Looks like Microsoft made the bulletins live that were supposed to be released this coming Tuesday. The bulletins are dated September 13th 2011. While the links below work as I type this diary, they may not work later today. Some of the related links may not have any information yet (like CVE). All bulletins appear to be live right now, and we will add them to the list below as we get to it.
This information may of course change as the final bulletins will be released on Tuesday. Some readers report that the bulletins are no longer available.
Overview of the September 2011 Microsoft patches and their status.
Contra Indications - KB
Vulnerability in WINS could allow elevation of privilege. Replaces MS11-035.
- none -
Vulnerability in Windows could allow remote code execution (DLL Linking Vuln.).
Arbitrary code execution vulnerability in Excel. Replaces MS11-045.
CVE-2011-1986 CVE-2011-1986 CVE-2011-1987 CVE-2011-1988 CVE-2011-1989 CVE-2011-1990
- none -
Code execution vulnerability in Microsoft Office. Replaces MS11-023, MS10-087 .
- none -
Microsoft Sharepoint Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability. Replaces MS11-016.
CVE-2011-1252 publicly disclosed. some of the others are not disclosed but likely simple to exploit XSS flaws.
We will update issues on this page for about a week or so as they evolve.
We appreciate updates
US based customers can call Microsoft for free patch related support on 1-866-PCSAFETY
(*): ISC rating
We use 4 levels:
PATCH NOW: Typically used where we see immediate danger of exploitation. Typical environments will want to deploy these patches ASAP. Workarounds are typically not accepted by users or are not possible. This rating is often used when typical deployments make it vulnerable and exploits are being used or easy to obtain or make.
Critical: Anything that needs little to become interesting for the dark side. Best approach is to test and deploy ASAP. Workarounds can give more time to test.
Important: Things where more testing and other measures can help.
Less Urgent: Typically we expect the impact if left unpatched to be not that big a deal in the short term. Do not forget them however.
The difference between the client and server rating is based on how you use the affected machine. We take into account the typical client and server deployment in the usage of the machine and the common measures people typically have in place already. Measures we presume are simple best practices for servers such as not using outlook, MSIE, word etc. to do traditional office or leisure work.
The rating is not a risk analysis as such. It is a rating of importance of the vulnerability and the perceived or even predicted threat for affected systems. The rating does not account for the number of affected systems there are. It is for an affected system in a typical worst-case role.
Only the organization itself is in a position to do a full risk analysis involving the presence (or lack of) affected systems, the actually implemented measures, the impact on their operation and the value of the assets involved.
All patches released by a vendor are important enough to have a close look if you use the affected systems. There is little incentive for vendors to publicize patches that do not have some form of risk to them.
(**): The exploitability rating we show is the worst of them all due to the too large number of ratings Microsoft assigns to some of the patches.
Johannes B. Ullrich
(c) SANS Internet Storm Center. http://isc.sans.edu Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial 3.0 United States License.