Find, fix and prevent vulnerabilities in your code.
critical severity
new
- Vulnerable module: handlebars
- Introduced through: oc-template-handlebars@6.0.25, oc-template-handlebars-compiler@6.7.0 and others
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: oc@opentable/oc#7970b2933011ba67f81ba000c2a92a3aaefe4887 › oc-template-handlebars@6.0.25 › handlebars@4.7.7
-
Introduced through: oc@opentable/oc#7970b2933011ba67f81ba000c2a92a3aaefe4887 › oc-template-handlebars-compiler@6.7.0 › handlebars@4.7.7
-
Introduced through: oc@opentable/oc#7970b2933011ba67f81ba000c2a92a3aaefe4887 › oc-client@4.0.2 › oc-template-handlebars@6.0.24 › handlebars@4.7.7
-
Introduced through: oc@opentable/oc#7970b2933011ba67f81ba000c2a92a3aaefe4887 › oc-template-handlebars-compiler@6.7.0 › oc-template-handlebars@6.0.25 › handlebars@4.7.7
Overview
handlebars is an extension to the Mustache templating language.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Access of Resource Using Incompatible Type ('Type Confusion') via the compile function. An attacker can execute arbitrary code by supplying a crafted Abstract Syntax Tree (AST) object with a malicious NumberLiteral value, which is emitted directly into generated JavaScript code without proper sanitization.
Note: This allows the attacker to inject and run arbitrary commands on the server. This is only exploitable if user-controlled JSON is deserialized and passed directly to the compile function.
Workaround
This vulnerability can be mitigated by validating that the input to the compile function is always a string and not a plain object or JSON-deserialized value, or by using the runtime-only build where compile is unavailable.
Remediation
Upgrade handlebars to version 4.7.9 or higher.
References
critical severity
new
- Vulnerable module: handlebars
- Introduced through: oc-template-handlebars@6.0.25, oc-template-handlebars-compiler@6.7.0 and others
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: oc@opentable/oc#7970b2933011ba67f81ba000c2a92a3aaefe4887 › oc-template-handlebars@6.0.25 › handlebars@4.7.7
-
Introduced through: oc@opentable/oc#7970b2933011ba67f81ba000c2a92a3aaefe4887 › oc-template-handlebars-compiler@6.7.0 › handlebars@4.7.7
-
Introduced through: oc@opentable/oc#7970b2933011ba67f81ba000c2a92a3aaefe4887 › oc-client@4.0.2 › oc-template-handlebars@6.0.24 › handlebars@4.7.7
-
Introduced through: oc@opentable/oc#7970b2933011ba67f81ba000c2a92a3aaefe4887 › oc-template-handlebars-compiler@6.7.0 › oc-template-handlebars@6.0.25 › handlebars@4.7.7
Overview
handlebars is an extension to the Mustache templating language.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Access of Resource Using Incompatible Type ('Type Confusion') via manipulation of the @partial-block variable in the template data context. An attacker can execute arbitrary JavaScript code on the server by overwriting @partial-block with a crafted Handlebars AST and triggering its evaluation through a subsequent invocation.
Note: This is only exploitable if helpers that accept arbitrary objects are registered and allow mutation of the data context.
Workaround
This vulnerability can be mitigated by using the runtime-only build require('handlebars/runtime'), auditing registered helpers to prevent writing arbitrary values to context objects, and avoiding registration of helpers from third-party packages in contexts where templates or context data can be influenced by untrusted input.
Remediation
Upgrade handlebars to version 4.7.9 or higher.
References
critical severity
new
- Vulnerable module: handlebars
- Introduced through: oc-template-handlebars@6.0.25, oc-template-handlebars-compiler@6.7.0 and others
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: oc@opentable/oc#7970b2933011ba67f81ba000c2a92a3aaefe4887 › oc-template-handlebars@6.0.25 › handlebars@4.7.7
-
Introduced through: oc@opentable/oc#7970b2933011ba67f81ba000c2a92a3aaefe4887 › oc-template-handlebars-compiler@6.7.0 › handlebars@4.7.7
-
Introduced through: oc@opentable/oc#7970b2933011ba67f81ba000c2a92a3aaefe4887 › oc-client@4.0.2 › oc-template-handlebars@6.0.24 › handlebars@4.7.7
-
Introduced through: oc@opentable/oc#7970b2933011ba67f81ba000c2a92a3aaefe4887 › oc-template-handlebars-compiler@6.7.0 › oc-template-handlebars@6.0.25 › handlebars@4.7.7
Overview
handlebars is an extension to the Mustache templating language.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Access of Resource Using Incompatible Type ('Type Confusion') via the resolvePartial and invokePartial functions. An attacker can execute arbitrary code on the server by supplying a crafted object as a dynamic partial in the template context, which is then compiled and executed as JavaScript.
Note: This is only exploitable if the template uses dynamic partial lookups and the attacker can control the context property used for the lookup.
Workaround
This vulnerability can be mitigated by using the runtime-only build require('handlebars/runtime'), sanitizing context data to prevent non-primitive objects from being passed to dynamic partials, or avoiding dynamic partial lookups when context data is user-controlled.
Remediation
Upgrade handlebars to version 4.7.9 or higher.
References
high severity
new
- Vulnerable module: handlebars
- Introduced through: oc-template-handlebars@6.0.25, oc-template-handlebars-compiler@6.7.0 and others
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: oc@opentable/oc#7970b2933011ba67f81ba000c2a92a3aaefe4887 › oc-template-handlebars@6.0.25 › handlebars@4.7.7
-
Introduced through: oc@opentable/oc#7970b2933011ba67f81ba000c2a92a3aaefe4887 › oc-template-handlebars-compiler@6.7.0 › handlebars@4.7.7
-
Introduced through: oc@opentable/oc#7970b2933011ba67f81ba000c2a92a3aaefe4887 › oc-client@4.0.2 › oc-template-handlebars@6.0.24 › handlebars@4.7.7
-
Introduced through: oc@opentable/oc#7970b2933011ba67f81ba000c2a92a3aaefe4887 › oc-template-handlebars-compiler@6.7.0 › oc-template-handlebars@6.0.25 › handlebars@4.7.7
Overview
handlebars is an extension to the Mustache templating language.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Improper Check for Unusual or Exceptional Conditions through the registerDecorator path in lib/handlebars/compiler/javascript-compiler.js. An attacker can crash the Node.js process by supplying a template with malformed or unregistered decorator syntax, causing the compiled template to call an undefined decorator as a function. This affects applications that compile untrusted templates at request time, especially when the compile/render call is not wrapped in try/catch. A single malicious template such as {{*n}} can trigger an unhandled TypeError and terminate the process.
Workarounds
- Wrap compilation and rendering in
try/catch. - Validate template input before passing it to
compile(), and reject decorator syntax if decorators are not used. - Use pre-compilation at build time and avoid calling
compile()on request-time input.
Remediation
Upgrade handlebars to version 4.7.9 or higher.
References
high severity
new
- Vulnerable module: handlebars
- Introduced through: oc-template-handlebars@6.0.25, oc-template-handlebars-compiler@6.7.0 and others
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: oc@opentable/oc#7970b2933011ba67f81ba000c2a92a3aaefe4887 › oc-template-handlebars@6.0.25 › handlebars@4.7.7
-
Introduced through: oc@opentable/oc#7970b2933011ba67f81ba000c2a92a3aaefe4887 › oc-template-handlebars-compiler@6.7.0 › handlebars@4.7.7
-
Introduced through: oc@opentable/oc#7970b2933011ba67f81ba000c2a92a3aaefe4887 › oc-client@4.0.2 › oc-template-handlebars@6.0.24 › handlebars@4.7.7
-
Introduced through: oc@opentable/oc#7970b2933011ba67f81ba000c2a92a3aaefe4887 › oc-template-handlebars-compiler@6.7.0 › oc-template-handlebars@6.0.25 › handlebars@4.7.7
Overview
handlebars is an extension to the Mustache templating language.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Improper Encoding or Escaping of Output through the CLI precompiler in lib/precompiler.js. An attacker can execute arbitrary JavaScript in the generated bundle by supplying crafted template filenames or CLI options such as --namespace, --commonjs, --handlebarPath, or --map. The issue affects the precompiler output path used by bin/handlebars / lib/precompiler.js, where untrusted names and option values were concatenated into emitted JavaScript without escaping.
Workarounds
- Validate template filenames and CLI option values before invoking the precompiler and reject values containing JavaScript string-escaping or statement-breaking characters.
- Use a fixed, trusted namespace string rather than passing it from the command line in automated pipelines.
- Run the precompiler in a sandboxed environment with limited write access.
Remediation
Upgrade handlebars to version 4.7.9 or higher.
References
high severity
- Vulnerable module: fast-xml-parser
- Introduced through: oc-s3-storage-adapter@2.2.2
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: oc@opentable/oc#7970b2933011ba67f81ba000c2a92a3aaefe4887 › oc-s3-storage-adapter@2.2.2 › @aws-sdk/client-s3@3.186.0 › fast-xml-parser@3.19.0
-
Introduced through: oc@opentable/oc#7970b2933011ba67f81ba000c2a92a3aaefe4887 › oc-s3-storage-adapter@2.2.2 › @aws-sdk/client-s3@3.186.0 › @aws-sdk/client-sts@3.186.0 › fast-xml-parser@3.19.0
Overview
fast-xml-parser is a Validate XML, Parse XML, Build XML without C/C++ based libraries
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Regular Expression Denial of Service (ReDoS) due to allowing special characters in entity names, which are not escaped or sanitized. An attacker can inject an inefficient regex in the entity replacement step of the parser, this can cause the parser to stall for an indefinite amount of time.
Workaround
This vulnerability can be avoided by not parsing DOCTYPE data with the processEntities: false option.
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 fast-xml-parser to version 4.2.4 or higher.
References
medium severity
- Vulnerable module: fast-xml-parser
- Introduced through: oc-s3-storage-adapter@2.2.2
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: oc@opentable/oc#7970b2933011ba67f81ba000c2a92a3aaefe4887 › oc-s3-storage-adapter@2.2.2 › @aws-sdk/client-s3@3.186.0 › fast-xml-parser@3.19.0
-
Introduced through: oc@opentable/oc#7970b2933011ba67f81ba000c2a92a3aaefe4887 › oc-s3-storage-adapter@2.2.2 › @aws-sdk/client-s3@3.186.0 › @aws-sdk/client-sts@3.186.0 › fast-xml-parser@3.19.0
Overview
fast-xml-parser is a Validate XML, Parse XML, Build XML without C/C++ based libraries
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Buffer Overflow via the XMLBuilder when preserveOrder:true is set. An attacker can cause the application to crash by providing specially crafted input data.
Workaround
This vulnerability can be mitigated by using preserveOrder:false or by validating input data before passing it to the builder.
Remediation
Upgrade fast-xml-parser to version 4.5.4, 5.3.8 or higher.
References
medium severity
- Vulnerable module: fast-xml-parser
- Introduced through: oc-s3-storage-adapter@2.2.2
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: oc@opentable/oc#7970b2933011ba67f81ba000c2a92a3aaefe4887 › oc-s3-storage-adapter@2.2.2 › @aws-sdk/client-s3@3.186.0 › fast-xml-parser@3.19.0
-
Introduced through: oc@opentable/oc#7970b2933011ba67f81ba000c2a92a3aaefe4887 › oc-s3-storage-adapter@2.2.2 › @aws-sdk/client-s3@3.186.0 › @aws-sdk/client-sts@3.186.0 › fast-xml-parser@3.19.0
Overview
fast-xml-parser is a Validate XML, Parse XML, Build XML without C/C++ based libraries
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Regular Expression Denial of Service (ReDoS) in currency.js, which can be triggered by supplying excessively long strings such as '\t'.repeat(13337) + '.'
Note: The vulnerability is in the experimental "v5" functionality that is included in version 4.x during development, at the time of discovery.
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 fast-xml-parser to version 4.4.1 or higher.
References
medium severity
- Vulnerable module: fast-xml-parser
- Introduced through: oc-s3-storage-adapter@2.2.2
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: oc@opentable/oc#7970b2933011ba67f81ba000c2a92a3aaefe4887 › oc-s3-storage-adapter@2.2.2 › @aws-sdk/client-s3@3.186.0 › fast-xml-parser@3.19.0
-
Introduced through: oc@opentable/oc#7970b2933011ba67f81ba000c2a92a3aaefe4887 › oc-s3-storage-adapter@2.2.2 › @aws-sdk/client-s3@3.186.0 › @aws-sdk/client-sts@3.186.0 › fast-xml-parser@3.19.0
Overview
fast-xml-parser is a Validate XML, Parse XML, Build XML without C/C++ based libraries
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Prototype Pollution due to improper argument validation, which is exploitable via the aName variable.
PoC
const { XMLParser, XMLBuilder, XMLValidator} = require("fast-xml-parser");
let XMLdata = "<__proto__><polluted>hacked</polluted></__proto__>"
const parser = new XMLParser();
let jObj = parser.parse(XMLdata);
console.log(jObj.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
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 fast-xml-parser to version 4.1.2 or higher.
References
medium severity
new
- Vulnerable module: handlebars
- Introduced through: oc-template-handlebars@6.0.25, oc-template-handlebars-compiler@6.7.0 and others
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: oc@opentable/oc#7970b2933011ba67f81ba000c2a92a3aaefe4887 › oc-template-handlebars@6.0.25 › handlebars@4.7.7
-
Introduced through: oc@opentable/oc#7970b2933011ba67f81ba000c2a92a3aaefe4887 › oc-template-handlebars-compiler@6.7.0 › handlebars@4.7.7
-
Introduced through: oc@opentable/oc#7970b2933011ba67f81ba000c2a92a3aaefe4887 › oc-client@4.0.2 › oc-template-handlebars@6.0.24 › handlebars@4.7.7
-
Introduced through: oc@opentable/oc#7970b2933011ba67f81ba000c2a92a3aaefe4887 › oc-template-handlebars-compiler@6.7.0 › oc-template-handlebars@6.0.25 › handlebars@4.7.7
Overview
handlebars is an extension to the Mustache templating language.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Prototype Pollution in the protoAccessControl function. An attacker can gain unauthorized access to prototype methods by referencing __lookupSetter__ in templates through untrusted input.
Note: This is only exploitable if the allowProtoMethodsByDefault option is set to true.
Workaround
This vulnerability can be mitigated by not enabling the allowProtoMethodsByDefault option, or by ensuring templates do not reference __lookupSetter__ through 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
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 handlebars to version 4.7.9 or higher.
References
medium severity
new
- Vulnerable module: handlebars
- Introduced through: oc-template-handlebars@6.0.25, oc-template-handlebars-compiler@6.7.0 and others
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: oc@opentable/oc#7970b2933011ba67f81ba000c2a92a3aaefe4887 › oc-template-handlebars@6.0.25 › handlebars@4.7.7
-
Introduced through: oc@opentable/oc#7970b2933011ba67f81ba000c2a92a3aaefe4887 › oc-template-handlebars-compiler@6.7.0 › handlebars@4.7.7
-
Introduced through: oc@opentable/oc#7970b2933011ba67f81ba000c2a92a3aaefe4887 › oc-client@4.0.2 › oc-template-handlebars@6.0.24 › handlebars@4.7.7
-
Introduced through: oc@opentable/oc#7970b2933011ba67f81ba000c2a92a3aaefe4887 › oc-template-handlebars-compiler@6.7.0 › oc-template-handlebars@6.0.25 › handlebars@4.7.7
Overview
handlebars is an extension to the Mustache templating language.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Time-of-check Time-of-use (TOCTOU) Race Condition in the lookup function. An attacker can access properties that should be restricted by bypassing prototype-access controls through a time-of-check time-of-use (TOCTOU) flaw, where the security check and the actual property access are decoupled.
Note: This is only exploitable if the { compat: true } compile option is enabled.
Workaround
This vulnerability can be mitigated by avoiding the { compat: true } option and ensuring context data objects are plain JSON without Proxies or getter-based accessor properties.
Remediation
Upgrade handlebars to version 4.7.9 or higher.
References
medium severity
- Vulnerable module: markdown
- Introduced through: oc-template-jade-compiler@7.5.0
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: oc@opentable/oc#7970b2933011ba67f81ba000c2a92a3aaefe4887 › oc-template-jade-compiler@7.5.0 › oc-jade-legacy@1.11.1 › jstransformer-markdown@1.2.1 › markdown@0.5.0
Overview
markdown is a yet another markdown parser, this time for JavaScript.
Note: This package is no longer actively maintained and should be considered deprecated.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Regular Expression Denial of Service (ReDoS). It is possible under certain circumstances to abuse the URL regex parse functionality available within the Gruber dialect feature to conduct denial of service attacks.
Note: Exploitation of this vulnerability requires usage of the Gruber dialect (dialects/gruber.js) within markdown, which is not available by default.
PoC by Snyk
console.time('benchmark');
//regex taken from https://github.com/evilstreak/markdown-js/blob/master/src/dialects/gruber.js#L12
var urlRegexp = /(?:(?:https?|ftp):\/\/)(?:\S+(?::\S*)?@)?(?:(?!(?:10|127)(?:\.\d{1,3}){3})(?!(?:169\.254|192\.168)(?:\.\d{1,3}){2})(?!172\.(?:1[6-9]|2\d|3[0-1])(?:\.\d{1,3}){2})(?:[1-9]\d?|1\d\d|2[01]\d|22[0-3])(?:\.(?:1?\d{1,2}|2[0-4]\d|25[0-5])){2}(?:\.(?:[1-9]\d?|1\d\d|2[0-4]\d|25[0-4]))|(?:(?:[a-z\u00a1-\uffff0-9]-*)*[a-z\u00a1-\uffff0-9]+)(?:\.(?:[a-z\u00a1-\uffff0-9]+-?)*[a-z\u00a1-\uffff0-9]+)*(?:\.(?:[a-z\u00a1-\uffff]{2,})))(?::\d{2,5})?(?:\/[^\s]*)?/i.source;
//expoit/payload
const str = '';
//Duplicate of code from https://github.com/evilstreak/markdown-js/blob/master/src/dialects/gruber.js#L566
var m = str.match(new RegExp("^!\\[(.*?)][ \\t]*\\((" + urlRegexp + ")\\)([ \\t])*([\"'].*[\"'])?")) ||
str.match( /^!\[(.*?)\][ \t]*\([ \t]*([^")]*?)(?:[ \t]+(["'])(.*?)\3)?[ \t]*\)/ );
console.timeEnd('benchmark');
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 markdown.
References
medium severity
- Vulnerable module: markdown
- Introduced through: oc-template-jade-compiler@7.5.0
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: oc@opentable/oc#7970b2933011ba67f81ba000c2a92a3aaefe4887 › oc-template-jade-compiler@7.5.0 › oc-jade-legacy@1.11.1 › jstransformer-markdown@1.2.1 › markdown@0.5.0
Overview
markdown is a yet another markdown parser, this time for JavaScript.
Note: This package is no longer actively maintained and should be considered deprecated.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Regular Expression Denial of Service (ReDoS). The markdown.toHTML() function has significantly degraded performance when parsing long strings containing underscores. This may lead to ReDoS if the parser accepts 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
There is no fixed version for markdown.
References
medium severity
- Vulnerable module: uglify-js
- Introduced through: oc-template-handlebars-compiler@6.7.0 and oc-template-jade-compiler@7.5.0
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: oc@opentable/oc#7970b2933011ba67f81ba000c2a92a3aaefe4887 › oc-template-handlebars-compiler@6.7.0 › uglify-js@3.7.6
-
Introduced through: oc@opentable/oc#7970b2933011ba67f81ba000c2a92a3aaefe4887 › oc-template-jade-compiler@7.5.0 › uglify-js@3.7.6
-
Introduced through: oc@opentable/oc#7970b2933011ba67f81ba000c2a92a3aaefe4887 › oc-template-jade-compiler@7.5.0 › jstransformer-uglify-js@1.2.0 › uglify-js@2.8.29
-
Introduced through: oc@opentable/oc#7970b2933011ba67f81ba000c2a92a3aaefe4887 › oc-template-jade-compiler@7.5.0 › oc-jade-legacy@1.11.1 › uglify-js@2.8.29
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
low severity
new
- Vulnerable module: handlebars
- Introduced through: oc-template-handlebars@6.0.25, oc-template-handlebars-compiler@6.7.0 and others
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: oc@opentable/oc#7970b2933011ba67f81ba000c2a92a3aaefe4887 › oc-template-handlebars@6.0.25 › handlebars@4.7.7
-
Introduced through: oc@opentable/oc#7970b2933011ba67f81ba000c2a92a3aaefe4887 › oc-template-handlebars-compiler@6.7.0 › handlebars@4.7.7
-
Introduced through: oc@opentable/oc#7970b2933011ba67f81ba000c2a92a3aaefe4887 › oc-client@4.0.2 › oc-template-handlebars@6.0.24 › handlebars@4.7.7
-
Introduced through: oc@opentable/oc#7970b2933011ba67f81ba000c2a92a3aaefe4887 › oc-template-handlebars-compiler@6.7.0 › oc-template-handlebars@6.0.25 › handlebars@4.7.7
Overview
handlebars is an extension to the Mustache templating language.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Prototype Pollution via the resolvePartial function. An attacker can inject malicious scripts into rendered output by polluting Object.prototype with a key matching a partial reference, causing unescaped content to be rendered.
Note:
This is only exploitable if the attacker knows or can guess the name of a partial reference used in a template.
Workaround
This vulnerability can be mitigated by applying Object.freeze(Object.prototype) early in application startup or by using the runtime-only build, which reduces the attack surface.
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 handlebars to version 4.7.9 or higher.