Monday, January 18th 2021

Critical Flaw in Windows 10 Could Corrupt Your Hard Drive

Windows OS security is taken seriously, as the OS is wide-spread across millions of PCs around the world, however, there may be issues where OS has some security flaw that is found by external researchers. Due to the sheer code base of the new OS like Windows 10, there are a plethora of bugs and security flaws waiting to get discovered by someone. And today, thanks to the team of cybersecurity researchers, we have found out that in Windows 10 file-system called NTFS, there is a bug that corrupts your hard drive by simply triggering a specific variable name in a file.

If the end-user inside Windows 10 tries to access the NTFS attribute called "$i30" in a specific way, the flaw is exploited. The NTFS search index attribute, specifically the string "$i30", is containing a list of files and subfolders in a directory, and there is even a log of deleted files and folders. After running a specific command inside the command line (CMD) or inside the browser, Windows will start to display warnings of "File or directory is corrupted and cannot be read". After that, the OS will prompt a user to restart the machine and repair the damaged drive, so the Windows disk check utility will start. Once corrupted, Windows 10 will start displaying a notification indicating that the main file table (MFT) on the particular disk is corrupted and thus can not operate. Starting from the build Windows 10 Build 1803 the OS is vulnerable until the current version and a possible fix is expected to be released soon.
Sources: Jonas L (Twitter), Siam Alam (Twitter), via Security Newspaper
Add your own comment

124 Comments on Critical Flaw in Windows 10 Could Corrupt Your Hard Drive

#101
Aquinus
Resident Wat-man
trparkyI still wouldn't trust it. If I knew that a file was corrupt, I'd wouldn't trust any repair of it. Replace it from a known good source.
Now there's the rub. Without a checksum, how are you going to know that data become corrupted in the first place if you don't have a signature to check it against? You won't until you try to use it and if (and only if,) the application using it throws an error due to the corruption as opposed to still continuing to operate with the bad data.
lexluthermiesterWrite-buffering actually completes the writes as some point.
So does CoW. Metadata gets copied, but why copy the data when it doesn't change? The data is already there and it's not going to change. If you as the consumer of data get your data when you ask for it, why do you care if under the hood there is structural sharing to save on space along with all the other benefits of going that route? You shouldn't. You should however care about things like snapshotting and disk space optimization because it enables you to have more control over your data without having to do all of this yourself and things like optimizing disk usage gets you more out of your drive. That's definitely not a bad thing.
Posted on Reply
#102
trparky
R-T-Bhas the amazing property of a write buffer that won't flush until it's full: that's right, no timeout.
I'm not sure I like that concept. We've already had discussions in other parts of these forums where people have complained about how SSDs (except for those expensive enterprise drives) don't have some form of onboard power device to complete the write transactions in case of a power failure. Or am I barking up the wrong tree here?
AquinusNow there's the rub. Without a checksum, how are you going to know that data become corrupted in the first place if you don't have a signature to check it against? You won't until you try to use it and if (and only if,) the application using it throws an error due to the corruption as opposed to still continuing to operate with the bad data.
For my most important data, I make my own checksums. Do I wish I didn't have to do that? Yes. But I only do that for about 1 to 2% of the data that I store, mostly ripped DVD ISO files (yes, I own them). As for the rest of the six or seven terabytes of data that I have, oh well... it's not a big deal.

If you guys must know, I have a TV series set that is really old and the DVD set is experiencing bit-rot. Some of the disks are physically delaminating. Needless to say, I have all the disks ripped to ISO files on my drives and store them in multiple locations with manually created SHA512 checksums.
Posted on Reply
#103
R-T-B
trparkyI'm not sure I like that concept. We've already had discussions in other parts of these forums where people have complained about how SSDs (except for those expensive enterprise drives) don't have some form of onboard power device to complete the write transactions in case of a power failure. Or am I barking up the wrong tree here?
No, you are completely correct.
Posted on Reply
#104
trparky
I thought so. Any write buffer that doesn't start spooling the data to the disk as fast as possible opens the door for data corruption the likes of which... yeah, I really don't want to think about it.
Posted on Reply
#105
lexluthermiester
R-T-BYet. But someday it will be.
If you really think that, you need to brush up on how firewalls work. If a person using a third party firewall that is currently being maintained and continuing to support Win7, if properly configured, that user will not be exposed to anything that will put them at risk.
R-T-BHopefully by the time that comes around though most users will have migrated.
Time will tell.
R-T-BNo one really uses that anymore though.
Likely because it's not very useful.
trparkyI thought so. Any write buffer that doesn't start spooling the data to the disk as fast as possible opens the door for data corruption the likes of which... yeah, I really don't want to think about it.
Exactly.
Posted on Reply
#106
R-T-B
lexluthermiesterIf you really think that, you need to brush up on how firewalls work.
No, I don't. a firewall can't supersede the TCP/IP stack that accepts the incoming connection in the first place. Find a hole in that and you've got the keys to the kingdom.

It'll take time. It took A REAL LONG TIME for 2000 to get there. I don't think XP is even there yet. But it'll happen, because software isn't perfect. As I said, I doubt it'll be a real issue because by then, the install base will be gone. We hope anyways.
lexluthermiesterLikely because it's not very useful.
It's fast and has low cpu cycles, but it's largerly from IBM datacenter land and doesn't care if you lose power, screw you in that situation lol. You also should be using ECC according to them. Yeah. Old school IBM exec logic... lol.

NTFS as far as a filesystem has it's lineage in HPFS from OS/2. It's a very old design. That doesn't mean it's bad though. It's decently vetted and proven. But Microsoft is aware it is aging, and is working on a replacement already. That's why I mentioned ReFS. It's already available in Server, but it doesn't support extended attributes yet, so you can't install to it.
Posted on Reply
#107
lexluthermiester
R-T-BNo, I don't. a firewall can't supersede the TCP/IP stack that accepts the incoming connection in the first place. Find a hole in that and you've got the keys to the kingdom.
Oh yes you do. Most good firewalls use kernel level implementations to regulate network traffic coming into and out of a system being firewalled. I'm aware that IT security is your line of work, however that doesn't mean you have nothing to learn.
R-T-BBut Microsoft is aware it is aging, and is working on a replacement already.
NTFS doesn't need replacement, it needs refinement. Nothing more. You don't fix something that isn't broken.
Posted on Reply
#108
R-T-B
lexluthermiesterOh yes you do. Most good firewalls use kernel level implementations to regulate network traffic coming into and out of a system being firewalled. I'm aware that IT security is your line of work, however that doesn't mean you have nothing to learn.
Your saying they use their own TCP stack? I really doubt that. Mind you stack level exploits are really rare. Like I said the last I'm aware of is in Windows 2000... or maybe it's even NT, I forget. They aren't common, is the point.
Regardless, I basically agree with you.
lexluthermiesterNTFS doesn't need replacement, it needs refinement. Nothing more. You don't fix something that isn't broken.
In the same sense that FAT32 doesn't need replacement, yes (I'm aware they are not in the same league but they both fill roles, so bear with me). See, it's good at what it does but having a newer flashier "heir to the throne" would not hurt the PR people. That's what MS is after, honestly. ReFS is slowly being retrofitted for that, I feel.
Posted on Reply
#109
trparky
R-T-BYour saying they use their own TCP stack? I really doubt that.
Exactly. The firewall still needs to insert itself into the networking stack. If at any stage of the networking stack there is a vulnerability below that of where the firewall is loaded, as @R-T-B has said before... you have the keys to the kingdom.
Posted on Reply
#110
R-T-B
trparkyExactly. The firewall still needs to insert itself into the networking stack. If at any stage of the networking stack there is a vulnerability, as @R-T-B has said before... you have the keys to the kingdom.
But again, these kind of exploits are rare, because the best coders are hired for that sort of stuff. Because they know that's entry point #1.

Not impossible, but pretty far out.

So we both have points here.
Posted on Reply
#111
trparky
R-T-BBut again, these kind of exploits are rare, because the best coders are hired for that sort of stuff. Because they know that's entry point #1.
Ah but I still remember the days of using punters back in the old Windows 9x days. Oh those were the days. Losing an online game? Load the punter and sit back as your opponent dropped out of the game. I believe it used a malformed ICMP packet that crashed the old Windows 9x TCP/IP stack.
Posted on Reply
#112
R-T-B
trparkyAh but I still remember the days of using punters back in the old Windows 9x days. Oh those were the days. Losing an online game? Load the punter and sit back as your opponent dropped out of the game. I believe it used a malformed ICMP packet that crashed the old Windows 9x TCP/IP stack.
9x was kind of an abomination in that regard, lol.

I think it's the last one Bill Gates actually had lines of code in too. Makes me wonder how competent he really was...
Posted on Reply
#113
trparky
R-T-B9x was kind of an abomination in that regard, lol.

I think it's the last one Bill Gates actually had lines of code in too. Makes me wonder how competent he really was...
Oh yeah, it was only when Windows XP came out that the consumer world graduated to using a real OS. Everything before Windows XP was an absolute dumpster fire.
Posted on Reply
#114
windwhirl
trparkyEverything before Windows XP was an absolute dumpster fire.
Hey, my Windows 2000 nostalgia is insulted by that comment! :laugh:

I do agree, though. I would go even further and say XP before SP2 was garbage.
Posted on Reply
#115
trparky
windwhirlHey, my Windows 2000 nostalgia is insulted by that comment!
Windows XP was essentially Windows 2000 with a candy shell.
windwhirlI do agree, though. I would go even further and say XP before SP2 was garbage.
I agree.
Posted on Reply
#116
danwat1234
lemonadesodaYep. I have another unwanted forced update last night.

And YES I have done all the registry policy and O&O shut ups to stop forced update. But somehow, MS, automagically does it anyway.
You can COMPLETELY disable Windows updates on Windows 10. Tested on 1903,

First go to Services and shut off Windows Update and disable it. Refresh Services to make sure it isn't running.

Now navigate to \windows\system32\ and find files wuaueng.dll and wuauclt.exe. If you can find the former, then look for wuauserv.dll.

For each, go to properties, security, advanced.
Click change owner and type in your user name, Click Check Names to select your user name and Click ok. Then Click Apply or Ok on the main window and close it and reopen it.
Now, you can change permissions for all users.
Delete/Remove permissions from all users and Click Ok.

If that doesn't work, then change owner to Administrator, close the window and try again.

That's it.
To re-enable, add "Read/Execute" permissions to System on wuaueng.dll or whichever dll you have. Doesn't need it on wuauclt.exe for some reason.
Posted on Reply
#117
lemonadesoda
...we need an update script, to allow permissions, force manual update, then deny permissions.
Posted on Reply
#118
R-T-B
lemonadesoda...we need an update script, to allow permissions, force manual update, then deny permissions.
I mean you basically described WuMgr.
Posted on Reply
#119
lemonadesoda
RTB, thanks for the tip. Installed. Looks nifty. But look at this screenshot:



Please tell me what i am doing wrong. Look, the screenshot shows that "Disable Automatic Update" was ALREADY set. But guess what, Windows autoupdates, auto reboots. Can you lot even begin to understand my frustration!
Posted on Reply
#120
R-T-B
lemonadesodaRTB, thanks for the tip. Installed. Looks nifty. But look at this screenshot:



Please tell me what i am doing wrong. Look, the screenshot shows that "Disable Automatic Update" was ALREADY set. But guess what, Windows autoupdates, auto reboots. Can you lot even begin to understand my frustration!
Try running as Administrator? Maybe it'll unlock other checkboxes there, I usually use "Disable Update Facilities."
Posted on Reply
#121
lexluthermiester
lemonadesodaCan you lot even begin to understand my frustration!
We really can.
R-T-BTry running as Administrator?
This and....
R-T-B"Disable Update Facilitators"
...this. Also check the "Disable Store Auto Update"
Posted on Reply
#122
InVasMani
Is this specific to the C:/ drive only or any drive!?!? Curious if you can use this to corrupt then reformat a bitlocker encrypted drive.
Posted on Reply
#123
bsvols
ThrashZoneHi,
1709 was the best performer benchmark wise.


I use update mini tool it hasn't failed me yet.
"I use update mini tool it hasn't failed me yet." ***** This!
Posted on Reply
#124
lexluthermiester
bsvols"I use update mini tool it hasn't failed me yet." ***** This!
Why? Have you had problems with it?
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment
Jun 1st, 2024 03:27 EDT change timezone

New Forum Posts

Popular Reviews

Controversial News Posts