Vulnerabilities

 4 via 4 paths

Dependencies

 251

Source

 GitHub

Commit

 f17325e4

Find, fix and prevent vulnerabilities in your code.

Test and protect my applications
Severity
  • 1
  • 3
Status
  • 4
  • 0
  • 0

high severity

Prototype Pollution

  • Vulnerable module: protobufjs
  • Introduced through: @google-cloud/datastore@6.3.1

Detailed paths

  • Introduced through: @blinkk/fileset@blinkkcode/fileset#f17325e43079493d768e7ea94d1a96a6a5ae9cef › @google-cloud/datastore@6.3.1 › google-gax@2.30.5 › protobufjs@6.11.3
    Remediation: Upgrade to @google-cloud/datastore@7.0.0.

Overview

protobufjs is a protocol buffer for JavaScript (& TypeScript).

Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Prototype Pollution. A user-controlled protobuf message can be used by an attacker to pollute the prototype of Object.prototype by adding and overwriting its data and functions. Exploitation can involve:

  1. using the function parse to parse protobuf messages on the fly,

  2. loading .proto files by using load/loadSync functions, or

  3. providing untrusted input to the functions ReflectionObject.setParsedOption and util.setProperty

Note:

  1. This is a different issue from CVE-2022-25878

  2. Users who use this package from npm can rest assured that version 7.2.4 includes the fixed code.

Developers using this package from a different CDN should consider 7.2.5 as the fixed version.

Details

Prototype Pollution is a vulnerability affecting JavaScript. Prototype Pollution refers to the ability to inject properties into existing JavaScript language construct prototypes, such as objects. JavaScript allows all Object attributes to be altered, including their magical attributes such as __proto__, constructor and prototype. An attacker manipulates these attributes to overwrite, or pollute, a JavaScript application object prototype of the base object by injecting other values. Properties on the Object.prototype are then inherited by all the JavaScript objects through the prototype chain. When that happens, this leads to either denial of service by triggering JavaScript exceptions, or it tampers with the application source code to force the code path that the attacker injects, thereby leading to remote code execution.

There are two main ways in which the pollution of prototypes occurs:

  • Unsafe Object recursive merge

  • Property 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

  1. Freeze the prototype— use Object.freeze (Object.prototype).

  2. Require schema validation of JSON input.

  3. Avoid using unsafe recursive merge functions.

  4. Consider using objects without prototypes (for example, Object.create(null)), breaking the prototype chain and preventing pollution.

  5. As a best practice use Map instead of Object.

For more information on this vulnerability type:

Arteau, Oliver. “JavaScript prototype pollution attack in NodeJS application.” GitHub, 26 May 2018

Remediation

Upgrade protobufjs to version 6.11.4, 7.2.4 or higher.

References

Prototype Pollution vulnerability report

medium severity

Uncontrolled Resource Consumption

  • Vulnerable module: @grpc/grpc-js
  • Introduced through: @google-cloud/datastore@6.3.1

Detailed paths

  • Introduced through: @blinkk/fileset@blinkkcode/fileset#f17325e43079493d768e7ea94d1a96a6a5ae9cef › @google-cloud/datastore@6.3.1 › google-gax@2.30.5 › @grpc/grpc-js@1.6.12
    Remediation: Upgrade to @google-cloud/datastore@7.0.0.

Overview

@grpc/grpc-js is a gRPC Library for Node

Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Uncontrolled Resource Consumption via the grpc.max_receive_message_length channel option. An attacker can cause a denial of service by sending messages that exceed the configured limits, which are then buffered or decompressed into memory.

Remediation

Upgrade @grpc/grpc-js to version 1.8.22, 1.9.15, 1.10.9 or higher.

References

Uncontrolled Resource Consumption vulnerability report

medium severity

Cross-site Scripting (XSS)

  • Vulnerable module: cookie
  • Introduced through: cookie@0.4.2

Detailed paths

  • Introduced through: @blinkk/fileset@blinkkcode/fileset#f17325e43079493d768e7ea94d1a96a6a5ae9cef › cookie@0.4.2
    Remediation: Upgrade to cookie@0.7.0.

Overview

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

Workaround

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

Details

A cross-site scripting attack occurs when the attacker tricks a legitimate web-based application or site to accept a request as originating from a trusted source.

This is done by escaping the context of the web application; the web application then delivers that data to its users along with other trusted dynamic content, without validating it. The browser unknowingly executes malicious script on the client side (through client-side languages; usually JavaScript or HTML) in order to perform actions that are otherwise typically blocked by the browser’s Same Origin Policy.

Injecting malicious code is the most prevalent manner by which XSS is exploited; for this reason, escaping characters in order to prevent this manipulation is the top method for securing code against this vulnerability.

Escaping means that the application is coded to mark key characters, and particularly key characters included in user input, to prevent those characters from being interpreted in a dangerous context. For example, in HTML, < can be coded as &lt; and > can be coded as &gt; in order to be interpreted and displayed as themselves in text, while within the code itself, they are used for HTML tags. If malicious content is injected into an application that escapes special characters and that malicious content uses < and > as HTML tags, those characters are nonetheless not interpreted as HTML tags by the browser if they’ve been correctly escaped in the application code and in this way the attempted attack is diverted.

The most prominent use of XSS is to steal cookies (source: OWASP HttpOnly) and hijack user sessions, but XSS exploits have been used to expose sensitive information, enable access to privileged services and functionality and deliver malware.

Types of attacks

There are a few methods by which XSS can be manipulated:

Type Origin Description
Stored Server The malicious code is inserted in the application (usually as a link) by the attacker. The code is activated every time a user clicks the link.
Reflected Server The attacker delivers a malicious link externally from the vulnerable web site application to a user. When clicked, malicious code is sent to the vulnerable web site, which reflects the attack back to the user’s browser.
DOM-based Client The attacker forces the user’s browser to render a malicious page. The data in the page itself delivers the cross-site scripting data.
Mutated The attacker injects code that appears safe, but is then rewritten and modified by the browser, while parsing the markup. An example is rebalancing unclosed quotation marks or even adding quotation marks to unquoted parameters.

Affected environments

The following environments are susceptible to an XSS attack:

  • Web servers
  • Application servers
  • Web application environments

How to prevent

This section describes the top best practices designed to specifically protect your code:

  • Sanitize data input in an HTTP request before reflecting it back, ensuring all data is validated, filtered or escaped before echoing anything back to the user, such as the values of query parameters during searches.
  • Convert special characters such as ?, &, /, <, > and spaces to their respective HTML or URL encoded equivalents.
  • Give users the option to disable client-side scripts.
  • Redirect invalid requests.
  • Detect simultaneous logins, including those from two separate IP addresses, and invalidate those sessions.
  • Use and enforce a Content Security Policy (source: Wikipedia) to disable any features that might be manipulated for an XSS attack.
  • Read the documentation for any of the libraries referenced in your code to understand which elements allow for embedded HTML.

Remediation

Upgrade cookie to version 0.7.0 or higher.

References

Cross-site Scripting (XSS) vulnerability report

medium severity

Session Fixation

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

Detailed paths

  • Introduced through: @blinkk/fileset@blinkkcode/fileset#f17325e43079493d768e7ea94d1a96a6a5ae9cef › passport@0.4.1
    Remediation: Upgrade to passport@0.6.0.

Overview

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

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

Remediation

Upgrade passport to version 0.6.0 or higher.

References

Session Fixation vulnerability report