Vulnerabilities

17 via 73 paths

Dependencies

149

Source

GitHub

Commit

612f4f76

Find, fix and prevent vulnerabilities in your code.

Severity
  • 8
  • 9
Status
  • 17
  • 0
  • 0

high severity

Remote Memory Exposure

  • Vulnerable module: bl
  • Introduced through: google-auth-library@0.9.10 and googleapis@7.1.0

Detailed paths

  • Introduced through: serviceproviders@linnovate/service-providers#612f4f767eaa29d009cc61ec31eaf0080ece8e03 google-auth-library@0.9.10 request@2.74.0 bl@1.1.2
    Remediation: Upgrade to google-auth-library@0.10.0.
  • Introduced through: serviceproviders@linnovate/service-providers#612f4f767eaa29d009cc61ec31eaf0080ece8e03 googleapis@7.1.0 request@2.72.0 bl@1.1.2
    Remediation: Upgrade to googleapis@12.1.0.
  • Introduced through: serviceproviders@linnovate/service-providers#612f4f767eaa29d009cc61ec31eaf0080ece8e03 googleapis@7.1.0 google-auth-library@0.9.10 request@2.74.0 bl@1.1.2
    Remediation: Upgrade to googleapis@16.0.0.

Overview

bl is a library that allows you to collect buffers and access with a standard readable buffer interface.

Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Remote Memory Exposure. If user input ends up in consume() argument and can become negative, BufferList state can be corrupted, tricking it into exposing uninitialized memory via regular .slice() calls.

PoC by chalker

const { BufferList } = require('bl')
const secret = require('crypto').randomBytes(256)
for (let i = 0; i < 1e6; i++) {
  const clone = Buffer.from(secret)
  const bl = new BufferList()
  bl.append(Buffer.from('a'))
  bl.consume(-1024)
  const buf = bl.slice(1)
  if (buf.indexOf(clone) !== -1) {
    console.error(`Match (at ${i})`, buf)
  }
}

Remediation

Upgrade bl to version 2.2.1, 3.0.1, 4.0.3, 1.2.3 or higher.

References

high severity

Regular Expression Denial of Service (ReDoS)

  • Vulnerable module: ansi-regex
  • Introduced through: google-auth-library@0.9.10 and googleapis@7.1.0

Detailed paths

  • Introduced through: serviceproviders@linnovate/service-providers#612f4f767eaa29d009cc61ec31eaf0080ece8e03 google-auth-library@0.9.10 request@2.74.0 har-validator@2.0.6 chalk@1.1.3 has-ansi@2.0.0 ansi-regex@2.1.1
  • Introduced through: serviceproviders@linnovate/service-providers#612f4f767eaa29d009cc61ec31eaf0080ece8e03 googleapis@7.1.0 request@2.72.0 har-validator@2.0.6 chalk@1.1.3 has-ansi@2.0.0 ansi-regex@2.1.1
  • Introduced through: serviceproviders@linnovate/service-providers#612f4f767eaa29d009cc61ec31eaf0080ece8e03 google-auth-library@0.9.10 request@2.74.0 har-validator@2.0.6 chalk@1.1.3 strip-ansi@3.0.1 ansi-regex@2.1.1
  • Introduced through: serviceproviders@linnovate/service-providers#612f4f767eaa29d009cc61ec31eaf0080ece8e03 googleapis@7.1.0 request@2.72.0 har-validator@2.0.6 chalk@1.1.3 strip-ansi@3.0.1 ansi-regex@2.1.1
  • Introduced through: serviceproviders@linnovate/service-providers#612f4f767eaa29d009cc61ec31eaf0080ece8e03 googleapis@7.1.0 google-auth-library@0.9.10 request@2.74.0 har-validator@2.0.6 chalk@1.1.3 has-ansi@2.0.0 ansi-regex@2.1.1
  • Introduced through: serviceproviders@linnovate/service-providers#612f4f767eaa29d009cc61ec31eaf0080ece8e03 googleapis@7.1.0 google-auth-library@0.9.10 request@2.74.0 har-validator@2.0.6 chalk@1.1.3 strip-ansi@3.0.1 ansi-regex@2.1.1

Overview

Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Regular Expression Denial of Service (ReDoS) due to the sub-patterns [[\\]()#;?]* and (?:;[-a-zA-Z\\d\\/#&.:=?%@~_]*)*.

PoC

import ansiRegex from 'ansi-regex';

for(var i = 1; i <= 50000; i++) {
    var time = Date.now();
    var attack_str = "\u001B["+";".repeat(i*10000);
    ansiRegex().test(attack_str)
    var time_cost = Date.now() - time;
    console.log("attack_str.length: " + attack_str.length + ": " + time_cost+" ms")
}

Details

Denial of Service (DoS) describes a family of attacks, all aimed at making a system inaccessible to its original and legitimate users. There are many types of DoS attacks, ranging from trying to clog the network pipes to the system by generating a large volume of traffic from many machines (a Distributed Denial of Service - DDoS - attack) to sending crafted requests that cause a system to crash or take a disproportional amount of time to process.

The Regular expression Denial of Service (ReDoS) is a type of Denial of Service attack. Regular expressions are incredibly powerful, but they aren't very intuitive and can ultimately end up making it easy for attackers to take your site down.

Let’s take the following regular expression as an example:

regex = /A(B|C+)+D/

This regular expression accomplishes the following:

  • A The string must start with the letter 'A'
  • (B|C+)+ The string must then follow the letter A with either the letter 'B' or some number of occurrences of the letter 'C' (the + matches one or more times). The + at the end of this section states that we can look for one or more matches of this section.
  • D Finally, we ensure this section of the string ends with a 'D'

The expression would match inputs such as ABBD, ABCCCCD, ABCBCCCD and ACCCCCD

It most cases, it doesn't take very long for a regex engine to find a match:

$ time node -e '/A(B|C+)+D/.test("ACCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCD")'
0.04s user 0.01s system 95% cpu 0.052 total

$ time node -e '/A(B|C+)+D/.test("ACCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCX")'
1.79s user 0.02s system 99% cpu 1.812 total

The entire process of testing it against a 30 characters long string takes around ~52ms. But when given an invalid string, it takes nearly two seconds to complete the test, over ten times as long as it took to test a valid string. The dramatic difference is due to the way regular expressions get evaluated.

Most Regex engines will work very similarly (with minor differences). The engine will match the first possible way to accept the current character and proceed to the next one. If it then fails to match the next one, it will backtrack and see if there was another way to digest the previous character. If it goes too far down the rabbit hole only to find out the string doesn’t match in the end, and if many characters have multiple valid regex paths, the number of backtracking steps can become very large, resulting in what is known as catastrophic backtracking.

Let's look at how our expression runs into this problem, using a shorter string: "ACCCX". While it seems fairly straightforward, there are still four different ways that the engine could match those three C's:

  1. CCC
  2. CC+C
  3. C+CC
  4. C+C+C.

The engine has to try each of those combinations to see if any of them potentially match against the expression. When you combine that with the other steps the engine must take, we can use RegEx 101 debugger to see the engine has to take a total of 38 steps before it can determine the string doesn't match.

From there, the number of steps the engine must use to validate a string just continues to grow.

String Number of C's Number of steps
ACCCX 3 38
ACCCCX 4 71
ACCCCCX 5 136
ACCCCCCCCCCCCCCX 14 65,553

By the time the string includes 14 C's, the engine has to take over 65,000 steps just to see if the string is valid. These extreme situations can cause them to work very slowly (exponentially related to input size, as shown above), allowing an attacker to exploit this and can cause the service to excessively consume CPU, resulting in a Denial of Service.

Remediation

Upgrade ansi-regex to version 3.0.1, 4.1.1, 5.0.1, 6.0.1 or higher.

References

high severity

Prototype Poisoning

  • Vulnerable module: qs
  • Introduced through: googleapis@7.1.0

Detailed paths

  • Introduced through: serviceproviders@linnovate/service-providers#612f4f767eaa29d009cc61ec31eaf0080ece8e03 googleapis@7.1.0 request@2.72.0 qs@6.1.2
    Remediation: Upgrade to googleapis@12.1.0.

Overview

qs is a querystring parser that supports nesting and arrays, with a depth limit.

Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Prototype Poisoning which allows attackers to cause a Node process to hang, processing an Array object whose prototype has been replaced by one with an excessive length value.

Note: In many typical Express use cases, an unauthenticated remote attacker can place the attack payload in the query string of the URL that is used to visit the application, such as a[__proto__]=b&a[__proto__]&a[length]=100000000.

Details

Denial of Service (DoS) describes a family of attacks, all aimed at making a system inaccessible to its intended and legitimate users.

Unlike other vulnerabilities, DoS attacks usually do not aim at breaching security. Rather, they are focused on making websites and services unavailable to genuine users resulting in downtime.

One popular Denial of Service vulnerability is DDoS (a Distributed Denial of Service), an attack that attempts to clog network pipes to the system by generating a large volume of traffic from many machines.

When it comes to open source libraries, DoS vulnerabilities allow attackers to trigger such a crash or crippling of the service by using a flaw either in the application code or from the use of open source libraries.

Two common types of DoS vulnerabilities:

  • High CPU/Memory Consumption- An attacker sending crafted requests that could cause the system to take a disproportionate amount of time to process. For example, commons-fileupload:commons-fileupload.

  • Crash - An attacker sending crafted requests that could cause the system to crash. For Example, npm ws package

Remediation

Upgrade qs to version 6.2.4, 6.3.3, 6.4.1, 6.5.3, 6.6.1, 6.7.3, 6.8.3, 6.9.7, 6.10.3 or higher.

References

high severity

Regular Expression Denial of Service (ReDoS)

  • Vulnerable module: tough-cookie
  • Introduced through: googleapis@7.1.0

Detailed paths

  • Introduced through: serviceproviders@linnovate/service-providers#612f4f767eaa29d009cc61ec31eaf0080ece8e03 googleapis@7.1.0 request@2.72.0 tough-cookie@2.2.2
    Remediation: Upgrade to googleapis@12.1.0.
  • Introduced through: serviceproviders@linnovate/service-providers#612f4f767eaa29d009cc61ec31eaf0080ece8e03 googleapis@7.1.0 request@2.72.0 tough-cookie@2.2.2
    Remediation: Upgrade to googleapis@12.1.0.

Overview

tough-cookie is a RFC6265 Cookies and CookieJar module for Node.js.

Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Regular Expression Denial of Service (ReDoS). An attacker can provide a cookie, which nearly matches the pattern being matched. This will cause the regular expression matching to take a long time, all the while occupying the event loop and preventing it from processing other requests and making the server unavailable (a Denial of Service 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:

  • A The string must start with the letter 'A'
  • (B|C+)+ The string must then follow the letter A with either the letter 'B' or some number of occurrences of the letter 'C' (the + matches one or more times). The + at the end of this section states that we can look for one or more matches of this section.
  • D Finally, we ensure this section of the string ends with a 'D'

The expression would match inputs such as ABBD, ABCCCCD, ABCBCCCD and ACCCCCD

It most cases, it doesn't take very long for a regex engine to find a match:

$ time node -e '/A(B|C+)+D/.test("ACCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCD")'
0.04s user 0.01s system 95% cpu 0.052 total

$ time node -e '/A(B|C+)+D/.test("ACCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCX")'
1.79s user 0.02s system 99% cpu 1.812 total

The entire process of testing it against a 30 characters long string takes around ~52ms. But when given an invalid string, it takes nearly two seconds to complete the test, over ten times as long as it took to test a valid string. The dramatic difference is due to the way regular expressions get evaluated.

Most Regex engines will work very similarly (with minor differences). The engine will match the first possible way to accept the current character and proceed to the next one. If it then fails to match the next one, it will backtrack and see if there was another way to digest the previous character. If it goes too far down the rabbit hole only to find out the string doesn’t match in the end, and if many characters have multiple valid regex paths, the number of backtracking steps can become very large, resulting in what is known as catastrophic backtracking.

Let's look at how our expression runs into this problem, using a shorter string: "ACCCX". While it seems fairly straightforward, there are still four different ways that the engine could match those three C's:

  1. CCC
  2. CC+C
  3. C+CC
  4. C+C+C.

The engine has to try each of those combinations to see if any of them potentially match against the expression. When you combine that with the other steps the engine must take, we can use RegEx 101 debugger to see the engine has to take a total of 38 steps before it can determine the string doesn't match.

From there, the number of steps the engine must use to validate a string just continues to grow.

String Number of C's Number of steps
ACCCX 3 38
ACCCCX 4 71
ACCCCCX 5 136
ACCCCCCCCCCCCCCX 14 65,553

By the time the string includes 14 C's, the engine has to take over 65,000 steps just to see if the string is valid. These extreme situations can cause them to work very slowly (exponentially related to input size, as shown above), allowing an attacker to exploit this and can cause the service to excessively consume CPU, resulting in a Denial of Service.

Remediation

Upgrade tough-cookie to version 2.3.0 or higher.

References

high severity

Regular Expression Denial of Service (ReDoS)

  • Vulnerable module: hawk
  • Introduced through: google-auth-library@0.9.10 and googleapis@7.1.0

Detailed paths

  • Introduced through: serviceproviders@linnovate/service-providers#612f4f767eaa29d009cc61ec31eaf0080ece8e03 google-auth-library@0.9.10 request@2.74.0 hawk@3.1.3
    Remediation: Upgrade to google-auth-library@0.10.0.
  • Introduced through: serviceproviders@linnovate/service-providers#612f4f767eaa29d009cc61ec31eaf0080ece8e03 googleapis@7.1.0 request@2.72.0 hawk@3.1.3
    Remediation: Upgrade to googleapis@12.1.0.
  • Introduced through: serviceproviders@linnovate/service-providers#612f4f767eaa29d009cc61ec31eaf0080ece8e03 googleapis@7.1.0 google-auth-library@0.9.10 request@2.74.0 hawk@3.1.3
    Remediation: Upgrade to googleapis@16.0.0.

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:

  • A The string must start with the letter 'A'
  • (B|C+)+ The string must then follow the letter A with either the letter 'B' or some number of occurrences of the letter 'C' (the + matches one or more times). The + at the end of this section states that we can look for one or more matches of this section.
  • D Finally, we ensure this section of the string ends with a 'D'

The expression would match inputs such as ABBD, ABCCCCD, ABCBCCCD and ACCCCCD

It most cases, it doesn't take very long for a regex engine to find a match:

$ time node -e '/A(B|C+)+D/.test("ACCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCD")'
0.04s user 0.01s system 95% cpu 0.052 total

$ time node -e '/A(B|C+)+D/.test("ACCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCX")'
1.79s user 0.02s system 99% cpu 1.812 total

The entire process of testing it against a 30 characters long string takes around ~52ms. But when given an invalid string, it takes nearly two seconds to complete the test, over ten times as long as it took to test a valid string. The dramatic difference is due to the way regular expressions get evaluated.

Most Regex engines will work very similarly (with minor differences). The engine will match the first possible way to accept the current character and proceed to the next one. If it then fails to match the next one, it will backtrack and see if there was another way to digest the previous character. If it goes too far down the rabbit hole only to find out the string doesn’t match in the end, and if many characters have multiple valid regex paths, the number of backtracking steps can become very large, resulting in what is known as catastrophic backtracking.

Let's look at how our expression runs into this problem, using a shorter string: "ACCCX". While it seems fairly straightforward, there are still four different ways that the engine could match those three C's:

  1. CCC
  2. CC+C
  3. C+CC
  4. C+C+C.

The engine has to try each of those combinations to see if any of them potentially match against the expression. When you combine that with the other steps the engine must take, we can use RegEx 101 debugger to see the engine has to take a total of 38 steps before it can determine the string doesn't match.

From there, the number of steps the engine must use to validate a string just continues to grow.

String Number of C's Number of steps
ACCCX 3 38
ACCCCX 4 71
ACCCCCX 5 136
ACCCCCCCCCCCCCCX 14 65,553

By the time the string includes 14 C's, the engine has to take over 65,000 steps just to see if the string is valid. These extreme situations can cause them to work very slowly (exponentially related to input size, as shown above), allowing an attacker to exploit this and can cause the service to excessively consume CPU, resulting in a Denial of Service.

Remediation

Upgrade hawk to version 9.0.1 or higher.

References

high severity

Improper Verification of Cryptographic Signature

  • Vulnerable module: node-forge
  • Introduced through: google-auth-library@0.9.10 and googleapis@7.1.0

Detailed paths

  • Introduced through: serviceproviders@linnovate/service-providers#612f4f767eaa29d009cc61ec31eaf0080ece8e03 google-auth-library@0.9.10 gtoken@1.2.3 google-p12-pem@0.1.2 node-forge@0.7.6
    Remediation: Upgrade to google-auth-library@6.0.0.
  • Introduced through: serviceproviders@linnovate/service-providers#612f4f767eaa29d009cc61ec31eaf0080ece8e03 googleapis@7.1.0 google-auth-library@0.9.10 gtoken@1.2.3 google-p12-pem@0.1.2 node-forge@0.7.6
    Remediation: Upgrade to googleapis@49.0.0.

Overview

node-forge is a JavaScript implementations of network transports, cryptography, ciphers, PKI, message digests, and various utilities.

Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Improper Verification of Cryptographic Signature due to RSA's PKCS#1 v1.5 signature verification code which does not check for tailing garbage bytes after decoding a DigestInfo ASN.1 structure. This can allow padding bytes to be removed and garbage data added to forge a signature when a low public exponent is being used.

Remediation

Upgrade node-forge to version 1.3.0 or higher.

References

high severity

Prototype Pollution

  • Vulnerable module: node-forge
  • Introduced through: google-auth-library@0.9.10 and googleapis@7.1.0

Detailed paths

  • Introduced through: serviceproviders@linnovate/service-providers#612f4f767eaa29d009cc61ec31eaf0080ece8e03 google-auth-library@0.9.10 gtoken@1.2.3 google-p12-pem@0.1.2 node-forge@0.7.6
    Remediation: Upgrade to google-auth-library@1.0.0.
  • Introduced through: serviceproviders@linnovate/service-providers#612f4f767eaa29d009cc61ec31eaf0080ece8e03 googleapis@7.1.0 google-auth-library@0.9.10 gtoken@1.2.3 google-p12-pem@0.1.2 node-forge@0.7.6
    Remediation: Upgrade to googleapis@25.0.0.

Overview

node-forge is a JavaScript implementations of network transports, cryptography, ciphers, PKI, message digests, and various utilities.

Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Prototype Pollution via the util.setPath function.

Note: version 0.10.0 is a breaking change removing the vulnerable functions.

POC:

const nodeforge = require('node-forge');
var obj = {};
nodeforge.util.setPath(obj, ['__proto__', 'polluted'], true);
console.log(polluted);

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 node-forge to version 0.10.0 or higher.

References

high severity

Uninitialized Memory Exposure

  • Vulnerable module: base64url
  • Introduced through: google-auth-library@0.9.10 and googleapis@7.1.0

Detailed paths

  • Introduced through: serviceproviders@linnovate/service-providers#612f4f767eaa29d009cc61ec31eaf0080ece8e03 google-auth-library@0.9.10 jws@3.0.0 base64url@1.0.6
    Remediation: Upgrade to google-auth-library@0.10.0.
  • Introduced through: serviceproviders@linnovate/service-providers#612f4f767eaa29d009cc61ec31eaf0080ece8e03 googleapis@7.1.0 google-auth-library@0.9.10 jws@3.0.0 base64url@1.0.6
    Remediation: Upgrade to googleapis@16.0.0.
  • Introduced through: serviceproviders@linnovate/service-providers#612f4f767eaa29d009cc61ec31eaf0080ece8e03 googleapis@7.1.0 gapitoken@0.1.5 jws@3.0.0 base64url@1.0.6
  • Introduced through: serviceproviders@linnovate/service-providers#612f4f767eaa29d009cc61ec31eaf0080ece8e03 google-auth-library@0.9.10 jws@3.0.0 jwa@1.0.2 base64url@0.0.6
    Remediation: Upgrade to google-auth-library@0.10.0.
  • Introduced through: serviceproviders@linnovate/service-providers#612f4f767eaa29d009cc61ec31eaf0080ece8e03 googleapis@7.1.0 google-auth-library@0.9.10 jws@3.0.0 jwa@1.0.2 base64url@0.0.6
    Remediation: Upgrade to googleapis@16.0.0.
  • Introduced through: serviceproviders@linnovate/service-providers#612f4f767eaa29d009cc61ec31eaf0080ece8e03 googleapis@7.1.0 gapitoken@0.1.5 jws@3.0.0 jwa@1.0.2 base64url@0.0.6

Overview

base64url Converting to, and from, base64url.

Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Uninitialized Memory Exposure. An attacker could extract sensitive data from uninitialized memory or may cause a Denial of Service (DoS) by passing in a large number, in setups where typed user input can be passed (e.g. from JSON).

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 base64url to version 3.0.0 or higher. Note This is vulnerable only for Node <=4

References

medium severity

Server-side Request Forgery (SSRF)

  • Vulnerable module: request
  • Introduced through: google-auth-library@0.9.10 and googleapis@7.1.0

Detailed paths

  • Introduced through: serviceproviders@linnovate/service-providers#612f4f767eaa29d009cc61ec31eaf0080ece8e03 google-auth-library@0.9.10 gtoken@1.2.3 request@2.88.2
  • Introduced through: serviceproviders@linnovate/service-providers#612f4f767eaa29d009cc61ec31eaf0080ece8e03 googleapis@7.1.0 gapitoken@0.1.5 request@2.88.2
  • Introduced through: serviceproviders@linnovate/service-providers#612f4f767eaa29d009cc61ec31eaf0080ece8e03 googleapis@7.1.0 google-auth-library@0.9.10 gtoken@1.2.3 request@2.88.2
  • Introduced through: serviceproviders@linnovate/service-providers#612f4f767eaa29d009cc61ec31eaf0080ece8e03 google-auth-library@0.9.10 request@2.74.0
  • Introduced through: serviceproviders@linnovate/service-providers#612f4f767eaa29d009cc61ec31eaf0080ece8e03 googleapis@7.1.0 google-auth-library@0.9.10 request@2.74.0
  • Introduced through: serviceproviders@linnovate/service-providers#612f4f767eaa29d009cc61ec31eaf0080ece8e03 googleapis@7.1.0 request@2.72.0

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

Prototype Pollution

  • Vulnerable module: tough-cookie
  • Introduced through: google-auth-library@0.9.10 and googleapis@7.1.0

Detailed paths

  • Introduced through: serviceproviders@linnovate/service-providers#612f4f767eaa29d009cc61ec31eaf0080ece8e03 google-auth-library@0.9.10 gtoken@1.2.3 request@2.88.2 tough-cookie@2.5.0
  • Introduced through: serviceproviders@linnovate/service-providers#612f4f767eaa29d009cc61ec31eaf0080ece8e03 googleapis@7.1.0 gapitoken@0.1.5 request@2.88.2 tough-cookie@2.5.0
  • Introduced through: serviceproviders@linnovate/service-providers#612f4f767eaa29d009cc61ec31eaf0080ece8e03 googleapis@7.1.0 google-auth-library@0.9.10 gtoken@1.2.3 request@2.88.2 tough-cookie@2.5.0
  • Introduced through: serviceproviders@linnovate/service-providers#612f4f767eaa29d009cc61ec31eaf0080ece8e03 google-auth-library@0.9.10 request@2.74.0 tough-cookie@2.3.4
  • Introduced through: serviceproviders@linnovate/service-providers#612f4f767eaa29d009cc61ec31eaf0080ece8e03 googleapis@7.1.0 google-auth-library@0.9.10 request@2.74.0 tough-cookie@2.3.4
  • Introduced through: serviceproviders@linnovate/service-providers#612f4f767eaa29d009cc61ec31eaf0080ece8e03 googleapis@7.1.0 request@2.72.0 tough-cookie@2.2.2

Overview

tough-cookie is a RFC6265 Cookies and CookieJar module for Node.js.

Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Prototype Pollution due to improper handling of Cookies when using CookieJar in rejectPublicSuffixes=false mode. Due to an issue with the manner in which the objects are initialized, an attacker can expose or modify a limited amount of property information on those objects. There is no impact to availability.

PoC

// PoC.js
async function main(){
var tough = require("tough-cookie");
var cookiejar = new tough.CookieJar(undefined,{rejectPublicSuffixes:false});
// Exploit cookie
await cookiejar.setCookie(
  "Slonser=polluted; Domain=__proto__; Path=/notauth",
  "https://__proto__/admin"
);
// normal cookie
var cookie = await cookiejar.setCookie(
  "Auth=Lol; Domain=google.com; Path=/notauth",
  "https://google.com/"
);

//Exploit cookie
var a = {};
console.log(a["/notauth"]["Slonser"])
}
main();

Details

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

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

  • Unsafe Object recursive 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 tough-cookie to version 4.1.3 or higher.

References

medium severity

Prototype Pollution

  • Vulnerable module: hoek
  • Introduced through: google-auth-library@0.9.10 and googleapis@7.1.0

Detailed paths

  • Introduced through: serviceproviders@linnovate/service-providers#612f4f767eaa29d009cc61ec31eaf0080ece8e03 google-auth-library@0.9.10 request@2.74.0 hawk@3.1.3 hoek@2.16.3
    Remediation: Upgrade to google-auth-library@0.10.0.
  • Introduced through: serviceproviders@linnovate/service-providers#612f4f767eaa29d009cc61ec31eaf0080ece8e03 googleapis@7.1.0 request@2.72.0 hawk@3.1.3 hoek@2.16.3
    Remediation: Upgrade to googleapis@12.1.0.
  • Introduced through: serviceproviders@linnovate/service-providers#612f4f767eaa29d009cc61ec31eaf0080ece8e03 google-auth-library@0.9.10 request@2.74.0 hawk@3.1.3 boom@2.10.1 hoek@2.16.3
    Remediation: Upgrade to google-auth-library@0.10.0.
  • Introduced through: serviceproviders@linnovate/service-providers#612f4f767eaa29d009cc61ec31eaf0080ece8e03 googleapis@7.1.0 request@2.72.0 hawk@3.1.3 boom@2.10.1 hoek@2.16.3
    Remediation: Upgrade to googleapis@12.1.0.
  • Introduced through: serviceproviders@linnovate/service-providers#612f4f767eaa29d009cc61ec31eaf0080ece8e03 google-auth-library@0.9.10 request@2.74.0 hawk@3.1.3 sntp@1.0.9 hoek@2.16.3
    Remediation: Upgrade to google-auth-library@0.10.0.
  • Introduced through: serviceproviders@linnovate/service-providers#612f4f767eaa29d009cc61ec31eaf0080ece8e03 googleapis@7.1.0 request@2.72.0 hawk@3.1.3 sntp@1.0.9 hoek@2.16.3
    Remediation: Upgrade to googleapis@12.1.0.
  • Introduced through: serviceproviders@linnovate/service-providers#612f4f767eaa29d009cc61ec31eaf0080ece8e03 googleapis@7.1.0 google-auth-library@0.9.10 request@2.74.0 hawk@3.1.3 hoek@2.16.3
    Remediation: Upgrade to googleapis@16.0.0.
  • Introduced through: serviceproviders@linnovate/service-providers#612f4f767eaa29d009cc61ec31eaf0080ece8e03 google-auth-library@0.9.10 request@2.74.0 hawk@3.1.3 cryptiles@2.0.5 boom@2.10.1 hoek@2.16.3
    Remediation: Upgrade to google-auth-library@0.10.0.
  • Introduced through: serviceproviders@linnovate/service-providers#612f4f767eaa29d009cc61ec31eaf0080ece8e03 googleapis@7.1.0 request@2.72.0 hawk@3.1.3 cryptiles@2.0.5 boom@2.10.1 hoek@2.16.3
    Remediation: Upgrade to googleapis@12.1.0.
  • Introduced through: serviceproviders@linnovate/service-providers#612f4f767eaa29d009cc61ec31eaf0080ece8e03 googleapis@7.1.0 google-auth-library@0.9.10 request@2.74.0 hawk@3.1.3 boom@2.10.1 hoek@2.16.3
    Remediation: Upgrade to googleapis@16.0.0.
  • Introduced through: serviceproviders@linnovate/service-providers#612f4f767eaa29d009cc61ec31eaf0080ece8e03 googleapis@7.1.0 google-auth-library@0.9.10 request@2.74.0 hawk@3.1.3 sntp@1.0.9 hoek@2.16.3
    Remediation: Upgrade to googleapis@16.0.0.
  • Introduced through: serviceproviders@linnovate/service-providers#612f4f767eaa29d009cc61ec31eaf0080ece8e03 googleapis@7.1.0 google-auth-library@0.9.10 request@2.74.0 hawk@3.1.3 cryptiles@2.0.5 boom@2.10.1 hoek@2.16.3
    Remediation: Upgrade to googleapis@16.0.0.
  • Introduced through: serviceproviders@linnovate/service-providers#612f4f767eaa29d009cc61ec31eaf0080ece8e03 google-auth-library@0.9.10 request@2.74.0 hawk@3.1.3 hoek@2.16.3
    Remediation: Upgrade to google-auth-library@0.10.0.
  • Introduced through: serviceproviders@linnovate/service-providers#612f4f767eaa29d009cc61ec31eaf0080ece8e03 googleapis@7.1.0 request@2.72.0 hawk@3.1.3 hoek@2.16.3
    Remediation: Upgrade to googleapis@12.1.0.
  • Introduced through: serviceproviders@linnovate/service-providers#612f4f767eaa29d009cc61ec31eaf0080ece8e03 google-auth-library@0.9.10 request@2.74.0 hawk@3.1.3 boom@2.10.1 hoek@2.16.3
    Remediation: Upgrade to google-auth-library@0.10.0.
  • Introduced through: serviceproviders@linnovate/service-providers#612f4f767eaa29d009cc61ec31eaf0080ece8e03 googleapis@7.1.0 request@2.72.0 hawk@3.1.3 boom@2.10.1 hoek@2.16.3
    Remediation: Upgrade to googleapis@12.1.0.
  • Introduced through: serviceproviders@linnovate/service-providers#612f4f767eaa29d009cc61ec31eaf0080ece8e03 google-auth-library@0.9.10 request@2.74.0 hawk@3.1.3 sntp@1.0.9 hoek@2.16.3
    Remediation: Upgrade to google-auth-library@0.10.0.
  • Introduced through: serviceproviders@linnovate/service-providers#612f4f767eaa29d009cc61ec31eaf0080ece8e03 googleapis@7.1.0 request@2.72.0 hawk@3.1.3 sntp@1.0.9 hoek@2.16.3
    Remediation: Upgrade to googleapis@12.1.0.
  • Introduced through: serviceproviders@linnovate/service-providers#612f4f767eaa29d009cc61ec31eaf0080ece8e03 googleapis@7.1.0 google-auth-library@0.9.10 request@2.74.0 hawk@3.1.3 hoek@2.16.3
    Remediation: Upgrade to googleapis@16.0.0.
  • Introduced through: serviceproviders@linnovate/service-providers#612f4f767eaa29d009cc61ec31eaf0080ece8e03 google-auth-library@0.9.10 request@2.74.0 hawk@3.1.3 cryptiles@2.0.5 boom@2.10.1 hoek@2.16.3
    Remediation: Upgrade to google-auth-library@0.10.0.
  • Introduced through: serviceproviders@linnovate/service-providers#612f4f767eaa29d009cc61ec31eaf0080ece8e03 googleapis@7.1.0 request@2.72.0 hawk@3.1.3 cryptiles@2.0.5 boom@2.10.1 hoek@2.16.3
    Remediation: Upgrade to googleapis@12.1.0.
  • Introduced through: serviceproviders@linnovate/service-providers#612f4f767eaa29d009cc61ec31eaf0080ece8e03 googleapis@7.1.0 google-auth-library@0.9.10 request@2.74.0 hawk@3.1.3 boom@2.10.1 hoek@2.16.3
    Remediation: Upgrade to googleapis@16.0.0.
  • Introduced through: serviceproviders@linnovate/service-providers#612f4f767eaa29d009cc61ec31eaf0080ece8e03 googleapis@7.1.0 google-auth-library@0.9.10 request@2.74.0 hawk@3.1.3 sntp@1.0.9 hoek@2.16.3
    Remediation: Upgrade to googleapis@16.0.0.
  • Introduced through: serviceproviders@linnovate/service-providers#612f4f767eaa29d009cc61ec31eaf0080ece8e03 googleapis@7.1.0 google-auth-library@0.9.10 request@2.74.0 hawk@3.1.3 cryptiles@2.0.5 boom@2.10.1 hoek@2.16.3
    Remediation: Upgrade to googleapis@16.0.0.

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:

  • A The string must start with the letter 'A'
  • (B|C+)+ The string must then follow the letter A with either the letter 'B' or some number of occurrences of the letter 'C' (the + matches one or more times). The + at the end of this section states that we can look for one or more matches of this section.
  • D Finally, we ensure this section of the string ends with a 'D'

The expression would match inputs such as ABBD, ABCCCCD, ABCBCCCD and ACCCCCD

It most cases, it doesn't take very long for a regex engine to find a match:

$ time node -e '/A(B|C+)+D/.test("ACCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCD")'
0.04s user 0.01s system 95% cpu 0.052 total

$ time node -e '/A(B|C+)+D/.test("ACCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCX")'
1.79s user 0.02s system 99% cpu 1.812 total

The entire process of testing it against a 30 characters long string takes around ~52ms. But when given an invalid string, it takes nearly two seconds to complete the test, over ten times as long as it took to test a valid string. The dramatic difference is due to the way regular expressions get evaluated.

Most Regex engines will work very similarly (with minor differences). The engine will match the first possible way to accept the current character and proceed to the next one. If it then fails to match the next one, it will backtrack and see if there was another way to digest the previous character. If it goes too far down the rabbit hole only to find out the string doesn’t match in the end, and if many characters have multiple valid regex paths, the number of backtracking steps can become very large, resulting in what is known as catastrophic backtracking.

Let's look at how our expression runs into this problem, using a shorter string: "ACCCX". While it seems fairly straightforward, there are still four different ways that the engine could match those three C's:

  1. CCC
  2. CC+C
  3. C+CC
  4. C+C+C.

The engine has to try each of those combinations to see if any of them potentially match against the expression. When you combine that with the other steps the engine must take, we can use RegEx 101 debugger to see the engine has to take a total of 38 steps before it can determine the string doesn't match.

From there, the number of steps the engine must use to validate a string just continues to grow.

String Number of C's Number of steps
ACCCX 3 38
ACCCCX 4 71
ACCCCCX 5 136
ACCCCCCCCCCCCCCX 14 65,553

By the time the string includes 14 C's, the engine has to take over 65,000 steps just to see if the string is valid. These extreme situations can cause them to work very slowly (exponentially related to input size, as shown above), allowing an attacker to exploit this and can cause the service to excessively consume CPU, resulting in a Denial of Service.

Remediation

Upgrade hoek to version 4.2.1, 5.0.3 or higher.

References

medium severity

Prototype Pollution

  • Vulnerable module: node-forge
  • Introduced through: google-auth-library@0.9.10 and googleapis@7.1.0

Detailed paths

  • Introduced through: serviceproviders@linnovate/service-providers#612f4f767eaa29d009cc61ec31eaf0080ece8e03 google-auth-library@0.9.10 gtoken@1.2.3 google-p12-pem@0.1.2 node-forge@0.7.6
    Remediation: Upgrade to google-auth-library@6.0.0.
  • Introduced through: serviceproviders@linnovate/service-providers#612f4f767eaa29d009cc61ec31eaf0080ece8e03 googleapis@7.1.0 google-auth-library@0.9.10 gtoken@1.2.3 google-p12-pem@0.1.2 node-forge@0.7.6
    Remediation: Upgrade to googleapis@49.0.0.

Overview

node-forge is a JavaScript implementations of network transports, cryptography, ciphers, PKI, message digests, and various utilities.

Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Prototype Pollution via the forge.debug API if called with untrusted input.

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 node-forge to version 1.0.0 or higher.

References

medium severity

Regular Expression Denial of Service (ReDoS)

  • Vulnerable module: tough-cookie
  • Introduced through: googleapis@7.1.0

Detailed paths

  • Introduced through: serviceproviders@linnovate/service-providers#612f4f767eaa29d009cc61ec31eaf0080ece8e03 googleapis@7.1.0 request@2.72.0 tough-cookie@2.2.2
    Remediation: Upgrade to googleapis@12.1.0.

Overview

tough-cookie is RFC6265 Cookies and Cookie Jar for node.js.

Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Regular expression Denial of Service (ReDoS) attacks. An attacker may pass a specially crafted cookie, causing the server to hang.

Details

Denial of Service (DoS) describes a family of attacks, all aimed at making a system inaccessible to its original and legitimate users. There are many types of DoS attacks, ranging from trying to clog the network pipes to the system by generating a large volume of traffic from many machines (a Distributed Denial of Service - DDoS - attack) to sending crafted requests that cause a system to crash or take a disproportional amount of time to process.

The Regular expression Denial of Service (ReDoS) is a type of Denial of Service attack. Regular expressions are incredibly powerful, but they aren't very intuitive and can ultimately end up making it easy for attackers to take your site down.

Let’s take the following regular expression as an example:

regex = /A(B|C+)+D/

This regular expression accomplishes the following:

  • A The string must start with the letter 'A'
  • (B|C+)+ The string must then follow the letter A with either the letter 'B' or some number of occurrences of the letter 'C' (the + matches one or more times). The + at the end of this section states that we can look for one or more matches of this section.
  • D Finally, we ensure this section of the string ends with a 'D'

The expression would match inputs such as ABBD, ABCCCCD, ABCBCCCD and ACCCCCD

It most cases, it doesn't take very long for a regex engine to find a match:

$ time node -e '/A(B|C+)+D/.test("ACCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCD")'
0.04s user 0.01s system 95% cpu 0.052 total

$ time node -e '/A(B|C+)+D/.test("ACCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCX")'
1.79s user 0.02s system 99% cpu 1.812 total

The entire process of testing it against a 30 characters long string takes around ~52ms. But when given an invalid string, it takes nearly two seconds to complete the test, over ten times as long as it took to test a valid string. The dramatic difference is due to the way regular expressions get evaluated.

Most Regex engines will work very similarly (with minor differences). The engine will match the first possible way to accept the current character and proceed to the next one. If it then fails to match the next one, it will backtrack and see if there was another way to digest the previous character. If it goes too far down the rabbit hole only to find out the string doesn’t match in the end, and if many characters have multiple valid regex paths, the number of backtracking steps can become very large, resulting in what is known as catastrophic backtracking.

Let's look at how our expression runs into this problem, using a shorter string: "ACCCX". While it seems fairly straightforward, there are still four different ways that the engine could match those three C's:

  1. CCC
  2. CC+C
  3. C+CC
  4. C+C+C.

The engine has to try each of those combinations to see if any of them potentially match against the expression. When you combine that with the other steps the engine must take, we can use RegEx 101 debugger to see the engine has to take a total of 38 steps before it can determine the string doesn't match.

From there, the number of steps the engine must use to validate a string just continues to grow.

String Number of C's Number of steps
ACCCX 3 38
ACCCCX 4 71
ACCCCCX 5 136
ACCCCCCCCCCCCCCX 14 65,553

By the time the string includes 14 C's, the engine has to take over 65,000 steps just to see if the string is valid. These extreme situations can cause them to work very slowly (exponentially related to input size, as shown above), allowing an attacker to exploit this and can cause the service to excessively consume CPU, resulting in a Denial of Service.

Remediation

Upgrade to version 2.3.3 or newer.

References

medium severity

Improper Verification of Cryptographic Signature

  • Vulnerable module: node-forge
  • Introduced through: google-auth-library@0.9.10 and googleapis@7.1.0

Detailed paths

  • Introduced through: serviceproviders@linnovate/service-providers#612f4f767eaa29d009cc61ec31eaf0080ece8e03 google-auth-library@0.9.10 gtoken@1.2.3 google-p12-pem@0.1.2 node-forge@0.7.6
    Remediation: Upgrade to google-auth-library@6.0.0.
  • Introduced through: serviceproviders@linnovate/service-providers#612f4f767eaa29d009cc61ec31eaf0080ece8e03 googleapis@7.1.0 google-auth-library@0.9.10 gtoken@1.2.3 google-p12-pem@0.1.2 node-forge@0.7.6
    Remediation: Upgrade to googleapis@49.0.0.

Overview

node-forge is a JavaScript implementations of network transports, cryptography, ciphers, PKI, message digests, and various utilities.

Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Improper Verification of Cryptographic Signature due to RSA's PKCS#1 v1.5 signature verification code which does not properly check DigestInfo for a proper ASN.1 structure. This can lead to successful verification with signatures that contain invalid structures but a valid digest.

Remediation

Upgrade node-forge to version 1.3.0 or higher.

References

medium severity

Improper Verification of Cryptographic Signature

  • Vulnerable module: node-forge
  • Introduced through: google-auth-library@0.9.10 and googleapis@7.1.0

Detailed paths

  • Introduced through: serviceproviders@linnovate/service-providers#612f4f767eaa29d009cc61ec31eaf0080ece8e03 google-auth-library@0.9.10 gtoken@1.2.3 google-p12-pem@0.1.2 node-forge@0.7.6
    Remediation: Upgrade to google-auth-library@6.0.0.
  • Introduced through: serviceproviders@linnovate/service-providers#612f4f767eaa29d009cc61ec31eaf0080ece8e03 googleapis@7.1.0 google-auth-library@0.9.10 gtoken@1.2.3 google-p12-pem@0.1.2 node-forge@0.7.6
    Remediation: Upgrade to googleapis@49.0.0.

Overview

node-forge is a JavaScript implementations of network transports, cryptography, ciphers, PKI, message digests, and various utilities.

Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Improper Verification of Cryptographic Signature due to RSAs PKCS#1` v1.5 signature verification code which is lenient in checking the digest algorithm structure. This can allow a crafted structure that steals padding bytes and uses unchecked portion of the PKCS#1 encoded message to forge a signature when a low public exponent is being used.

Remediation

Upgrade node-forge to version 1.3.0 or higher.

References

medium severity

Open Redirect

  • Vulnerable module: node-forge
  • Introduced through: google-auth-library@0.9.10 and googleapis@7.1.0

Detailed paths

  • Introduced through: serviceproviders@linnovate/service-providers#612f4f767eaa29d009cc61ec31eaf0080ece8e03 google-auth-library@0.9.10 gtoken@1.2.3 google-p12-pem@0.1.2 node-forge@0.7.6
    Remediation: Upgrade to google-auth-library@6.0.0.
  • Introduced through: serviceproviders@linnovate/service-providers#612f4f767eaa29d009cc61ec31eaf0080ece8e03 googleapis@7.1.0 google-auth-library@0.9.10 gtoken@1.2.3 google-p12-pem@0.1.2 node-forge@0.7.6
    Remediation: Upgrade to googleapis@49.0.0.

Overview

node-forge is a JavaScript implementations of network transports, cryptography, ciphers, PKI, message digests, and various utilities.

Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Open Redirect via parseUrl function when it mishandles certain uses of backslash such as https:/\/\/\ and interprets the URI as a relative path.

PoC:


// poc.js
var forge = require("node-forge");
var url = forge.util.parseUrl("https:/\/\/\www.github.com/foo/bar");
console.log(url);

// Output of node poc.js:

{
  full: 'https://',
  scheme: 'https',
  host: '',
  port: 443,
  path: '/www.github.com/foo/bar',                        <<<---- path  should be "/foo/bar"
  fullHost: ''
}

Remediation

Upgrade node-forge to version 1.0.0 or higher.

References

medium severity

Uninitialized Memory Exposure

  • Vulnerable module: tunnel-agent
  • Introduced through: google-auth-library@0.9.10 and googleapis@7.1.0

Detailed paths

  • Introduced through: serviceproviders@linnovate/service-providers#612f4f767eaa29d009cc61ec31eaf0080ece8e03 google-auth-library@0.9.10 request@2.74.0 tunnel-agent@0.4.3
    Remediation: Upgrade to google-auth-library@0.10.0.
  • Introduced through: serviceproviders@linnovate/service-providers#612f4f767eaa29d009cc61ec31eaf0080ece8e03 googleapis@7.1.0 request@2.72.0 tunnel-agent@0.4.3
    Remediation: Upgrade to googleapis@12.1.0.
  • Introduced through: serviceproviders@linnovate/service-providers#612f4f767eaa29d009cc61ec31eaf0080ece8e03 googleapis@7.1.0 google-auth-library@0.9.10 request@2.74.0 tunnel-agent@0.4.3
    Remediation: Upgrade to googleapis@16.0.0.

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