Find, fix and prevent vulnerabilities in your code.
high severity
- Vulnerable module: node-sass
- Introduced through: node-sass@4.14.1
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: betterdiscord@JsSucks/BetterDiscordApp#835cc3134cbc80408faeec8b6df9608405650a1b › node-sass@4.14.1
Overview
node-sass is a Node.js bindings package for libsass.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to NULL Pointer Dereference in the function Sass::Functions::selector_append
which could be leveraged by an attacker to cause a denial of service (application crash) or possibly have unspecified other impact. node-sass
is affected by this vulnerability due to its bundled usage of libsass
.
Remediation
There is no fixed version for node-sass
.
References
high severity
- Vulnerable module: node-sass
- Introduced through: node-sass@4.14.1
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: betterdiscord@JsSucks/BetterDiscordApp#835cc3134cbc80408faeec8b6df9608405650a1b › node-sass@4.14.1
Overview
node-sass is a Node.js bindings package for libsass.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Use After Free via the SharedPtr
class in SharedPtr.cpp
(or SharedPtr.hpp
) that may cause a denial of service (application crash) or possibly have unspecified other impact. Note: node-sass
is affected by this vulnerability due to its bundled usage of the libsass
package.
Details
A cross-site scripting attack occurs when the attacker tricks a legitimate web-based application or site to accept a request as originating from a trusted source.
This is done by escaping the context of the web application; the web application then delivers that data to its users along with other trusted dynamic content, without validating it. The browser unknowingly executes malicious script on the client side (through client-side languages; usually JavaScript or HTML) in order to perform actions that are otherwise typically blocked by the browser’s Same Origin Policy.
Injecting malicious code is the most prevalent manner by which XSS is exploited; for this reason, escaping characters in order to prevent this manipulation is the top method for securing code against this vulnerability.
Escaping means that the application is coded to mark key characters, and particularly key characters included in user input, to prevent those characters from being interpreted in a dangerous context. For example, in HTML, <
can be coded as <
; and >
can be coded as >
; in order to be interpreted and displayed as themselves in text, while within the code itself, they are used for HTML tags. If malicious content is injected into an application that escapes special characters and that malicious content uses <
and >
as HTML tags, those characters are nonetheless not interpreted as HTML tags by the browser if they’ve been correctly escaped in the application code and in this way the attempted attack is diverted.
The most prominent use of XSS is to steal cookies (source: OWASP HttpOnly) and hijack user sessions, but XSS exploits have been used to expose sensitive information, enable access to privileged services and functionality and deliver malware.
Types of attacks
There are a few methods by which XSS can be manipulated:
Type | Origin | Description |
---|---|---|
Stored | Server | The malicious code is inserted in the application (usually as a link) by the attacker. The code is activated every time a user clicks the link. |
Reflected | Server | The attacker delivers a malicious link externally from the vulnerable web site application to a user. When clicked, malicious code is sent to the vulnerable web site, which reflects the attack back to the user’s browser. |
DOM-based | Client | The attacker forces the user’s browser to render a malicious page. The data in the page itself delivers the cross-site scripting data. |
Mutated | The attacker injects code that appears safe, but is then rewritten and modified by the browser, while parsing the markup. An example is rebalancing unclosed quotation marks or even adding quotation marks to unquoted parameters. |
Affected environments
The following environments are susceptible to an XSS attack:
- Web servers
- Application servers
- Web application environments
How to prevent
This section describes the top best practices designed to specifically protect your code:
- Sanitize data input in an HTTP request before reflecting it back, ensuring all data is validated, filtered or escaped before echoing anything back to the user, such as the values of query parameters during searches.
- Convert special characters such as
?
,&
,/
,<
,>
and spaces to their respective HTML or URL encoded equivalents. - Give users the option to disable client-side scripts.
- Redirect invalid requests.
- Detect simultaneous logins, including those from two separate IP addresses, and invalidate those sessions.
- Use and enforce a Content Security Policy (source: Wikipedia) to disable any features that might be manipulated for an XSS attack.
- Read the documentation for any of the libraries referenced in your code to understand which elements allow for embedded HTML.
Remediation
There is no fixed version for node-sass
.
References
high severity
new
- Vulnerable module: cross-spawn
- Introduced through: node-sass@4.14.1
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: betterdiscord@JsSucks/BetterDiscordApp#835cc3134cbc80408faeec8b6df9608405650a1b › node-sass@4.14.1 › cross-spawn@3.0.1Remediation: Upgrade to node-sass@5.0.0.
Overview
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Regular Expression Denial of Service (ReDoS) due to improper input sanitization. An attacker can increase the CPU usage and crash the program by crafting a very large and well crafted string.
PoC
const { argument } = require('cross-spawn/lib/util/escape');
var str = "";
for (var i = 0; i < 1000000; i++) {
str += "\\";
}
str += "◎";
console.log("start")
argument(str)
console.log("end")
// run `npm install cross-spawn` and `node attack.js`
// then the program will stuck forever with high CPU usage
Details
Denial of Service (DoS) describes a family of attacks, all aimed at making a system inaccessible to its original and legitimate users. There are many types of DoS attacks, ranging from trying to clog the network pipes to the system by generating a large volume of traffic from many machines (a Distributed Denial of Service - DDoS - attack) to sending crafted requests that cause a system to crash or take a disproportional amount of time to process.
The Regular expression Denial of Service (ReDoS) is a type of Denial of Service attack. Regular expressions are incredibly powerful, but they aren't very intuitive and can ultimately end up making it easy for attackers to take your site down.
Let’s take the following regular expression as an example:
regex = /A(B|C+)+D/
This regular expression accomplishes the following:
A
The string must start with the letter 'A'(B|C+)+
The string must then follow the letter A with either the letter 'B' or some number of occurrences of the letter 'C' (the+
matches one or more times). The+
at the end of this section states that we can look for one or more matches of this section.D
Finally, we ensure this section of the string ends with a 'D'
The expression would match inputs such as ABBD
, ABCCCCD
, ABCBCCCD
and ACCCCCD
It most cases, it doesn't take very long for a regex engine to find a match:
$ time node -e '/A(B|C+)+D/.test("ACCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCD")'
0.04s user 0.01s system 95% cpu 0.052 total
$ time node -e '/A(B|C+)+D/.test("ACCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCX")'
1.79s user 0.02s system 99% cpu 1.812 total
The entire process of testing it against a 30 characters long string takes around ~52ms. But when given an invalid string, it takes nearly two seconds to complete the test, over ten times as long as it took to test a valid string. The dramatic difference is due to the way regular expressions get evaluated.
Most Regex engines will work very similarly (with minor differences). The engine will match the first possible way to accept the current character and proceed to the next one. If it then fails to match the next one, it will backtrack and see if there was another way to digest the previous character. If it goes too far down the rabbit hole only to find out the string doesn’t match in the end, and if many characters have multiple valid regex paths, the number of backtracking steps can become very large, resulting in what is known as catastrophic backtracking.
Let's look at how our expression runs into this problem, using a shorter string: "ACCCX". While it seems fairly straightforward, there are still four different ways that the engine could match those three C's:
- CCC
- CC+C
- C+CC
- C+C+C.
The engine has to try each of those combinations to see if any of them potentially match against the expression. When you combine that with the other steps the engine must take, we can use RegEx 101 debugger to see the engine has to take a total of 38 steps before it can determine the string doesn't match.
From there, the number of steps the engine must use to validate a string just continues to grow.
String | Number of C's | Number of steps |
---|---|---|
ACCCX | 3 | 38 |
ACCCCX | 4 | 71 |
ACCCCCX | 5 | 136 |
ACCCCCCCCCCCCCCX | 14 | 65,553 |
By the time the string includes 14 C's, the engine has to take over 65,000 steps just to see if the string is valid. These extreme situations can cause them to work very slowly (exponentially related to input size, as shown above), allowing an attacker to exploit this and can cause the service to excessively consume CPU, resulting in a Denial of Service.
Remediation
Upgrade cross-spawn
to version 6.0.6, 7.0.5 or higher.
References
high severity
- Vulnerable module: tar
- Introduced through: node-sass@4.14.1
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: betterdiscord@JsSucks/BetterDiscordApp#835cc3134cbc80408faeec8b6df9608405650a1b › node-sass@4.14.1 › node-gyp@3.8.0 › tar@2.2.2Remediation: Upgrade to node-sass@5.0.0.
Overview
tar is a full-featured Tar for Node.js.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Arbitrary File Write. node-tar
aims to guarantee that any file whose location would be modified by a symbolic link is not extracted. This is, in part, achieved by ensuring that extracted directories are not symlinks. Additionally, in order to prevent unnecessary stat calls to determine whether a given path is a directory, paths are cached when directories are created.
This logic was insufficient when extracting tar
files that contained both a directory and a symlink with the same name as the directory, where the symlink and directory names in the archive entry used backslashes as a path separator on posix systems. The cache checking logic used both \
and /
characters as path separators. However, \
is a valid filename character on posix systems.
By first creating a directory, and then replacing that directory with a symlink, it is possible to bypass node-tar
symlink checks on directories, essentially allowing an untrusted tar
file to symlink into an arbitrary location. This can lead to extracting arbitrary files into that location, thus allowing arbitrary file creation and overwrite.
Additionally, a similar confusion could arise on case-insensitive filesystems. If a tar
archive contained a directory at FOO
, followed by a symbolic link named foo
, then on case-insensitive file systems, the creation of the symbolic link would remove the directory from the filesystem, but not from the internal directory cache, as it would not be treated as a cache hit. A subsequent file entry within the FOO
directory would then be placed in the target of the symbolic link, thinking that the directory had already been created.
Remediation
Upgrade tar
to version 6.1.7, 5.0.8, 4.4.16 or higher.
References
high severity
- Vulnerable module: tar
- Introduced through: node-sass@4.14.1
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: betterdiscord@JsSucks/BetterDiscordApp#835cc3134cbc80408faeec8b6df9608405650a1b › node-sass@4.14.1 › node-gyp@3.8.0 › tar@2.2.2Remediation: Upgrade to node-sass@5.0.0.
Overview
tar is a full-featured Tar for Node.js.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Arbitrary File Write. node-tar
aims to guarantee that any file whose location would be modified by a symbolic link is not extracted. This is, in part, achieved by ensuring that extracted directories are not symlinks. Additionally, in order to prevent unnecessary stat calls to determine whether a given path is a directory, paths are cached when directories are created.
This logic is insufficient when extracting tar
files that contain two directories and a symlink with names containing unicode values that normalized to the same value. Additionally, on Windows systems, long path portions would resolve to the same file system entities as their 8.3 "short path" counterparts.
A specially crafted tar
archive can include directories with two forms of the path that resolve to the same file system entity, followed by a symbolic link with a name in the first form, lastly followed by a file using the second form. This leads to bypassing node-tar
symlink checks on directories, essentially allowing an untrusted tar
file to symlink into an arbitrary location and extracting arbitrary files into that location.
Remediation
Upgrade tar
to version 6.1.9, 5.0.10, 4.4.18 or higher.
References
high severity
- Vulnerable module: tar
- Introduced through: node-sass@4.14.1
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: betterdiscord@JsSucks/BetterDiscordApp#835cc3134cbc80408faeec8b6df9608405650a1b › node-sass@4.14.1 › node-gyp@3.8.0 › tar@2.2.2Remediation: Upgrade to node-sass@5.0.0.
Overview
tar is a full-featured Tar for Node.js.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Arbitrary File Write. node-tar
aims to guarantee that any file whose location would be outside of the extraction target directory is not extracted. This is, in part, accomplished by sanitizing absolute paths of entries within the archive, skipping archive entries that contain ..
path portions, and resolving the sanitized paths against the extraction target directory.
This logic is insufficient on Windows systems when extracting tar
files that contain a path that is not an absolute path, but specify a drive letter different from the extraction target, such as C:some\path
. If the drive letter does not match the extraction target, for example D:\extraction\dir
, then the result of path.resolve(extractionDirectory, entryPath)
resolves against the current working directory on the C:
drive, rather than the extraction target directory.
Additionally, a ..
portion of the path can occur immediately after the drive letter, such as C:../foo
, and is not properly sanitized by the logic that checks for ..
within the normalized and split portions of the path.
Note: This only affects users of node-tar
on Windows systems.
Remediation
Upgrade tar
to version 6.1.9, 5.0.10, 4.4.18 or higher.
References
high severity
- Vulnerable module: tar
- Introduced through: node-sass@4.14.1
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: betterdiscord@JsSucks/BetterDiscordApp#835cc3134cbc80408faeec8b6df9608405650a1b › node-sass@4.14.1 › node-gyp@3.8.0 › tar@2.2.2Remediation: Upgrade to node-sass@5.0.0.
Overview
tar is a full-featured Tar for Node.js.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Arbitrary File Overwrite. This is due to insufficient symlink protection.
node-tar
aims to guarantee that any file whose location would be modified by a symbolic link is not extracted. This is, in part, achieved by ensuring that extracted directories are not symlinks. Additionally, in order to prevent unnecessary stat
calls to determine whether a given path is a directory, paths are cached when directories are created.
This logic is insufficient when extracting tar files that contain both a directory and a symlink with the same name as the directory. This order of operations results in the directory being created and added to the node-tar
directory cache. When a directory is present in the directory cache, subsequent calls to mkdir
for that directory are skipped.
However, this is also where node-tar
checks for symlinks occur. By first creating a directory, and then replacing that directory with a symlink, it is possible to bypass node-tar
symlink checks on directories, essentially allowing an untrusted tar file to symlink into an arbitrary location and subsequently extracting arbitrary files into that location.
Remediation
Upgrade tar
to version 3.2.3, 4.4.15, 5.0.7, 6.1.2 or higher.
References
high severity
- Vulnerable module: tar
- Introduced through: node-sass@4.14.1
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: betterdiscord@JsSucks/BetterDiscordApp#835cc3134cbc80408faeec8b6df9608405650a1b › node-sass@4.14.1 › node-gyp@3.8.0 › tar@2.2.2Remediation: Upgrade to node-sass@5.0.0.
Overview
tar is a full-featured Tar for Node.js.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Arbitrary File Overwrite. This is due to insufficient absolute path sanitization.
node-tar
aims to prevent extraction of absolute file paths by turning absolute paths into relative paths when the preservePaths
flag is not set to true
. This is achieved by stripping the absolute path root from any absolute file paths contained in a tar file. For example, the path /home/user/.bashrc
would turn into home/user/.bashrc
.
This logic is insufficient when file paths contain repeated path roots such as ////home/user/.bashrc
. node-tar
only strips a single path root from such paths. When given an absolute file path with repeating path roots, the resulting path (e.g. ///home/user/.bashrc
) still resolves to an absolute path.
Remediation
Upgrade tar
to version 3.2.2, 4.4.14, 5.0.6, 6.1.1 or higher.
References
high severity
- Vulnerable module: ansi-regex
- Introduced through: node-sass@4.14.1 and keytar@4.4.1
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: betterdiscord@JsSucks/BetterDiscordApp#835cc3134cbc80408faeec8b6df9608405650a1b › node-sass@4.14.1 › chalk@1.1.3 › strip-ansi@3.0.1 › ansi-regex@2.1.1
-
Introduced through: betterdiscord@JsSucks/BetterDiscordApp#835cc3134cbc80408faeec8b6df9608405650a1b › node-sass@4.14.1 › chalk@1.1.3 › has-ansi@2.0.0 › ansi-regex@2.1.1
-
Introduced through: betterdiscord@JsSucks/BetterDiscordApp#835cc3134cbc80408faeec8b6df9608405650a1b › node-sass@4.14.1 › npmlog@4.1.2 › gauge@2.7.4 › strip-ansi@3.0.1 › ansi-regex@2.1.1Remediation: Upgrade to node-sass@7.0.0.
-
Introduced through: betterdiscord@JsSucks/BetterDiscordApp#835cc3134cbc80408faeec8b6df9608405650a1b › node-sass@4.14.1 › npmlog@4.1.2 › gauge@2.7.4 › string-width@1.0.2 › strip-ansi@3.0.1 › ansi-regex@2.1.1Remediation: Upgrade to node-sass@7.0.0.
-
Introduced through: betterdiscord@JsSucks/BetterDiscordApp#835cc3134cbc80408faeec8b6df9608405650a1b › keytar@4.4.1 › prebuild-install@5.2.4 › npmlog@4.1.2 › gauge@2.7.4 › strip-ansi@3.0.1 › ansi-regex@2.1.1Remediation: Upgrade to keytar@7.1.0.
-
Introduced through: betterdiscord@JsSucks/BetterDiscordApp#835cc3134cbc80408faeec8b6df9608405650a1b › node-sass@4.14.1 › node-gyp@3.8.0 › npmlog@4.1.2 › gauge@2.7.4 › strip-ansi@3.0.1 › ansi-regex@2.1.1Remediation: Upgrade to node-sass@7.0.1.
-
Introduced through: betterdiscord@JsSucks/BetterDiscordApp#835cc3134cbc80408faeec8b6df9608405650a1b › keytar@4.4.1 › prebuild-install@5.2.4 › npmlog@4.1.2 › gauge@2.7.4 › string-width@1.0.2 › strip-ansi@3.0.1 › ansi-regex@2.1.1Remediation: Upgrade to keytar@7.1.0.
-
Introduced through: betterdiscord@JsSucks/BetterDiscordApp#835cc3134cbc80408faeec8b6df9608405650a1b › node-sass@4.14.1 › node-gyp@3.8.0 › npmlog@4.1.2 › gauge@2.7.4 › string-width@1.0.2 › strip-ansi@3.0.1 › ansi-regex@2.1.1Remediation: Upgrade to node-sass@7.0.1.
Overview
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Regular Expression Denial of Service (ReDoS) due to the sub-patterns [[\\]()#;?]*
and (?:;[-a-zA-Z\\d\\/#&.:=?%@~_]*)*
.
PoC
import ansiRegex from 'ansi-regex';
for(var i = 1; i <= 50000; i++) {
var time = Date.now();
var attack_str = "\u001B["+";".repeat(i*10000);
ansiRegex().test(attack_str)
var time_cost = Date.now() - time;
console.log("attack_str.length: " + attack_str.length + ": " + time_cost+" ms")
}
Details
Denial of Service (DoS) describes a family of attacks, all aimed at making a system inaccessible to its original and legitimate users. There are many types of DoS attacks, ranging from trying to clog the network pipes to the system by generating a large volume of traffic from many machines (a Distributed Denial of Service - DDoS - attack) to sending crafted requests that cause a system to crash or take a disproportional amount of time to process.
The Regular expression Denial of Service (ReDoS) is a type of Denial of Service attack. Regular expressions are incredibly powerful, but they aren't very intuitive and can ultimately end up making it easy for attackers to take your site down.
Let’s take the following regular expression as an example:
regex = /A(B|C+)+D/
This regular expression accomplishes the following:
A
The string must start with the letter 'A'(B|C+)+
The string must then follow the letter A with either the letter 'B' or some number of occurrences of the letter 'C' (the+
matches one or more times). The+
at the end of this section states that we can look for one or more matches of this section.D
Finally, we ensure this section of the string ends with a 'D'
The expression would match inputs such as ABBD
, ABCCCCD
, ABCBCCCD
and ACCCCCD
It most cases, it doesn't take very long for a regex engine to find a match:
$ time node -e '/A(B|C+)+D/.test("ACCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCD")'
0.04s user 0.01s system 95% cpu 0.052 total
$ time node -e '/A(B|C+)+D/.test("ACCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCX")'
1.79s user 0.02s system 99% cpu 1.812 total
The entire process of testing it against a 30 characters long string takes around ~52ms. But when given an invalid string, it takes nearly two seconds to complete the test, over ten times as long as it took to test a valid string. The dramatic difference is due to the way regular expressions get evaluated.
Most Regex engines will work very similarly (with minor differences). The engine will match the first possible way to accept the current character and proceed to the next one. If it then fails to match the next one, it will backtrack and see if there was another way to digest the previous character. If it goes too far down the rabbit hole only to find out the string doesn’t match in the end, and if many characters have multiple valid regex paths, the number of backtracking steps can become very large, resulting in what is known as catastrophic backtracking.
Let's look at how our expression runs into this problem, using a shorter string: "ACCCX". While it seems fairly straightforward, there are still four different ways that the engine could match those three C's:
- CCC
- CC+C
- C+CC
- C+C+C.
The engine has to try each of those combinations to see if any of them potentially match against the expression. When you combine that with the other steps the engine must take, we can use RegEx 101 debugger to see the engine has to take a total of 38 steps before it can determine the string doesn't match.
From there, the number of steps the engine must use to validate a string just continues to grow.
String | Number of C's | Number of steps |
---|---|---|
ACCCX | 3 | 38 |
ACCCCX | 4 | 71 |
ACCCCCX | 5 | 136 |
ACCCCCCCCCCCCCCX | 14 | 65,553 |
By the time the string includes 14 C's, the engine has to take over 65,000 steps just to see if the string is valid. These extreme situations can cause them to work very slowly (exponentially related to input size, as shown above), allowing an attacker to exploit this and can cause the service to excessively consume CPU, resulting in a Denial of Service.
Remediation
Upgrade ansi-regex
to version 3.0.1, 4.1.1, 5.0.1, 6.0.1 or higher.
References
high severity
- Vulnerable module: axios
- Introduced through: axios@0.18.1
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: betterdiscord@JsSucks/BetterDiscordApp#835cc3134cbc80408faeec8b6df9608405650a1b › axios@0.18.1Remediation: Upgrade to axios@0.21.3.
Overview
axios is a promise-based HTTP client for the browser and Node.js.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Regular Expression Denial of Service (ReDoS) via the trim
function.
PoC
// poc.js
var {trim} = require("axios/lib/utils");
function build_blank (n) {
var ret = "1"
for (var i = 0; i < n; i++) {
ret += " "
}
return ret + "1";
}
var time = Date.now();
trim(build_blank(50000))
var time_cost = Date.now() - time;
console.log("time_cost: " + time_cost)
Details
Denial of Service (DoS) describes a family of attacks, all aimed at making a system inaccessible to its original and legitimate users. There are many types of DoS attacks, ranging from trying to clog the network pipes to the system by generating a large volume of traffic from many machines (a Distributed Denial of Service - DDoS - attack) to sending crafted requests that cause a system to crash or take a disproportional amount of time to process.
The Regular expression Denial of Service (ReDoS) is a type of Denial of Service attack. Regular expressions are incredibly powerful, but they aren't very intuitive and can ultimately end up making it easy for attackers to take your site down.
Let’s take the following regular expression as an example:
regex = /A(B|C+)+D/
This regular expression accomplishes the following:
A
The string must start with the letter 'A'(B|C+)+
The string must then follow the letter A with either the letter 'B' or some number of occurrences of the letter 'C' (the+
matches one or more times). The+
at the end of this section states that we can look for one or more matches of this section.D
Finally, we ensure this section of the string ends with a 'D'
The expression would match inputs such as ABBD
, ABCCCCD
, ABCBCCCD
and ACCCCCD
It most cases, it doesn't take very long for a regex engine to find a match:
$ time node -e '/A(B|C+)+D/.test("ACCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCD")'
0.04s user 0.01s system 95% cpu 0.052 total
$ time node -e '/A(B|C+)+D/.test("ACCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCX")'
1.79s user 0.02s system 99% cpu 1.812 total
The entire process of testing it against a 30 characters long string takes around ~52ms. But when given an invalid string, it takes nearly two seconds to complete the test, over ten times as long as it took to test a valid string. The dramatic difference is due to the way regular expressions get evaluated.
Most Regex engines will work very similarly (with minor differences). The engine will match the first possible way to accept the current character and proceed to the next one. If it then fails to match the next one, it will backtrack and see if there was another way to digest the previous character. If it goes too far down the rabbit hole only to find out the string doesn’t match in the end, and if many characters have multiple valid regex paths, the number of backtracking steps can become very large, resulting in what is known as catastrophic backtracking.
Let's look at how our expression runs into this problem, using a shorter string: "ACCCX". While it seems fairly straightforward, there are still four different ways that the engine could match those three C's:
- CCC
- CC+C
- C+CC
- C+C+C.
The engine has to try each of those combinations to see if any of them potentially match against the expression. When you combine that with the other steps the engine must take, we can use RegEx 101 debugger to see the engine has to take a total of 38 steps before it can determine the string doesn't match.
From there, the number of steps the engine must use to validate a string just continues to grow.
String | Number of C's | Number of steps |
---|---|---|
ACCCX | 3 | 38 |
ACCCCX | 4 | 71 |
ACCCCCX | 5 | 136 |
ACCCCCCCCCCCCCCX | 14 | 65,553 |
By the time the string includes 14 C's, the engine has to take over 65,000 steps just to see if the string is valid. These extreme situations can cause them to work very slowly (exponentially related to input size, as shown above), allowing an attacker to exploit this and can cause the service to excessively consume CPU, resulting in a Denial of Service.
Remediation
Upgrade axios
to version 0.21.3 or higher.
References
high severity
- Vulnerable module: braces
- Introduced through: chokidar@2.1.8
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: betterdiscord@JsSucks/BetterDiscordApp#835cc3134cbc80408faeec8b6df9608405650a1b › chokidar@2.1.8 › braces@2.3.2Remediation: Upgrade to chokidar@3.0.0.
-
Introduced through: betterdiscord@JsSucks/BetterDiscordApp#835cc3134cbc80408faeec8b6df9608405650a1b › chokidar@2.1.8 › anymatch@2.0.0 › micromatch@3.1.10 › braces@2.3.2Remediation: Upgrade to chokidar@4.0.0.
-
Introduced through: betterdiscord@JsSucks/BetterDiscordApp#835cc3134cbc80408faeec8b6df9608405650a1b › chokidar@2.1.8 › readdirp@2.2.1 › micromatch@3.1.10 › braces@2.3.2
Overview
braces is a Bash-like brace expansion, implemented in JavaScript.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Uncontrolled resource consumption due improper limitation of the number of characters it can handle, through the parse
function. An attacker can cause the application to allocate excessive memory and potentially crash by sending imbalanced braces as input.
PoC
const { braces } = require('micromatch');
console.log("Executing payloads...");
const maxRepeats = 10;
for (let repeats = 1; repeats <= maxRepeats; repeats += 1) {
const payload = '{'.repeat(repeats*90000);
console.log(`Testing with ${repeats} repeats...`);
const startTime = Date.now();
braces(payload);
const endTime = Date.now();
const executionTime = endTime - startTime;
console.log(`Regex executed in ${executionTime / 1000}s.\n`);
}
Remediation
Upgrade braces
to version 3.0.3 or higher.
References
high severity
- Vulnerable module: micromatch
- Introduced through: chokidar@2.1.8
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: betterdiscord@JsSucks/BetterDiscordApp#835cc3134cbc80408faeec8b6df9608405650a1b › chokidar@2.1.8 › anymatch@2.0.0 › micromatch@3.1.10Remediation: Upgrade to chokidar@4.0.0.
-
Introduced through: betterdiscord@JsSucks/BetterDiscordApp#835cc3134cbc80408faeec8b6df9608405650a1b › chokidar@2.1.8 › readdirp@2.2.1 › micromatch@3.1.10
Overview
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Inefficient Regular Expression Complexity due to the use of unsafe pattern configurations that allow greedy matching through the micromatch.braces()
function. An attacker can cause the application to hang or slow down by passing a malicious payload that triggers extensive backtracking in regular expression processing.
Remediation
Upgrade micromatch
to version 4.0.8 or higher.
References
high severity
- Vulnerable module: semver
- Introduced through: node-sass@4.14.1
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: betterdiscord@JsSucks/BetterDiscordApp#835cc3134cbc80408faeec8b6df9608405650a1b › node-sass@4.14.1 › node-gyp@3.8.0 › semver@5.3.0Remediation: Upgrade to node-sass@5.0.0.
Overview
semver is a semantic version parser used by npm.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Regular Expression Denial of Service (ReDoS) via the function new Range
, when untrusted user data is provided as a range.
PoC
const semver = require('semver')
const lengths_2 = [2000, 4000, 8000, 16000, 32000, 64000, 128000]
console.log("n[+] Valid range - Test payloads")
for (let i = 0; i =1.2.3' + ' '.repeat(lengths_2[i]) + '<1.3.0';
const start = Date.now()
semver.validRange(value)
// semver.minVersion(value)
// semver.maxSatisfying(["1.2.3"], value)
// semver.minSatisfying(["1.2.3"], value)
// new semver.Range(value, {})
const end = Date.now();
console.log('length=%d, time=%d ms', value.length, end - start);
}
Details
Denial of Service (DoS) describes a family of attacks, all aimed at making a system inaccessible to its original and legitimate users. There are many types of DoS attacks, ranging from trying to clog the network pipes to the system by generating a large volume of traffic from many machines (a Distributed Denial of Service - DDoS - attack) to sending crafted requests that cause a system to crash or take a disproportional amount of time to process.
The Regular expression Denial of Service (ReDoS) is a type of Denial of Service attack. Regular expressions are incredibly powerful, but they aren't very intuitive and can ultimately end up making it easy for attackers to take your site down.
Let’s take the following regular expression as an example:
regex = /A(B|C+)+D/
This regular expression accomplishes the following:
A
The string must start with the letter 'A'(B|C+)+
The string must then follow the letter A with either the letter 'B' or some number of occurrences of the letter 'C' (the+
matches one or more times). The+
at the end of this section states that we can look for one or more matches of this section.D
Finally, we ensure this section of the string ends with a 'D'
The expression would match inputs such as ABBD
, ABCCCCD
, ABCBCCCD
and ACCCCCD
It most cases, it doesn't take very long for a regex engine to find a match:
$ time node -e '/A(B|C+)+D/.test("ACCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCD")'
0.04s user 0.01s system 95% cpu 0.052 total
$ time node -e '/A(B|C+)+D/.test("ACCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCX")'
1.79s user 0.02s system 99% cpu 1.812 total
The entire process of testing it against a 30 characters long string takes around ~52ms. But when given an invalid string, it takes nearly two seconds to complete the test, over ten times as long as it took to test a valid string. The dramatic difference is due to the way regular expressions get evaluated.
Most Regex engines will work very similarly (with minor differences). The engine will match the first possible way to accept the current character and proceed to the next one. If it then fails to match the next one, it will backtrack and see if there was another way to digest the previous character. If it goes too far down the rabbit hole only to find out the string doesn’t match in the end, and if many characters have multiple valid regex paths, the number of backtracking steps can become very large, resulting in what is known as catastrophic backtracking.
Let's look at how our expression runs into this problem, using a shorter string: "ACCCX". While it seems fairly straightforward, there are still four different ways that the engine could match those three C's:
- CCC
- CC+C
- C+CC
- C+C+C.
The engine has to try each of those combinations to see if any of them potentially match against the expression. When you combine that with the other steps the engine must take, we can use RegEx 101 debugger to see the engine has to take a total of 38 steps before it can determine the string doesn't match.
From there, the number of steps the engine must use to validate a string just continues to grow.
String | Number of C's | Number of steps |
---|---|---|
ACCCX | 3 | 38 |
ACCCCX | 4 | 71 |
ACCCCCX | 5 | 136 |
ACCCCCCCCCCCCCCX | 14 | 65,553 |
By the time the string includes 14 C's, the engine has to take over 65,000 steps just to see if the string is valid. These extreme situations can cause them to work very slowly (exponentially related to input size, as shown above), allowing an attacker to exploit this and can cause the service to excessively consume CPU, resulting in a Denial of Service.
Remediation
Upgrade semver
to version 5.7.2, 6.3.1, 7.5.2 or higher.
References
high severity
- Vulnerable module: trim-newlines
- Introduced through: node-sass@4.14.1
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: betterdiscord@JsSucks/BetterDiscordApp#835cc3134cbc80408faeec8b6df9608405650a1b › node-sass@4.14.1 › meow@3.7.0 › trim-newlines@1.0.0Remediation: Upgrade to node-sass@6.0.1.
Overview
trim-newlines is a Trim newlines from the start and/or end of a string
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Denial of Service (DoS) via the end()
method.
Details
Denial of Service (DoS) describes a family of attacks, all aimed at making a system inaccessible to its intended and legitimate users.
Unlike other vulnerabilities, DoS attacks usually do not aim at breaching security. Rather, they are focused on making websites and services unavailable to genuine users resulting in downtime.
One popular Denial of Service vulnerability is DDoS (a Distributed Denial of Service), an attack that attempts to clog network pipes to the system by generating a large volume of traffic from many machines.
When it comes to open source libraries, DoS vulnerabilities allow attackers to trigger such a crash or crippling of the service by using a flaw either in the application code or from the use of open source libraries.
Two common types of DoS vulnerabilities:
High CPU/Memory Consumption- An attacker sending crafted requests that could cause the system to take a disproportionate amount of time to process. For example, commons-fileupload:commons-fileupload.
Crash - An attacker sending crafted requests that could cause the system to crash. For Example, npm
ws
package
Remediation
Upgrade trim-newlines
to version 3.0.1, 4.0.1 or higher.
References
high severity
- Vulnerable module: unset-value
- Introduced through: chokidar@2.1.8
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: betterdiscord@JsSucks/BetterDiscordApp#835cc3134cbc80408faeec8b6df9608405650a1b › chokidar@2.1.8 › braces@2.3.2 › snapdragon@0.8.2 › base@0.11.2 › cache-base@1.0.1 › unset-value@1.0.0
-
Introduced through: betterdiscord@JsSucks/BetterDiscordApp#835cc3134cbc80408faeec8b6df9608405650a1b › chokidar@2.1.8 › anymatch@2.0.0 › micromatch@3.1.10 › snapdragon@0.8.2 › base@0.11.2 › cache-base@1.0.1 › unset-value@1.0.0
-
Introduced through: betterdiscord@JsSucks/BetterDiscordApp#835cc3134cbc80408faeec8b6df9608405650a1b › chokidar@2.1.8 › readdirp@2.2.1 › micromatch@3.1.10 › snapdragon@0.8.2 › base@0.11.2 › cache-base@1.0.1 › unset-value@1.0.0
-
Introduced through: betterdiscord@JsSucks/BetterDiscordApp#835cc3134cbc80408faeec8b6df9608405650a1b › chokidar@2.1.8 › anymatch@2.0.0 › micromatch@3.1.10 › braces@2.3.2 › snapdragon@0.8.2 › base@0.11.2 › cache-base@1.0.1 › unset-value@1.0.0
-
Introduced through: betterdiscord@JsSucks/BetterDiscordApp#835cc3134cbc80408faeec8b6df9608405650a1b › chokidar@2.1.8 › readdirp@2.2.1 › micromatch@3.1.10 › braces@2.3.2 › snapdragon@0.8.2 › base@0.11.2 › cache-base@1.0.1 › unset-value@1.0.0
-
Introduced through: betterdiscord@JsSucks/BetterDiscordApp#835cc3134cbc80408faeec8b6df9608405650a1b › chokidar@2.1.8 › anymatch@2.0.0 › micromatch@3.1.10 › extglob@2.0.4 › snapdragon@0.8.2 › base@0.11.2 › cache-base@1.0.1 › unset-value@1.0.0
-
Introduced through: betterdiscord@JsSucks/BetterDiscordApp#835cc3134cbc80408faeec8b6df9608405650a1b › chokidar@2.1.8 › readdirp@2.2.1 › micromatch@3.1.10 › extglob@2.0.4 › snapdragon@0.8.2 › base@0.11.2 › cache-base@1.0.1 › unset-value@1.0.0
-
Introduced through: betterdiscord@JsSucks/BetterDiscordApp#835cc3134cbc80408faeec8b6df9608405650a1b › chokidar@2.1.8 › anymatch@2.0.0 › micromatch@3.1.10 › nanomatch@1.2.13 › snapdragon@0.8.2 › base@0.11.2 › cache-base@1.0.1 › unset-value@1.0.0
-
Introduced through: betterdiscord@JsSucks/BetterDiscordApp#835cc3134cbc80408faeec8b6df9608405650a1b › chokidar@2.1.8 › readdirp@2.2.1 › micromatch@3.1.10 › nanomatch@1.2.13 › snapdragon@0.8.2 › base@0.11.2 › cache-base@1.0.1 › unset-value@1.0.0
-
Introduced through: betterdiscord@JsSucks/BetterDiscordApp#835cc3134cbc80408faeec8b6df9608405650a1b › chokidar@2.1.8 › anymatch@2.0.0 › micromatch@3.1.10 › extglob@2.0.4 › expand-brackets@2.1.4 › snapdragon@0.8.2 › base@0.11.2 › cache-base@1.0.1 › unset-value@1.0.0
-
Introduced through: betterdiscord@JsSucks/BetterDiscordApp#835cc3134cbc80408faeec8b6df9608405650a1b › chokidar@2.1.8 › readdirp@2.2.1 › micromatch@3.1.10 › extglob@2.0.4 › expand-brackets@2.1.4 › snapdragon@0.8.2 › base@0.11.2 › cache-base@1.0.1 › unset-value@1.0.0
Overview
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Prototype Pollution via the unset
function in index.js
, because it allows access to object prototype properties.
Details
Prototype Pollution is a vulnerability affecting JavaScript. Prototype Pollution refers to the ability to inject properties into existing JavaScript language construct prototypes, such as objects. JavaScript allows all Object attributes to be altered, including their magical attributes such as __proto__
, constructor
and prototype
. An attacker manipulates these attributes to overwrite, or pollute, a JavaScript application object prototype of the base object by injecting other values. Properties on the Object.prototype
are then inherited by all the JavaScript objects through the prototype chain. When that happens, this leads to either denial of service by triggering JavaScript exceptions, or it tampers with the application source code to force the code path that the attacker injects, thereby leading to remote code execution.
There are two main ways in which the pollution of prototypes occurs:
Unsafe
Object
recursive mergeProperty definition by path
Unsafe Object recursive merge
The logic of a vulnerable recursive merge function follows the following high-level model:
merge (target, source)
foreach property of source
if property exists and is an object on both the target and the source
merge(target[property], source[property])
else
target[property] = source[property]
When the source object contains a property named __proto__
defined with Object.defineProperty()
, the condition that checks if the property exists and is an object on both the target and the source passes and the merge recurses with the target, being the prototype of Object
and the source of Object
as defined by the attacker. Properties are then copied on the Object
prototype.
Clone operations are a special sub-class of unsafe recursive merges, which occur when a recursive merge is conducted on an empty object: merge({},source)
.
lodash
and Hoek
are examples of libraries susceptible to recursive merge attacks.
Property definition by path
There are a few JavaScript libraries that use an API to define property values on an object based on a given path. The function that is generally affected contains this signature: theFunction(object, path, value)
If the attacker can control the value of “path”, they can set this value to __proto__.myValue
. myValue
is then assigned to the prototype of the class of the object.
Types of attacks
There are a few methods by which Prototype Pollution can be manipulated:
Type | Origin | Short description |
---|---|---|
Denial of service (DoS) | Client | This is the most likely attack. DoS occurs when Object holds generic functions that are implicitly called for various operations (for example, toString and valueOf ). The attacker pollutes Object.prototype.someattr and alters its state to an unexpected value such as Int or Object . In this case, the code fails and is likely to cause a denial of service. For example: if an attacker pollutes Object.prototype.toString by defining it as an integer, if the codebase at any point was reliant on someobject.toString() it would fail. |
Remote Code Execution | Client | Remote code execution is generally only possible in cases where the codebase evaluates a specific attribute of an object, and then executes that evaluation. For example: eval(someobject.someattr) . In this case, if the attacker pollutes Object.prototype.someattr they are likely to be able to leverage this in order to execute code. |
Property Injection | Client | The attacker pollutes properties that the codebase relies on for their informative value, including security properties such as cookies or tokens. For example: if a codebase checks privileges for someuser.isAdmin , then when the attacker pollutes Object.prototype.isAdmin and sets it to equal true , they can then achieve admin privileges. |
Affected environments
The following environments are susceptible to a Prototype Pollution attack:
Application server
Web server
Web browser
How to prevent
Freeze the prototype— use
Object.freeze (Object.prototype)
.Require schema validation of JSON input.
Avoid using unsafe recursive merge functions.
Consider using objects without prototypes (for example,
Object.create(null)
), breaking the prototype chain and preventing pollution.As a best practice use
Map
instead ofObject
.
For more information on this vulnerability type:
Arteau, Oliver. “JavaScript prototype pollution attack in NodeJS application.” GitHub, 26 May 2018
Remediation
Upgrade unset-value
to version 2.0.1 or higher.
References
high severity
- Vulnerable module: follow-redirects
- Introduced through: axios@0.18.1
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: betterdiscord@JsSucks/BetterDiscordApp#835cc3134cbc80408faeec8b6df9608405650a1b › axios@0.18.1 › follow-redirects@1.5.10Remediation: Upgrade to axios@0.20.0.
Overview
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Improper Handling of Extra Parameters due to the improper handling of URLs by the url.parse()
function. When new URL()
throws an error, it can be manipulated to misinterpret the hostname. An attacker could exploit this weakness to redirect traffic to a malicious site, potentially leading to information disclosure, phishing attacks, or other security breaches.
PoC
# Case 1 : Bypassing localhost restriction
let url = 'http://[localhost]/admin';
try{
new URL(url); // ERROR : Invalid URL
}catch{
url.parse(url); // -> http://localhost/admin
}
# Case 2 : Bypassing domain restriction
let url = 'http://attacker.domain*.allowed.domain:a';
try{
new URL(url); // ERROR : Invalid URL
}catch{
url.parse(url); // -> http://attacker.domain/*.allowed.domain:a
}
Remediation
Upgrade follow-redirects
to version 1.15.4 or higher.
References
high severity
- Vulnerable module: nedb
- Introduced through: nedb@1.8.0
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: betterdiscord@JsSucks/BetterDiscordApp#835cc3134cbc80408faeec8b6df9608405650a1b › nedb@1.8.0
Overview
nedb is an embedded persistent or in memory database for Node.js, nw.js, Electron and browsers, 100% JavaScript, no binary dependency.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Prototype Pollution. The library could be tricked into adding or modifying properties of Object.prototype
using a __proto__
or constructor.prototype
payload.
PoC by Snyk
const Datastore = require("nedb");
const db = new Datastore();
db.insert({hello: 'world'}, (err) => {
db.update({hello: 'world'}, {$set: {'__proto__.polluted_1': true}}, {}, (err) => {
console.log(({}).polluted_1); // true
});
db.update({hello: 'world'}, {$set: {'constructor.prototype.polluted_2': true}}, {}, (err) => {
console.log(({}).polluted_2); // true
});
});
Details
Prototype Pollution is a vulnerability affecting JavaScript. Prototype Pollution refers to the ability to inject properties into existing JavaScript language construct prototypes, such as objects. JavaScript allows all Object attributes to be altered, including their magical attributes such as __proto__
, constructor
and prototype
. An attacker manipulates these attributes to overwrite, or pollute, a JavaScript application object prototype of the base object by injecting other values. Properties on the Object.prototype
are then inherited by all the JavaScript objects through the prototype chain. When that happens, this leads to either denial of service by triggering JavaScript exceptions, or it tampers with the application source code to force the code path that the attacker injects, thereby leading to remote code execution.
There are two main ways in which the pollution of prototypes occurs:
Unsafe
Object
recursive mergeProperty definition by path
Unsafe Object recursive merge
The logic of a vulnerable recursive merge function follows the following high-level model:
merge (target, source)
foreach property of source
if property exists and is an object on both the target and the source
merge(target[property], source[property])
else
target[property] = source[property]
When the source object contains a property named __proto__
defined with Object.defineProperty()
, the condition that checks if the property exists and is an object on both the target and the source passes and the merge recurses with the target, being the prototype of Object
and the source of Object
as defined by the attacker. Properties are then copied on the Object
prototype.
Clone operations are a special sub-class of unsafe recursive merges, which occur when a recursive merge is conducted on an empty object: merge({},source)
.
lodash
and Hoek
are examples of libraries susceptible to recursive merge attacks.
Property definition by path
There are a few JavaScript libraries that use an API to define property values on an object based on a given path. The function that is generally affected contains this signature: theFunction(object, path, value)
If the attacker can control the value of “path”, they can set this value to __proto__.myValue
. myValue
is then assigned to the prototype of the class of the object.
Types of attacks
There are a few methods by which Prototype Pollution can be manipulated:
Type | Origin | Short description |
---|---|---|
Denial of service (DoS) | Client | This is the most likely attack. DoS occurs when Object holds generic functions that are implicitly called for various operations (for example, toString and valueOf ). The attacker pollutes Object.prototype.someattr and alters its state to an unexpected value such as Int or Object . In this case, the code fails and is likely to cause a denial of service. For example: if an attacker pollutes Object.prototype.toString by defining it as an integer, if the codebase at any point was reliant on someobject.toString() it would fail. |
Remote Code Execution | Client | Remote code execution is generally only possible in cases where the codebase evaluates a specific attribute of an object, and then executes that evaluation. For example: eval(someobject.someattr) . In this case, if the attacker pollutes Object.prototype.someattr they are likely to be able to leverage this in order to execute code. |
Property Injection | Client | The attacker pollutes properties that the codebase relies on for their informative value, including security properties such as cookies or tokens. For example: if a codebase checks privileges for someuser.isAdmin , then when the attacker pollutes Object.prototype.isAdmin and sets it to equal true , they can then achieve admin privileges. |
Affected environments
The following environments are susceptible to a Prototype Pollution attack:
Application server
Web server
Web browser
How to prevent
Freeze the prototype— use
Object.freeze (Object.prototype)
.Require schema validation of JSON input.
Avoid using unsafe recursive merge functions.
Consider using objects without prototypes (for example,
Object.create(null)
), breaking the prototype chain and preventing pollution.As a best practice use
Map
instead ofObject
.
For more information on this vulnerability type:
Arteau, Oliver. “JavaScript prototype pollution attack in NodeJS application.” GitHub, 26 May 2018
Remediation
There is no fixed version for nedb
.
high severity
- Vulnerable module: axios
- Introduced through: axios@0.18.1
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: betterdiscord@JsSucks/BetterDiscordApp#835cc3134cbc80408faeec8b6df9608405650a1b › axios@0.18.1Remediation: Upgrade to axios@0.28.0.
Overview
axios is a promise-based HTTP client for the browser and Node.js.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Cross-site Request Forgery (CSRF) due to inserting the X-XSRF-TOKEN
header using the secret XSRF-TOKEN
cookie value in all requests to any server when the XSRF-TOKEN
0 cookie is available, and the withCredentials
setting is turned on. If a malicious user manages to obtain this value, it can potentially lead to the XSRF defence mechanism bypass.
Workaround
Users should change the default XSRF-TOKEN
cookie name in the Axios configuration and manually include the corresponding header only in the specific places where it's necessary.
Remediation
Upgrade axios
to version 0.28.0, 1.6.0 or higher.
References
medium severity
- Vulnerable module: follow-redirects
- Introduced through: axios@0.18.1
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: betterdiscord@JsSucks/BetterDiscordApp#835cc3134cbc80408faeec8b6df9608405650a1b › axios@0.18.1 › follow-redirects@1.5.10Remediation: Upgrade to axios@0.20.0.
Overview
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Information Exposure due to the handling of the Proxy-Authorization
header across hosts. When using a dependent library, it only clears the authorization header during cross-domain redirects but allows the proxy-authentication header, which contains credentials, to persist. This behavior may lead to the unintended leakage of credentials if an attacker can trigger a cross-domain redirect and capture the persistent proxy-authentication header.
PoC
const axios = require('axios');
axios.get('http://127.0.0.1:10081/',{
headers: {
'AuThorization': 'Rear Test',
'ProXy-AuthoriZation': 'Rear Test',
'coOkie': 't=1'
}
}).then(function (response) {
console.log(response);
})
Remediation
Upgrade follow-redirects
to version 1.15.6 or higher.
References
medium severity
- Vulnerable module: node-sass
- Introduced through: node-sass@4.14.1
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: betterdiscord@JsSucks/BetterDiscordApp#835cc3134cbc80408faeec8b6df9608405650a1b › node-sass@4.14.1
Overview
node-sass is a Node.js bindings package for libsass.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Denial of Service (DoS). Uncontrolled recursion is possible in Sass::Complex_Selector::perform
in ast.hpp
and Sass::Inspect::operator
in inspect.cpp
. Note: node-sass
is affected by this vulnerability due to its bundled usage of the libsass
package.
Details
A cross-site scripting attack occurs when the attacker tricks a legitimate web-based application or site to accept a request as originating from a trusted source.
This is done by escaping the context of the web application; the web application then delivers that data to its users along with other trusted dynamic content, without validating it. The browser unknowingly executes malicious script on the client side (through client-side languages; usually JavaScript or HTML) in order to perform actions that are otherwise typically blocked by the browser’s Same Origin Policy.
Injecting malicious code is the most prevalent manner by which XSS is exploited; for this reason, escaping characters in order to prevent this manipulation is the top method for securing code against this vulnerability.
Escaping means that the application is coded to mark key characters, and particularly key characters included in user input, to prevent those characters from being interpreted in a dangerous context. For example, in HTML, <
can be coded as <
; and >
can be coded as >
; in order to be interpreted and displayed as themselves in text, while within the code itself, they are used for HTML tags. If malicious content is injected into an application that escapes special characters and that malicious content uses <
and >
as HTML tags, those characters are nonetheless not interpreted as HTML tags by the browser if they’ve been correctly escaped in the application code and in this way the attempted attack is diverted.
The most prominent use of XSS is to steal cookies (source: OWASP HttpOnly) and hijack user sessions, but XSS exploits have been used to expose sensitive information, enable access to privileged services and functionality and deliver malware.
Types of attacks
There are a few methods by which XSS can be manipulated:
Type | Origin | Description |
---|---|---|
Stored | Server | The malicious code is inserted in the application (usually as a link) by the attacker. The code is activated every time a user clicks the link. |
Reflected | Server | The attacker delivers a malicious link externally from the vulnerable web site application to a user. When clicked, malicious code is sent to the vulnerable web site, which reflects the attack back to the user’s browser. |
DOM-based | Client | The attacker forces the user’s browser to render a malicious page. The data in the page itself delivers the cross-site scripting data. |
Mutated | The attacker injects code that appears safe, but is then rewritten and modified by the browser, while parsing the markup. An example is rebalancing unclosed quotation marks or even adding quotation marks to unquoted parameters. |
Affected environments
The following environments are susceptible to an XSS attack:
- Web servers
- Application servers
- Web application environments
How to prevent
This section describes the top best practices designed to specifically protect your code:
- Sanitize data input in an HTTP request before reflecting it back, ensuring all data is validated, filtered or escaped before echoing anything back to the user, such as the values of query parameters during searches.
- Convert special characters such as
?
,&
,/
,<
,>
and spaces to their respective HTML or URL encoded equivalents. - Give users the option to disable client-side scripts.
- Redirect invalid requests.
- Detect simultaneous logins, including those from two separate IP addresses, and invalidate those sessions.
- Use and enforce a Content Security Policy (source: Wikipedia) to disable any features that might be manipulated for an XSS attack.
- Read the documentation for any of the libraries referenced in your code to understand which elements allow for embedded HTML.
Remediation
There is no fixed version for node-sass
.
References
medium severity
- Vulnerable module: node-sass
- Introduced through: node-sass@4.14.1
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: betterdiscord@JsSucks/BetterDiscordApp#835cc3134cbc80408faeec8b6df9608405650a1b › node-sass@4.14.1
Overview
node-sass is a Node.js bindings package for libsass.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Out-of-Bounds. A heap-based buffer over-read exists in Sass::Prelexer::parenthese_scope
in prelexer.hpp
. node-sass
is affected by this vulnerability due to its bundled usage of libsass
.
Remediation
There is no fixed version for node-sass
.
References
medium severity
- Vulnerable module: node-sass
- Introduced through: node-sass@4.14.1
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: betterdiscord@JsSucks/BetterDiscordApp#835cc3134cbc80408faeec8b6df9608405650a1b › node-sass@4.14.1
Overview
node-sass is a Node.js bindings package for libsass.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Out-of-Bounds via Sass::Prelexer::alternatives
in prelexer.hpp
. Note: node-sass
is affected by this vulnerability due to its bundled usage of the libsass
package.
Details
A cross-site scripting attack occurs when the attacker tricks a legitimate web-based application or site to accept a request as originating from a trusted source.
This is done by escaping the context of the web application; the web application then delivers that data to its users along with other trusted dynamic content, without validating it. The browser unknowingly executes malicious script on the client side (through client-side languages; usually JavaScript or HTML) in order to perform actions that are otherwise typically blocked by the browser’s Same Origin Policy.
Injecting malicious code is the most prevalent manner by which XSS is exploited; for this reason, escaping characters in order to prevent this manipulation is the top method for securing code against this vulnerability.
Escaping means that the application is coded to mark key characters, and particularly key characters included in user input, to prevent those characters from being interpreted in a dangerous context. For example, in HTML, <
can be coded as <
; and >
can be coded as >
; in order to be interpreted and displayed as themselves in text, while within the code itself, they are used for HTML tags. If malicious content is injected into an application that escapes special characters and that malicious content uses <
and >
as HTML tags, those characters are nonetheless not interpreted as HTML tags by the browser if they’ve been correctly escaped in the application code and in this way the attempted attack is diverted.
The most prominent use of XSS is to steal cookies (source: OWASP HttpOnly) and hijack user sessions, but XSS exploits have been used to expose sensitive information, enable access to privileged services and functionality and deliver malware.
Types of attacks
There are a few methods by which XSS can be manipulated:
Type | Origin | Description |
---|---|---|
Stored | Server | The malicious code is inserted in the application (usually as a link) by the attacker. The code is activated every time a user clicks the link. |
Reflected | Server | The attacker delivers a malicious link externally from the vulnerable web site application to a user. When clicked, malicious code is sent to the vulnerable web site, which reflects the attack back to the user’s browser. |
DOM-based | Client | The attacker forces the user’s browser to render a malicious page. The data in the page itself delivers the cross-site scripting data. |
Mutated | The attacker injects code that appears safe, but is then rewritten and modified by the browser, while parsing the markup. An example is rebalancing unclosed quotation marks or even adding quotation marks to unquoted parameters. |
Affected environments
The following environments are susceptible to an XSS attack:
- Web servers
- Application servers
- Web application environments
How to prevent
This section describes the top best practices designed to specifically protect your code:
- Sanitize data input in an HTTP request before reflecting it back, ensuring all data is validated, filtered or escaped before echoing anything back to the user, such as the values of query parameters during searches.
- Convert special characters such as
?
,&
,/
,<
,>
and spaces to their respective HTML or URL encoded equivalents. - Give users the option to disable client-side scripts.
- Redirect invalid requests.
- Detect simultaneous logins, including those from two separate IP addresses, and invalidate those sessions.
- Use and enforce a Content Security Policy (source: Wikipedia) to disable any features that might be manipulated for an XSS attack.
- Read the documentation for any of the libraries referenced in your code to understand which elements allow for embedded HTML.
Remediation
There is no fixed version for node-sass
.
References
medium severity
- Vulnerable module: node-sass
- Introduced through: node-sass@4.14.1
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: betterdiscord@JsSucks/BetterDiscordApp#835cc3134cbc80408faeec8b6df9608405650a1b › node-sass@4.14.1
Overview
node-sass is a Node.js bindings package for libsass.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Out-of-bounds Read. The function handle_error
in sass_context.cpp
allows attackers to cause a denial-of-service resulting from a heap-based buffer over-read via a crafted sass file. Note: node-sass
is affected by this vulnerability due to its bundled usage of the libsass
package.
Details
A cross-site scripting attack occurs when the attacker tricks a legitimate web-based application or site to accept a request as originating from a trusted source.
This is done by escaping the context of the web application; the web application then delivers that data to its users along with other trusted dynamic content, without validating it. The browser unknowingly executes malicious script on the client side (through client-side languages; usually JavaScript or HTML) in order to perform actions that are otherwise typically blocked by the browser’s Same Origin Policy.
Injecting malicious code is the most prevalent manner by which XSS is exploited; for this reason, escaping characters in order to prevent this manipulation is the top method for securing code against this vulnerability.
Escaping means that the application is coded to mark key characters, and particularly key characters included in user input, to prevent those characters from being interpreted in a dangerous context. For example, in HTML, <
can be coded as <
; and >
can be coded as >
; in order to be interpreted and displayed as themselves in text, while within the code itself, they are used for HTML tags. If malicious content is injected into an application that escapes special characters and that malicious content uses <
and >
as HTML tags, those characters are nonetheless not interpreted as HTML tags by the browser if they’ve been correctly escaped in the application code and in this way the attempted attack is diverted.
The most prominent use of XSS is to steal cookies (source: OWASP HttpOnly) and hijack user sessions, but XSS exploits have been used to expose sensitive information, enable access to privileged services and functionality and deliver malware.
Types of attacks
There are a few methods by which XSS can be manipulated:
Type | Origin | Description |
---|---|---|
Stored | Server | The malicious code is inserted in the application (usually as a link) by the attacker. The code is activated every time a user clicks the link. |
Reflected | Server | The attacker delivers a malicious link externally from the vulnerable web site application to a user. When clicked, malicious code is sent to the vulnerable web site, which reflects the attack back to the user’s browser. |
DOM-based | Client | The attacker forces the user’s browser to render a malicious page. The data in the page itself delivers the cross-site scripting data. |
Mutated | The attacker injects code that appears safe, but is then rewritten and modified by the browser, while parsing the markup. An example is rebalancing unclosed quotation marks or even adding quotation marks to unquoted parameters. |
Affected environments
The following environments are susceptible to an XSS attack:
- Web servers
- Application servers
- Web application environments
How to prevent
This section describes the top best practices designed to specifically protect your code:
- Sanitize data input in an HTTP request before reflecting it back, ensuring all data is validated, filtered or escaped before echoing anything back to the user, such as the values of query parameters during searches.
- Convert special characters such as
?
,&
,/
,<
,>
and spaces to their respective HTML or URL encoded equivalents. - Give users the option to disable client-side scripts.
- Redirect invalid requests.
- Detect simultaneous logins, including those from two separate IP addresses, and invalidate those sessions.
- Use and enforce a Content Security Policy (source: Wikipedia) to disable any features that might be manipulated for an XSS attack.
- Read the documentation for any of the libraries referenced in your code to understand which elements allow for embedded HTML.
Remediation
There is no fixed version for node-sass
.
References
medium severity
- Vulnerable module: request
- Introduced through: node-sass@4.14.1
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: betterdiscord@JsSucks/BetterDiscordApp#835cc3134cbc80408faeec8b6df9608405650a1b › node-sass@4.14.1 › request@2.88.2
-
Introduced through: betterdiscord@JsSucks/BetterDiscordApp#835cc3134cbc80408faeec8b6df9608405650a1b › node-sass@4.14.1 › node-gyp@3.8.0 › request@2.88.2
Overview
request is a simplified http request client.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Server-side Request Forgery (SSRF) due to insufficient checks in the lib/redirect.js
file by allowing insecure redirects in the default configuration, via an attacker-controller server that does a cross-protocol redirect (HTTP to HTTPS, or HTTPS to HTTP).
NOTE: request
package has been deprecated, so a fix is not expected. See https://github.com/request/request/issues/3142.
Remediation
A fix was pushed into the master
branch but not yet published.
References
medium severity
- Vulnerable module: tar
- Introduced through: node-sass@4.14.1
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: betterdiscord@JsSucks/BetterDiscordApp#835cc3134cbc80408faeec8b6df9608405650a1b › node-sass@4.14.1 › node-gyp@3.8.0 › tar@2.2.2Remediation: Upgrade to node-sass@5.0.0.
Overview
tar is a full-featured Tar for Node.js.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Uncontrolled Resource Consumption ('Resource Exhaustion') due to the lack of folders count validation during the folder creation process. An attacker who generates a large number of sub-folders can consume memory on the system running the software and even crash the client within few seconds of running it using a path with too many sub-folders inside.
Remediation
Upgrade tar
to version 6.2.1 or higher.
References
medium severity
- Vulnerable module: tough-cookie
- Introduced through: node-sass@4.14.1
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: betterdiscord@JsSucks/BetterDiscordApp#835cc3134cbc80408faeec8b6df9608405650a1b › node-sass@4.14.1 › request@2.88.2 › tough-cookie@2.5.0
-
Introduced through: betterdiscord@JsSucks/BetterDiscordApp#835cc3134cbc80408faeec8b6df9608405650a1b › node-sass@4.14.1 › node-gyp@3.8.0 › request@2.88.2 › tough-cookie@2.5.0
Overview
tough-cookie is a RFC6265 Cookies and CookieJar module for Node.js.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Prototype Pollution due to improper handling of Cookies when using CookieJar in rejectPublicSuffixes=false
mode. Due to an issue with the manner in which the objects are initialized, an attacker can expose or modify a limited amount of property information on those objects. There is no impact to availability.
PoC
// PoC.js
async function main(){
var tough = require("tough-cookie");
var cookiejar = new tough.CookieJar(undefined,{rejectPublicSuffixes:false});
// Exploit cookie
await cookiejar.setCookie(
"Slonser=polluted; Domain=__proto__; Path=/notauth",
"https://__proto__/admin"
);
// normal cookie
var cookie = await cookiejar.setCookie(
"Auth=Lol; Domain=google.com; Path=/notauth",
"https://google.com/"
);
//Exploit cookie
var a = {};
console.log(a["/notauth"]["Slonser"])
}
main();
Details
Prototype Pollution is a vulnerability affecting JavaScript. Prototype Pollution refers to the ability to inject properties into existing JavaScript language construct prototypes, such as objects. JavaScript allows all Object attributes to be altered, including their magical attributes such as __proto__
, constructor
and prototype
. An attacker manipulates these attributes to overwrite, or pollute, a JavaScript application object prototype of the base object by injecting other values. Properties on the Object.prototype
are then inherited by all the JavaScript objects through the prototype chain. When that happens, this leads to either denial of service by triggering JavaScript exceptions, or it tampers with the application source code to force the code path that the attacker injects, thereby leading to remote code execution.
There are two main ways in which the pollution of prototypes occurs:
Unsafe
Object
recursive mergeProperty definition by path
Unsafe Object recursive merge
The logic of a vulnerable recursive merge function follows the following high-level model:
merge (target, source)
foreach property of source
if property exists and is an object on both the target and the source
merge(target[property], source[property])
else
target[property] = source[property]
When the source object contains a property named __proto__
defined with Object.defineProperty()
, the condition that checks if the property exists and is an object on both the target and the source passes and the merge recurses with the target, being the prototype of Object
and the source of Object
as defined by the attacker. Properties are then copied on the Object
prototype.
Clone operations are a special sub-class of unsafe recursive merges, which occur when a recursive merge is conducted on an empty object: merge({},source)
.
lodash
and Hoek
are examples of libraries susceptible to recursive merge attacks.
Property definition by path
There are a few JavaScript libraries that use an API to define property values on an object based on a given path. The function that is generally affected contains this signature: theFunction(object, path, value)
If the attacker can control the value of “path”, they can set this value to __proto__.myValue
. myValue
is then assigned to the prototype of the class of the object.
Types of attacks
There are a few methods by which Prototype Pollution can be manipulated:
Type | Origin | Short description |
---|---|---|
Denial of service (DoS) | Client | This is the most likely attack. DoS occurs when Object holds generic functions that are implicitly called for various operations (for example, toString and valueOf ). The attacker pollutes Object.prototype.someattr and alters its state to an unexpected value such as Int or Object . In this case, the code fails and is likely to cause a denial of service. For example: if an attacker pollutes Object.prototype.toString by defining it as an integer, if the codebase at any point was reliant on someobject.toString() it would fail. |
Remote Code Execution | Client | Remote code execution is generally only possible in cases where the codebase evaluates a specific attribute of an object, and then executes that evaluation. For example: eval(someobject.someattr) . In this case, if the attacker pollutes Object.prototype.someattr they are likely to be able to leverage this in order to execute code. |
Property Injection | Client | The attacker pollutes properties that the codebase relies on for their informative value, including security properties such as cookies or tokens. For example: if a codebase checks privileges for someuser.isAdmin , then when the attacker pollutes Object.prototype.isAdmin and sets it to equal true , they can then achieve admin privileges. |
Affected environments
The following environments are susceptible to a Prototype Pollution attack:
Application server
Web server
Web browser
How to prevent
Freeze the prototype— use
Object.freeze (Object.prototype)
.Require schema validation of JSON input.
Avoid using unsafe recursive merge functions.
Consider using objects without prototypes (for example,
Object.create(null)
), breaking the prototype chain and preventing pollution.As a best practice use
Map
instead ofObject
.
For more information on this vulnerability type:
Arteau, Oliver. “JavaScript prototype pollution attack in NodeJS application.” GitHub, 26 May 2018
Remediation
Upgrade tough-cookie
to version 4.1.3 or higher.
References
medium severity
- Vulnerable module: inflight
- Introduced through: asar@1.0.0 and node-sass@4.14.1
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: betterdiscord@JsSucks/BetterDiscordApp#835cc3134cbc80408faeec8b6df9608405650a1b › asar@1.0.0 › glob@7.2.3 › inflight@1.0.6
-
Introduced through: betterdiscord@JsSucks/BetterDiscordApp#835cc3134cbc80408faeec8b6df9608405650a1b › node-sass@4.14.1 › glob@7.2.3 › inflight@1.0.6
-
Introduced through: betterdiscord@JsSucks/BetterDiscordApp#835cc3134cbc80408faeec8b6df9608405650a1b › node-sass@4.14.1 › node-gyp@3.8.0 › glob@7.2.3 › inflight@1.0.6
-
Introduced through: betterdiscord@JsSucks/BetterDiscordApp#835cc3134cbc80408faeec8b6df9608405650a1b › node-sass@4.14.1 › sass-graph@2.2.5 › glob@7.2.3 › inflight@1.0.6
-
Introduced through: betterdiscord@JsSucks/BetterDiscordApp#835cc3134cbc80408faeec8b6df9608405650a1b › node-sass@4.14.1 › true-case-path@1.0.3 › glob@7.2.3 › inflight@1.0.6
-
Introduced through: betterdiscord@JsSucks/BetterDiscordApp#835cc3134cbc80408faeec8b6df9608405650a1b › node-sass@4.14.1 › node-gyp@3.8.0 › rimraf@2.7.1 › glob@7.2.3 › inflight@1.0.6
-
Introduced through: betterdiscord@JsSucks/BetterDiscordApp#835cc3134cbc80408faeec8b6df9608405650a1b › node-sass@4.14.1 › gaze@1.1.3 › globule@1.3.4 › glob@7.1.7 › inflight@1.0.6
-
Introduced through: betterdiscord@JsSucks/BetterDiscordApp#835cc3134cbc80408faeec8b6df9608405650a1b › asar@1.0.0 › tmp-promise@1.1.0 › tmp@0.1.0 › rimraf@2.7.1 › glob@7.2.3 › inflight@1.0.6
-
Introduced through: betterdiscord@JsSucks/BetterDiscordApp#835cc3134cbc80408faeec8b6df9608405650a1b › node-sass@4.14.1 › node-gyp@3.8.0 › fstream@1.0.12 › rimraf@2.7.1 › glob@7.2.3 › inflight@1.0.6
-
Introduced through: betterdiscord@JsSucks/BetterDiscordApp#835cc3134cbc80408faeec8b6df9608405650a1b › node-sass@4.14.1 › node-gyp@3.8.0 › tar@2.2.2 › fstream@1.0.12 › rimraf@2.7.1 › glob@7.2.3 › inflight@1.0.6
Overview
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Missing Release of Resource after Effective Lifetime via the makeres
function due to improperly deleting keys from the reqs
object after execution of callbacks. This behavior causes the keys to remain in the reqs
object, which leads to resource exhaustion.
Exploiting this vulnerability results in crashing the node
process or in the application crash.
Note: This library is not maintained, and currently, there is no fix for this issue. To overcome this vulnerability, several dependent packages have eliminated the use of this library.
To trigger the memory leak, an attacker would need to have the ability to execute or influence the asynchronous operations that use the inflight module within the application. This typically requires access to the internal workings of the server or application, which is not commonly exposed to remote users. Therefore, “Attack vector” is marked as “Local”.
PoC
const inflight = require('inflight');
function testInflight() {
let i = 0;
function scheduleNext() {
let key = `key-${i++}`;
const callback = () => {
};
for (let j = 0; j < 1000000; j++) {
inflight(key, callback);
}
setImmediate(scheduleNext);
}
if (i % 100 === 0) {
console.log(process.memoryUsage());
}
scheduleNext();
}
testInflight();
Remediation
There is no fixed version for inflight
.
References
medium severity
- Vulnerable module: axios
- Introduced through: axios@0.18.1
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: betterdiscord@JsSucks/BetterDiscordApp#835cc3134cbc80408faeec8b6df9608405650a1b › axios@0.18.1Remediation: Upgrade to axios@0.21.1.
Overview
axios is a promise-based HTTP client for the browser and Node.js.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF). An attacker is able to bypass a proxy by providing a URL that responds with a redirect to a restricted host or IP address.
Remediation
Upgrade axios
to version 0.21.1 or higher.
References
medium severity
- Vulnerable module: underscore
- Introduced through: nedb@1.8.0
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: betterdiscord@JsSucks/BetterDiscordApp#835cc3134cbc80408faeec8b6df9608405650a1b › nedb@1.8.0 › underscore@1.4.4
-
Introduced through: betterdiscord@JsSucks/BetterDiscordApp#835cc3134cbc80408faeec8b6df9608405650a1b › nedb@1.8.0 › binary-search-tree@0.2.5 › underscore@1.4.4
Overview
underscore is a JavaScript's functional programming helper library.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Arbitrary Code Injection via the template
function, particularly when the variable
option is taken from _.templateSettings
as it is not sanitized.
PoC
const _ = require('underscore');
_.templateSettings.variable = "a = this.process.mainModule.require('child_process').execSync('touch HELLO')";
const t = _.template("")();
Remediation
Upgrade underscore
to version 1.13.0-2, 1.12.1 or higher.
References
medium severity
- Vulnerable module: axios
- Introduced through: axios@0.18.1
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: betterdiscord@JsSucks/BetterDiscordApp#835cc3134cbc80408faeec8b6df9608405650a1b › axios@0.18.1Remediation: Upgrade to axios@1.6.3.
Overview
axios is a promise-based HTTP client for the browser and Node.js.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Regular Expression Denial of Service (ReDoS). An attacker can deplete system resources by providing a manipulated string as input to the format method, causing the regular expression to exhibit a time complexity of O(n^2)
. This makes the server to become unable to provide normal service due to the excessive cost and time wasted in processing vulnerable regular expressions.
PoC
const axios = require('axios');
console.time('t1');
axios.defaults.baseURL = '/'.repeat(10000) + 'a/';
axios.get('/a').then(()=>{}).catch(()=>{});
console.timeEnd('t1');
console.time('t2');
axios.defaults.baseURL = '/'.repeat(100000) + 'a/';
axios.get('/a').then(()=>{}).catch(()=>{});
console.timeEnd('t2');
/* stdout
t1: 60.826ms
t2: 5.826s
*/
Details
Denial of Service (DoS) describes a family of attacks, all aimed at making a system inaccessible to its original and legitimate users. There are many types of DoS attacks, ranging from trying to clog the network pipes to the system by generating a large volume of traffic from many machines (a Distributed Denial of Service - DDoS - attack) to sending crafted requests that cause a system to crash or take a disproportional amount of time to process.
The Regular expression Denial of Service (ReDoS) is a type of Denial of Service attack. Regular expressions are incredibly powerful, but they aren't very intuitive and can ultimately end up making it easy for attackers to take your site down.
Let’s take the following regular expression as an example:
regex = /A(B|C+)+D/
This regular expression accomplishes the following:
A
The string must start with the letter 'A'(B|C+)+
The string must then follow the letter A with either the letter 'B' or some number of occurrences of the letter 'C' (the+
matches one or more times). The+
at the end of this section states that we can look for one or more matches of this section.D
Finally, we ensure this section of the string ends with a 'D'
The expression would match inputs such as ABBD
, ABCCCCD
, ABCBCCCD
and ACCCCCD
It most cases, it doesn't take very long for a regex engine to find a match:
$ time node -e '/A(B|C+)+D/.test("ACCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCD")'
0.04s user 0.01s system 95% cpu 0.052 total
$ time node -e '/A(B|C+)+D/.test("ACCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCX")'
1.79s user 0.02s system 99% cpu 1.812 total
The entire process of testing it against a 30 characters long string takes around ~52ms. But when given an invalid string, it takes nearly two seconds to complete the test, over ten times as long as it took to test a valid string. The dramatic difference is due to the way regular expressions get evaluated.
Most Regex engines will work very similarly (with minor differences). The engine will match the first possible way to accept the current character and proceed to the next one. If it then fails to match the next one, it will backtrack and see if there was another way to digest the previous character. If it goes too far down the rabbit hole only to find out the string doesn’t match in the end, and if many characters have multiple valid regex paths, the number of backtracking steps can become very large, resulting in what is known as catastrophic backtracking.
Let's look at how our expression runs into this problem, using a shorter string: "ACCCX". While it seems fairly straightforward, there are still four different ways that the engine could match those three C's:
- CCC
- CC+C
- C+CC
- C+C+C.
The engine has to try each of those combinations to see if any of them potentially match against the expression. When you combine that with the other steps the engine must take, we can use RegEx 101 debugger to see the engine has to take a total of 38 steps before it can determine the string doesn't match.
From there, the number of steps the engine must use to validate a string just continues to grow.
String | Number of C's | Number of steps |
---|---|---|
ACCCX | 3 | 38 |
ACCCCX | 4 | 71 |
ACCCCCX | 5 | 136 |
ACCCCCCCCCCCCCCX | 14 | 65,553 |
By the time the string includes 14 C's, the engine has to take over 65,000 steps just to see if the string is valid. These extreme situations can cause them to work very slowly (exponentially related to input size, as shown above), allowing an attacker to exploit this and can cause the service to excessively consume CPU, resulting in a Denial of Service.
Remediation
Upgrade axios
to version 1.6.3 or higher.
References
medium severity
- Vulnerable module: follow-redirects
- Introduced through: axios@0.18.1
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: betterdiscord@JsSucks/BetterDiscordApp#835cc3134cbc80408faeec8b6df9608405650a1b › axios@0.18.1 › follow-redirects@1.5.10Remediation: Upgrade to axios@0.20.0.
Overview
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Information Exposure by leaking the cookie header to a third party site in the process of fetching a remote URL with the cookie in the request body. If the response contains a location
header, it will follow the redirect to another URL of a potentially malicious actor, to which the cookie would be exposed.
Remediation
Upgrade follow-redirects
to version 1.14.7 or higher.
References
medium severity
- Vulnerable module: glob-parent
- Introduced through: chokidar@2.1.8
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: betterdiscord@JsSucks/BetterDiscordApp#835cc3134cbc80408faeec8b6df9608405650a1b › chokidar@2.1.8 › glob-parent@3.1.0Remediation: Upgrade to chokidar@3.0.0.
Overview
glob-parent is a package that helps extracting the non-magic parent path from a glob string.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Regular Expression Denial of Service (ReDoS). The enclosure
regex used to check for strings ending in enclosure containing path separator.
PoC by Yeting Li
var globParent = require("glob-parent")
function build_attack(n) {
var ret = "{"
for (var i = 0; i < n; i++) {
ret += "/"
}
return ret;
}
globParent(build_attack(5000));
Details
Denial of Service (DoS) describes a family of attacks, all aimed at making a system inaccessible to its original and legitimate users. There are many types of DoS attacks, ranging from trying to clog the network pipes to the system by generating a large volume of traffic from many machines (a Distributed Denial of Service - DDoS - attack) to sending crafted requests that cause a system to crash or take a disproportional amount of time to process.
The Regular expression Denial of Service (ReDoS) is a type of Denial of Service attack. Regular expressions are incredibly powerful, but they aren't very intuitive and can ultimately end up making it easy for attackers to take your site down.
Let’s take the following regular expression as an example:
regex = /A(B|C+)+D/
This regular expression accomplishes the following:
A
The string must start with the letter 'A'(B|C+)+
The string must then follow the letter A with either the letter 'B' or some number of occurrences of the letter 'C' (the+
matches one or more times). The+
at the end of this section states that we can look for one or more matches of this section.D
Finally, we ensure this section of the string ends with a 'D'
The expression would match inputs such as ABBD
, ABCCCCD
, ABCBCCCD
and ACCCCCD
It most cases, it doesn't take very long for a regex engine to find a match:
$ time node -e '/A(B|C+)+D/.test("ACCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCD")'
0.04s user 0.01s system 95% cpu 0.052 total
$ time node -e '/A(B|C+)+D/.test("ACCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCX")'
1.79s user 0.02s system 99% cpu 1.812 total
The entire process of testing it against a 30 characters long string takes around ~52ms. But when given an invalid string, it takes nearly two seconds to complete the test, over ten times as long as it took to test a valid string. The dramatic difference is due to the way regular expressions get evaluated.
Most Regex engines will work very similarly (with minor differences). The engine will match the first possible way to accept the current character and proceed to the next one. If it then fails to match the next one, it will backtrack and see if there was another way to digest the previous character. If it goes too far down the rabbit hole only to find out the string doesn’t match in the end, and if many characters have multiple valid regex paths, the number of backtracking steps can become very large, resulting in what is known as catastrophic backtracking.
Let's look at how our expression runs into this problem, using a shorter string: "ACCCX". While it seems fairly straightforward, there are still four different ways that the engine could match those three C's:
- CCC
- CC+C
- C+CC
- C+C+C.
The engine has to try each of those combinations to see if any of them potentially match against the expression. When you combine that with the other steps the engine must take, we can use RegEx 101 debugger to see the engine has to take a total of 38 steps before it can determine the string doesn't match.
From there, the number of steps the engine must use to validate a string just continues to grow.
String | Number of C's | Number of steps |
---|---|---|
ACCCX | 3 | 38 |
ACCCCX | 4 | 71 |
ACCCCCX | 5 | 136 |
ACCCCCCCCCCCCCCX | 14 | 65,553 |
By the time the string includes 14 C's, the engine has to take over 65,000 steps just to see if the string is valid. These extreme situations can cause them to work very slowly (exponentially related to input size, as shown above), allowing an attacker to exploit this and can cause the service to excessively consume CPU, resulting in a Denial of Service.
Remediation
Upgrade glob-parent
to version 5.1.2 or higher.
References
medium severity
- Vulnerable module: node-sass
- Introduced through: node-sass@4.14.1
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: betterdiscord@JsSucks/BetterDiscordApp#835cc3134cbc80408faeec8b6df9608405650a1b › node-sass@4.14.1Remediation: Upgrade to node-sass@7.0.0.
Overview
node-sass is a Node.js bindings package for libsass.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Improper Certificate Validation. Certificate validation is disabled by default when requesting binaries, even if the user is not specifying an alternative download path.
Remediation
Upgrade node-sass
to version 7.0.0 or higher.
References
medium severity
- Vulnerable module: scss-tokenizer
- Introduced through: node-sass@4.14.1
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: betterdiscord@JsSucks/BetterDiscordApp#835cc3134cbc80408faeec8b6df9608405650a1b › node-sass@4.14.1 › sass-graph@2.2.5 › scss-tokenizer@0.2.3Remediation: Upgrade to node-sass@7.0.2.
Overview
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Regular Expression Denial of Service (ReDoS) via the loadAnnotation()
function, due to the usage of insecure regex.
PoC
var scss = require("scss-tokenizer")
function build_attack(n) {
var ret = "a{}"
for (var i = 0; i < n; i++) {
ret += "/*# sourceMappingURL="
}
return ret + "!";
}
// postcss.parse('a{}/*# sourceMappingURL=a.css.map */')
for(var i = 1; i <= 500000; i++) {
if (i % 1000 == 0) {
var time = Date.now();
var attack_str = build_attack(i)
try{
scss.tokenize(attack_str)
var time_cost = Date.now() - time;
console.log("attack_str.length: " + attack_str.length + ": " + time_cost+" ms");
}
catch(e){
var time_cost = Date.now() - time;
console.log("attack_str.length: " + attack_str.length + ": " + time_cost+" ms");
}
}
}
Details
Denial of Service (DoS) describes a family of attacks, all aimed at making a system inaccessible to its original and legitimate users. There are many types of DoS attacks, ranging from trying to clog the network pipes to the system by generating a large volume of traffic from many machines (a Distributed Denial of Service - DDoS - attack) to sending crafted requests that cause a system to crash or take a disproportional amount of time to process.
The Regular expression Denial of Service (ReDoS) is a type of Denial of Service attack. Regular expressions are incredibly powerful, but they aren't very intuitive and can ultimately end up making it easy for attackers to take your site down.
Let’s take the following regular expression as an example:
regex = /A(B|C+)+D/
This regular expression accomplishes the following:
A
The string must start with the letter 'A'(B|C+)+
The string must then follow the letter A with either the letter 'B' or some number of occurrences of the letter 'C' (the+
matches one or more times). The+
at the end of this section states that we can look for one or more matches of this section.D
Finally, we ensure this section of the string ends with a 'D'
The expression would match inputs such as ABBD
, ABCCCCD
, ABCBCCCD
and ACCCCCD
It most cases, it doesn't take very long for a regex engine to find a match:
$ time node -e '/A(B|C+)+D/.test("ACCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCD")'
0.04s user 0.01s system 95% cpu 0.052 total
$ time node -e '/A(B|C+)+D/.test("ACCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCX")'
1.79s user 0.02s system 99% cpu 1.812 total
The entire process of testing it against a 30 characters long string takes around ~52ms. But when given an invalid string, it takes nearly two seconds to complete the test, over ten times as long as it took to test a valid string. The dramatic difference is due to the way regular expressions get evaluated.
Most Regex engines will work very similarly (with minor differences). The engine will match the first possible way to accept the current character and proceed to the next one. If it then fails to match the next one, it will backtrack and see if there was another way to digest the previous character. If it goes too far down the rabbit hole only to find out the string doesn’t match in the end, and if many characters have multiple valid regex paths, the number of backtracking steps can become very large, resulting in what is known as catastrophic backtracking.
Let's look at how our expression runs into this problem, using a shorter string: "ACCCX". While it seems fairly straightforward, there are still four different ways that the engine could match those three C's:
- CCC
- CC+C
- C+CC
- C+C+C.
The engine has to try each of those combinations to see if any of them potentially match against the expression. When you combine that with the other steps the engine must take, we can use RegEx 101 debugger to see the engine has to take a total of 38 steps before it can determine the string doesn't match.
From there, the number of steps the engine must use to validate a string just continues to grow.
String | Number of C's | Number of steps |
---|---|---|
ACCCX | 3 | 38 |
ACCCCX | 4 | 71 |
ACCCCCX | 5 | 136 |
ACCCCCCCCCCCCCCX | 14 | 65,553 |
By the time the string includes 14 C's, the engine has to take over 65,000 steps just to see if the string is valid. These extreme situations can cause them to work very slowly (exponentially related to input size, as shown above), allowing an attacker to exploit this and can cause the service to excessively consume CPU, resulting in a Denial of Service.
Remediation
Upgrade scss-tokenizer
to version 0.4.3 or higher.
References
medium severity
- Vulnerable module: node-sass
- Introduced through: node-sass@4.14.1
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: betterdiscord@JsSucks/BetterDiscordApp#835cc3134cbc80408faeec8b6df9608405650a1b › node-sass@4.14.1
Overview
node-sass is a Node.js bindings package for libsass.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to NULL Pointer Dereference via Sass::Parser::parseCompoundSelector
in parser_selectors.cpp
. Note: node-sass
is affected by this vulnerability due to its bundled usage of the libsass
package.
Remediation
There is no fixed version for node-sass
.
References
medium severity
- Vulnerable module: node-sass
- Introduced through: node-sass@4.14.1
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: betterdiscord@JsSucks/BetterDiscordApp#835cc3134cbc80408faeec8b6df9608405650a1b › node-sass@4.14.1
Overview
node-sass is a Node.js bindings package for libsass.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Out-of-bounds Read via Sass::weaveParents
in ast_sel_weave.cpp
. Note: node-sass
is affected by this vulnerability due to its bundled usage of the libsass
package.
Details
Denial of Service (DoS) describes a family of attacks, all aimed at making a system inaccessible to its original and legitimate users. There are many types of DoS attacks, ranging from trying to clog the network pipes to the system by generating a large volume of traffic from many machines (a Distributed Denial of Service - DDoS - attack) to sending crafted requests that cause a system to crash or take a disproportional amount of time to process.
The Regular expression Denial of Service (ReDoS) is a type of Denial of Service attack. Regular expressions are incredibly powerful, but they aren't very intuitive and can ultimately end up making it easy for attackers to take your site down.
Let’s take the following regular expression as an example:
regex = /A(B|C+)+D/
This regular expression accomplishes the following:
A
The string must start with the letter 'A'(B|C+)+
The string must then follow the letter A with either the letter 'B' or some number of occurrences of the letter 'C' (the+
matches one or more times). The+
at the end of this section states that we can look for one or more matches of this section.D
Finally, we ensure this section of the string ends with a 'D'
The expression would match inputs such as ABBD
, ABCCCCD
, ABCBCCCD
and ACCCCCD
It most cases, it doesn't take very long for a regex engine to find a match:
$ time node -e '/A(B|C+)+D/.test("ACCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCD")'
0.04s user 0.01s system 95% cpu 0.052 total
$ time node -e '/A(B|C+)+D/.test("ACCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCX")'
1.79s user 0.02s system 99% cpu 1.812 total
The entire process of testing it against a 30 characters long string takes around ~52ms. But when given an invalid string, it takes nearly two seconds to complete the test, over ten times as long as it took to test a valid string. The dramatic difference is due to the way regular expressions get evaluated.
Most Regex engines will work very similarly (with minor differences). The engine will match the first possible way to accept the current character and proceed to the next one. If it then fails to match the next one, it will backtrack and see if there was another way to digest the previous character. If it goes too far down the rabbit hole only to find out the string doesn’t match in the end, and if many characters have multiple valid regex paths, the number of backtracking steps can become very large, resulting in what is known as catastrophic backtracking.
Let's look at how our expression runs into this problem, using a shorter string: "ACCCX". While it seems fairly straightforward, there are still four different ways that the engine could match those three C's:
- CCC
- CC+C
- C+CC
- C+C+C.
The engine has to try each of those combinations to see if any of them potentially match against the expression. When you combine that with the other steps the engine must take, we can use RegEx 101 debugger to see the engine has to take a total of 38 steps before it can determine the string doesn't match.
From there, the number of steps the engine must use to validate a string just continues to grow.
String | Number of C's | Number of steps |
---|---|---|
ACCCX | 3 | 38 |
ACCCCX | 4 | 71 |
ACCCCCX | 5 | 136 |
ACCCCCCCCCCCCCCX | 14 | 65,553 |
By the time the string includes 14 C's, the engine has to take over 65,000 steps just to see if the string is valid. These extreme situations can cause them to work very slowly (exponentially related to input size, as shown above), allowing an attacker to exploit this and can cause the service to excessively consume CPU, resulting in a Denial of Service.
Remediation
There is no fixed version for node-sass
.
References
medium severity
- Vulnerable module: node-sass
- Introduced through: node-sass@4.14.1
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: betterdiscord@JsSucks/BetterDiscordApp#835cc3134cbc80408faeec8b6df9608405650a1b › node-sass@4.14.1
Overview
node-sass is a Node.js bindings package for libsass.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Uncontrolled Recursion via Sass::Eval::operator()(Sass::Binary_Expression*)
in eval.cpp
. Note: node-sass
is affected by this vulnerability due to its bundled usage of the libsass
package.
Details
A cross-site scripting attack occurs when the attacker tricks a legitimate web-based application or site to accept a request as originating from a trusted source.
This is done by escaping the context of the web application; the web application then delivers that data to its users along with other trusted dynamic content, without validating it. The browser unknowingly executes malicious script on the client side (through client-side languages; usually JavaScript or HTML) in order to perform actions that are otherwise typically blocked by the browser’s Same Origin Policy.
Injecting malicious code is the most prevalent manner by which XSS is exploited; for this reason, escaping characters in order to prevent this manipulation is the top method for securing code against this vulnerability.
Escaping means that the application is coded to mark key characters, and particularly key characters included in user input, to prevent those characters from being interpreted in a dangerous context. For example, in HTML, <
can be coded as <
; and >
can be coded as >
; in order to be interpreted and displayed as themselves in text, while within the code itself, they are used for HTML tags. If malicious content is injected into an application that escapes special characters and that malicious content uses <
and >
as HTML tags, those characters are nonetheless not interpreted as HTML tags by the browser if they’ve been correctly escaped in the application code and in this way the attempted attack is diverted.
The most prominent use of XSS is to steal cookies (source: OWASP HttpOnly) and hijack user sessions, but XSS exploits have been used to expose sensitive information, enable access to privileged services and functionality and deliver malware.
Types of attacks
There are a few methods by which XSS can be manipulated:
Type | Origin | Description |
---|---|---|
Stored | Server | The malicious code is inserted in the application (usually as a link) by the attacker. The code is activated every time a user clicks the link. |
Reflected | Server | The attacker delivers a malicious link externally from the vulnerable web site application to a user. When clicked, malicious code is sent to the vulnerable web site, which reflects the attack back to the user’s browser. |
DOM-based | Client | The attacker forces the user’s browser to render a malicious page. The data in the page itself delivers the cross-site scripting data. |
Mutated | The attacker injects code that appears safe, but is then rewritten and modified by the browser, while parsing the markup. An example is rebalancing unclosed quotation marks or even adding quotation marks to unquoted parameters. |
Affected environments
The following environments are susceptible to an XSS attack:
- Web servers
- Application servers
- Web application environments
How to prevent
This section describes the top best practices designed to specifically protect your code:
- Sanitize data input in an HTTP request before reflecting it back, ensuring all data is validated, filtered or escaped before echoing anything back to the user, such as the values of query parameters during searches.
- Convert special characters such as
?
,&
,/
,<
,>
and spaces to their respective HTML or URL encoded equivalents. - Give users the option to disable client-side scripts.
- Redirect invalid requests.
- Detect simultaneous logins, including those from two separate IP addresses, and invalidate those sessions.
- Use and enforce a Content Security Policy (source: Wikipedia) to disable any features that might be manipulated for an XSS attack.
- Read the documentation for any of the libraries referenced in your code to understand which elements allow for embedded HTML.
Remediation
There is no fixed version for node-sass
.
References
low severity
- Vulnerable module: tar
- Introduced through: node-sass@4.14.1
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: betterdiscord@JsSucks/BetterDiscordApp#835cc3134cbc80408faeec8b6df9608405650a1b › node-sass@4.14.1 › node-gyp@3.8.0 › tar@2.2.2Remediation: Upgrade to node-sass@5.0.0.
Overview
tar is a full-featured Tar for Node.js.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Regular Expression Denial of Service (ReDoS). When stripping the trailing slash from files
arguments, the f.replace(/\/+$/, '')
performance of this function can exponentially degrade when f
contains many /
characters resulting in ReDoS.
This vulnerability is not likely to be exploitable as it requires that the untrusted input is being passed into the tar.extract()
or tar.list()
array of entries to parse/extract, which would be unusual.
Details
Denial of Service (DoS) describes a family of attacks, all aimed at making a system inaccessible to its original and legitimate users. There are many types of DoS attacks, ranging from trying to clog the network pipes to the system by generating a large volume of traffic from many machines (a Distributed Denial of Service - DDoS - attack) to sending crafted requests that cause a system to crash or take a disproportional amount of time to process.
The Regular expression Denial of Service (ReDoS) is a type of Denial of Service attack. Regular expressions are incredibly powerful, but they aren't very intuitive and can ultimately end up making it easy for attackers to take your site down.
Let’s take the following regular expression as an example:
regex = /A(B|C+)+D/
This regular expression accomplishes the following:
A
The string must start with the letter 'A'(B|C+)+
The string must then follow the letter A with either the letter 'B' or some number of occurrences of the letter 'C' (the+
matches one or more times). The+
at the end of this section states that we can look for one or more matches of this section.D
Finally, we ensure this section of the string ends with a 'D'
The expression would match inputs such as ABBD
, ABCCCCD
, ABCBCCCD
and ACCCCCD
It most cases, it doesn't take very long for a regex engine to find a match:
$ time node -e '/A(B|C+)+D/.test("ACCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCD")'
0.04s user 0.01s system 95% cpu 0.052 total
$ time node -e '/A(B|C+)+D/.test("ACCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCX")'
1.79s user 0.02s system 99% cpu 1.812 total
The entire process of testing it against a 30 characters long string takes around ~52ms. But when given an invalid string, it takes nearly two seconds to complete the test, over ten times as long as it took to test a valid string. The dramatic difference is due to the way regular expressions get evaluated.
Most Regex engines will work very similarly (with minor differences). The engine will match the first possible way to accept the current character and proceed to the next one. If it then fails to match the next one, it will backtrack and see if there was another way to digest the previous character. If it goes too far down the rabbit hole only to find out the string doesn’t match in the end, and if many characters have multiple valid regex paths, the number of backtracking steps can become very large, resulting in what is known as catastrophic backtracking.
Let's look at how our expression runs into this problem, using a shorter string: "ACCCX". While it seems fairly straightforward, there are still four different ways that the engine could match those three C's:
- CCC
- CC+C
- C+CC
- C+C+C.
The engine has to try each of those combinations to see if any of them potentially match against the expression. When you combine that with the other steps the engine must take, we can use RegEx 101 debugger to see the engine has to take a total of 38 steps before it can determine the string doesn't match.
From there, the number of steps the engine must use to validate a string just continues to grow.
String | Number of C's | Number of steps |
---|---|---|
ACCCX | 3 | 38 |
ACCCCX | 4 | 71 |
ACCCCCX | 5 | 136 |
ACCCCCCCCCCCCCCX | 14 | 65,553 |
By the time the string includes 14 C's, the engine has to take over 65,000 steps just to see if the string is valid. These extreme situations can cause them to work very slowly (exponentially related to input size, as shown above), allowing an attacker to exploit this and can cause the service to excessively consume CPU, resulting in a Denial of Service.
Remediation
Upgrade tar
to version 6.1.4, 5.0.8, 4.4.16 or higher.
References
low severity
- Vulnerable module: follow-redirects
- Introduced through: axios@0.18.1
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: betterdiscord@JsSucks/BetterDiscordApp#835cc3134cbc80408faeec8b6df9608405650a1b › axios@0.18.1 › follow-redirects@1.5.10Remediation: Upgrade to axios@0.20.0.
Overview
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Information Exposure due a leakage of the Authorization header from the same hostname during HTTPS to HTTP redirection. An attacker who can listen in on the wire (or perform a MITM attack) will be able to receive the Authorization header due to the usage of the insecure HTTP protocol which does not verify the hostname the request is sending to.
Remediation
Upgrade follow-redirects
to version 1.14.8 or higher.