You are developing software that will run on Windows, and you want to protect your program against shatter attacks.
In December 2002, Microsoft issued security bulletin MS02-071 (http://www.microsoft.com/technet/treeview/?url=/technet/security/bulletin/MS02-071.asp), along with a patch for Windows NT 4.0, Windows 2000, and Windows XP that addresses the issue described in this recipe. Use that patch to prevent shatter attacks.
In addition, services running with elevated privileges should never use any of the Windows user interface APIs. In particular, windows (even invisible ones) and message loops should be avoided.
The primary consequence of the shatter attack is local elevation of privileges, which means that it is only an issue on versions of Windows that have privileges. In other words, Windows 95, Windows 98, and Windows ME are not affected.
In August 2002, Chris Paget released a white paper (http://security.tombom.co.uk/shatter.html) describing a form of attack against event-driven systems that he termed a shatter attack. In particular, Paget's paper targeted Microsoft's Win32 API. Paget was not the first to discover the vulnerabilities he described in his paper, but his paper reached the widest audience, and the name he gave the attack has since stuck. Indeed, Microsoft has been aware of the problems Paget describes since at least 1994.
In an event-driven system, all communication is done by way of messages. Devices (such as a keyboard or a mouse, for example) send messages to applications, and applications send messages to each other. The attack works by sending either unexpected messages (typically a series of messages that is expected in a particular order, but when received in a different order, the recipient will behave erratically) or malformed messages. The effect can be a denial of service?causing the victim application to crash, for example?or it can be more serious, allowing an attacker to inject code into the application and execute it, which could potentially result in privilege escalation.
Most event-driven systems are susceptible in varying degrees to these types of attack, but Microsoft's Win32 is particularly susceptible for two reasons. The first reason is that messages are used not only for notification, but also for control. For example, it is possible to cause a button to be clicked by sending it the appropriate message. The second reason is that it is impossible for the recipient of a message to determine the message's origin. Because of this, an attacker can easily impersonate another application, a device, the window manager, or the system. An application has no way of knowing whether a message to shut down the system has come from the system or from a malicious application.
There is one Win32 message that is of particular interest: WM_TIMER. This message is normally generated by the system as a result of calling the API function SetTimer( ). A timer is created with a timeout, and every time that timeout occurs, the message is sent to the window that requested the timer. What is interesting about this message, though, is that its parameters may contain an address. If an address is present, Windows (if it has not been patched) will jump to that address without performing any kind of validation to determine whether or not it is reasonable to do so. An attacker can take advantage of these facts to jump to an invalid address to force an application crash (denial of service), or to jump to an address known to contain code that an attacker has injected into the recipient's address space (by way of an edit control, for example). Such attacks could do any number of mischievous things, such as create a command window with elevated privileges.
The patch that Microsoft has issued to address the problem prevents WM_TIMER messages containing addresses that have not been registered with SetTimer( ) from being processed. In addition, Longhorn goes a step further by refusing to start a service that interacts with the desktop.
Microsoft Security Bulletin MS02-071: http://www.Microsoft.com/technet/treeview/?url=/technet/security/bulletin/MS02-071.asp
"Shatter Attacks?How to Break Windows" by Chris Paget: http://security.tombom.co.uk/shatter.html