Vulnerabilities

 6 via 11 paths

Dependencies

 185

Source

 GitHub

Commit

 a8478fe5

Find, fix and prevent vulnerabilities in your code.

Test and protect my applications
Severity
  • 5
  • 1
Status
  • 6
  • 0
  • 0

medium severity

Use of a Broken or Risky Cryptographic Algorithm

  • Vulnerable module: jsonwebtoken
  • Introduced through: jsonwebtoken@8.5.1 and socketio-jwt@4.6.2

Detailed paths

  • Introduced through: moniast@Kol007/MoniAst#a8478fe5b633a51114e13408b4e28be513ffb9de › jsonwebtoken@8.5.1
    Remediation: Upgrade to jsonwebtoken@9.0.0.
  • Introduced through: moniast@Kol007/MoniAst#a8478fe5b633a51114e13408b4e28be513ffb9de › socketio-jwt@4.6.2 › jsonwebtoken@8.5.1

Overview

jsonwebtoken is a JSON Web Token implementation (symmetric and asymmetric)

Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Use of a Broken or Risky Cryptographic Algorithm such that the library can be misconfigured to use legacy, insecure key types for signature verification. For example, DSA keys could be used with the RS256 algorithm.

Exploitability

Users are affected when using an algorithm and a key type other than the combinations mentioned below:

EC: ES256, ES384, ES512

RSA: RS256, RS384, RS512, PS256, PS384, PS512

RSA-PSS: PS256, PS384, PS512

And for Elliptic Curve algorithms:

ES256: prime256v1

ES384: secp384r1

ES512: secp521r1

Workaround

Users who are unable to upgrade to the fixed version can use the allowInvalidAsymmetricKeyTypes option to true in the sign() and verify() functions to continue usage of invalid key type/algorithm combination in 9.0.0 for legacy compatibility.

Remediation

Upgrade jsonwebtoken to version 9.0.0 or higher.

References

Use of a Broken or Risky Cryptographic Algorithm vulnerability report

medium severity

Improper Restriction of Security Token Assignment

  • Vulnerable module: jsonwebtoken
  • Introduced through: jsonwebtoken@8.5.1 and socketio-jwt@4.6.2

Detailed paths

  • Introduced through: moniast@Kol007/MoniAst#a8478fe5b633a51114e13408b4e28be513ffb9de › jsonwebtoken@8.5.1
    Remediation: Upgrade to jsonwebtoken@9.0.0.
  • Introduced through: moniast@Kol007/MoniAst#a8478fe5b633a51114e13408b4e28be513ffb9de › socketio-jwt@4.6.2 › jsonwebtoken@8.5.1

Overview

jsonwebtoken is a JSON Web Token implementation (symmetric and asymmetric)

Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Improper Restriction of Security Token Assignment via the secretOrPublicKey argument due to misconfigurations of the key retrieval function jwt.verify(). Exploiting this vulnerability might result in incorrect verification of forged tokens when tokens signed with an asymmetric public key could be verified with a symmetric HS256 algorithm.

Note: This vulnerability affects your application if it supports the usage of both symmetric and asymmetric keys in jwt.verify() implementation with the same key retrieval function.

Remediation

Upgrade jsonwebtoken to version 9.0.0 or higher.

References

Improper Restriction of Security Token Assignment vulnerability report

medium severity

Improper Authentication

  • Vulnerable module: jsonwebtoken
  • Introduced through: jsonwebtoken@8.5.1 and socketio-jwt@4.6.2

Detailed paths

  • Introduced through: moniast@Kol007/MoniAst#a8478fe5b633a51114e13408b4e28be513ffb9de › jsonwebtoken@8.5.1
    Remediation: Upgrade to jsonwebtoken@9.0.0.
  • Introduced through: moniast@Kol007/MoniAst#a8478fe5b633a51114e13408b4e28be513ffb9de › socketio-jwt@4.6.2 › jsonwebtoken@8.5.1

Overview

jsonwebtoken is a JSON Web Token implementation (symmetric and asymmetric)

Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Improper Authentication such that the lack of algorithm definition in the jwt.verify() function can lead to signature validation bypass due to defaulting to the none algorithm for signature verification.

Exploitability

Users are affected only if all of the following conditions are true for the jwt.verify() function:

  1. A token with no signature is received.

  2. No algorithms are specified.

  3. A falsy (e.g., null, false, undefined) secret or key is passed.

Remediation

Upgrade jsonwebtoken to version 9.0.0 or higher.

References

Improper Authentication vulnerability report

medium severity

Cross-site Scripting (XSS)

  • Vulnerable module: cookie
  • Introduced through: socket.io@2.5.1

Detailed paths

  • Introduced through: moniast@Kol007/MoniAst#a8478fe5b633a51114e13408b4e28be513ffb9de › socket.io@2.5.1 › engine.io@3.6.2 › cookie@0.4.2
    Remediation: Upgrade to socket.io@4.8.0.

Overview

Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Cross-site Scripting (XSS) via the cookie name, path, or domain, which can be used to set unexpected values to other cookie fields.

Workaround

Users who are not able to upgrade to the fixed version should avoid passing untrusted or arbitrary values for the cookie fields and ensure they are set by the application instead of user input.

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 &lt; and > can be coded as &gt; 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

Upgrade cookie to version 0.7.0 or higher.

References

Cross-site Scripting (XSS) vulnerability report

medium severity

Session Fixation

  • Vulnerable module: passport
  • Introduced through: passport@0.4.1

Detailed paths

  • Introduced through: moniast@Kol007/MoniAst#a8478fe5b633a51114e13408b4e28be513ffb9de › passport@0.4.1
    Remediation: Upgrade to passport@0.6.0.

Overview

passport is a Simple, unobtrusive authentication for Node.js.

Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Session Fixation. When a user logs in or logs out, the session is regenerated instead of being closed.

Remediation

Upgrade passport to version 0.6.0 or higher.

References

Session Fixation vulnerability report

low severity

Regular Expression Denial of Service (ReDoS)

  • Vulnerable module: debug
  • Introduced through: socket.io@2.5.1

Detailed paths

  • Introduced through: moniast@Kol007/MoniAst#a8478fe5b633a51114e13408b4e28be513ffb9de › socket.io@2.5.1 › debug@4.1.1
    Remediation: Upgrade to socket.io@3.0.5.
  • Introduced through: moniast@Kol007/MoniAst#a8478fe5b633a51114e13408b4e28be513ffb9de › socket.io@2.5.1 › engine.io@3.6.2 › debug@4.1.1
    Remediation: Upgrade to socket.io@3.0.0.
  • Introduced through: moniast@Kol007/MoniAst#a8478fe5b633a51114e13408b4e28be513ffb9de › socket.io@2.5.1 › socket.io-parser@3.4.3 › debug@4.1.1
    Remediation: Upgrade to socket.io@3.0.0.

Overview

debug is a small debugging utility.

Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Regular Expression Denial of Service (ReDoS) in the function useColors via manipulation of the str argument. The vulnerability can cause a very low impact of about 2 seconds of matching time for data 50k characters long.

Note: CVE-2017-20165 is a duplicate of this vulnerability.

PoC

Use the following regex in the %o formatter.

/\s*\n\s*/

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:

  1. CCC
  2. CC+C
  3. C+CC
  4. 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 debug to version 2.6.9, 3.1.0, 3.2.7, 4.3.1 or higher.

References

Regular Expression Denial of Service (ReDoS) vulnerability report