Goal Reached Thanks to every supporter — we hit 100%!

Goal: 1000 CNY · Raised: 1310 CNY

100%

CVE-2025-51726 PoC — CyberGhostVPN 安全漏洞

Source
Associated Vulnerability
Title:CyberGhostVPN 安全漏洞 (CVE-2025-51726)
Description:CyberGhostVPNSetup.exe (Windows installer) is signed using the weak cryptographic hash algorithm SHA-1, which is vulnerable to collision attacks. This allows a malicious actor to craft a fake installer with a forged SHA-1 certificate that may still be accepted by Windows signature verification mechanisms, particularly on systems without strict SmartScreen or trust policy enforcement. Additionally, the installer lacks High Entropy Address Space Layout Randomization (ASLR), as confirmed by BinSkim (BA2015 rule) and repeated WinDbg analysis. The binary consistently loads into predictable memory ranges, increasing the success rate of memory corruption exploits. These two misconfigurations, when combined, significantly lower the bar for successful supply-chain style attacks or privilege escalation through fake installers.
Readme
As requested, I have now demonstrated both vulnerabilities (BA2022 & BA2015) with practical exploitation scenarios and PoC evidence, which shows how an attacker could abuse these issues in a real-world context.
📌 1. [BA2022] Weak Hash in Code Signing – SHA-1 Exploitation Demonstration
Although the original CyberGhostVPNSetup.exe appears signed and trusted, I have successfully created a fake installer (fakeCyberGhost.exe) using a self-signed certificate with SHA-1 hashing.
✅ Technical Proof:
Used OpenSSL to generate a fake CA and SHA-1 certificate
Signed a fake binary using signtool.exe with that certificate
Windows still marked it as “Signed” (see sigcheck output)
Signature chain was accepted despite being forged with SHA-1
🔥 Security Impact:
This shows that an attacker could:
Forge a malicious payload using a SHA-1-based certificate chain
Mimic the CyberGhost vendor name and product
Trick users into installing malware disguised as a trusted installer
This kind of issue is highly relevant in supply chain attacks and APT-level scenarios, especially in environments that do not enforce strict trust validation or SmartScreen policies.
 
 
![image](https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/51cce04d-8b3e-40fd-a0dd-64f674284bcf)

![image](https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/2f8f7d7c-8e7a-49d6-899d-cf6112e335c1)

 ![image](https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/2d623130-4142-462e-ad60-e34933093a35)

![image](https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/eea7e8cb-ae92-4571-95e8-2c2688085385)




📌 2. [BA2015] Missing High Entropy ASLR – Predictable Memory Layout
I have used WinDbg to run CyberGhostVPNSetup.exe multiple times and observed that the binary consistently loads into low-memory base addresses, such as:
0x00C90000
0x00630000
On 64-bit systems, properly compiled binaries should load into high-memory randomized regions (e.g., 0x00007FF6xxxx0000) when High Entropy ASLR is enabled.
✅ Technical Proof:
WinDbg output shows low, non-randomized base addresses
Confirms that /HIGHENTROPYVA is not in use
Therefore, attackers can predict memory layout
Increases success of ROP (Return-Oriented Programming) and memory corruption exploits

  ![image](https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/7f43e0e2-a6c5-4766-9cc5-941870953a31)

![image](https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/acc01ae7-b614-4ca6-894e-81d4b5e703a8)



💥 Combined Business Risk
These two weaknesses, when combined, create a dangerous scenario:
Trust Bypass: The SHA-1 signature flaw allows an attacker to sign a fake binary that Windows accepts as “Signed”
Exploit Reliability: The predictable memory layout increases exploitability of memory-based vulnerabilities
Supply Chain Threat: End users are at risk of installing malware that appears legitimate
📎 Supporting Evidence
Attached screenshots of:
SHA-1 forged certificate creation and signing
Sigcheck verification (shows “Signed” despite fake cert)
WinDbg memory base address outputs proving ASLR weakness
Each step has been performed on a clean Windows environment using official tools (BinSkim, WinDbg, signtool, OpenSSL)
✅ Conclusion
This is not just a theoretical misconfiguration — it is a practical attack vector that shows how a motivated adversary could bypass trust and memory protections. The attached PoCs directly demonstrate real-world exploitability.

File Snapshot

Log in to view the POC file snapshot cached by Shenlong Bot

Log in to view
Remarks
    1. It is advised to access via the original source first.
    2. Local POC snapshots are reserved for subscribers — if the original source is unavailable, the local mirror is part of the paid plan.
    3. Mirroring, verifying, and maintaining this POC archive takes ongoing effort, so local snapshots are a paid feature. Your subscription keeps the archive online — thank you for the support. View subscription plans →