Vulnerabilities

9 via 12 paths

Dependencies

121

Source

GitHub

Find, fix and prevent vulnerabilities in your code.

Severity
  • 5
  • 4
Status
  • 9
  • 0
  • 0

high severity
new

Uncontrolled Recursion

  • Vulnerable module: @xmldom/xmldom
  • Introduced through: msw@0.36.8

Detailed paths

  • Introduced through: @seneca/github-provider@senecajs/seneca-github-provider msw@0.36.8 @mswjs/interceptors@0.12.7 @xmldom/xmldom@0.7.13
    Remediation: Upgrade to msw@0.44.0.

Overview

@xmldom/xmldom is a javascript ponyfill to provide the following APIs that are present in modern browsers to other runtimes. Since version 0.7.0 this package is published to npm as @xmldom/xmldom and no longer as xmldom

Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Uncontrolled Recursion in the recursive processing of deeply nested XML documents by several DOM-related operations, including normalize, serializeToString, getElementsByTagName, getElementsByTagNameNS, getElementsByClassName, getElementById, cloneNode, importNode, textContent, and isEqualNode. An attacker can cause the application to crash or become unresponsive by submitting a valid, deeply nested XML payload that triggers uncontrolled recursion and stack exhaustion.

PoC

const { DOMParser, XMLSerializer } = require('@xmldom/xmldom');

const depth = 5000;
const xml = '<a>'.repeat(depth) + '</a>'.repeat(depth);
const doc = new DOMParser().parseFromString(xml, 'text/xml');
new XMLSerializer().serializeToString(doc);
// RangeError: Maximum call stack size exceeded

Remediation

Upgrade @xmldom/xmldom to version 0.8.13, 0.9.10 or higher.

References

high severity
new

XML Injection

  • Vulnerable module: @xmldom/xmldom
  • Introduced through: msw@0.36.8

Detailed paths

  • Introduced through: @seneca/github-provider@senecajs/seneca-github-provider msw@0.36.8 @mswjs/interceptors@0.12.7 @xmldom/xmldom@0.7.13
    Remediation: Upgrade to msw@0.44.0.

Overview

@xmldom/xmldom is a javascript ponyfill to provide the following APIs that are present in modern browsers to other runtimes. Since version 0.7.0 this package is published to npm as @xmldom/xmldom and no longer as xmldom

Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to XML Injection due to unvalidated comment serialization. When an application uses the package to create an XML comment from untrusted user input, the package fails to sanitize comment-breaking sequences (like -->). An attacker can input --> to terminate the comment prematurely. Once the comment is broken out of, any text the attacker places after the --> is treated as "live" XML markup by the serializer rather than harmless comment text.

PoC

const { DOMImplementation, DOMParser, XMLSerializer } = require('@xmldom/xmldom');

const doc = new DOMImplementation().createDocument(null, 'root', null);

doc.documentElement.appendChild(
  doc.createComment('--><injected attr="1"/><!--')
);

const xml = new XMLSerializer().serializeToString(doc);
console.log(xml);
// <root><!----><injected attr="1"/><!----></root>

const reparsed = new DOMParser().parseFromString(xml, 'text/xml');
console.log(reparsed.documentElement.childNodes.item(1).nodeName);
// injected

Remediation

Upgrade @xmldom/xmldom to version 0.8.13, 0.9.10 or higher.

References

high severity
new

XML Injection

  • Vulnerable module: @xmldom/xmldom
  • Introduced through: msw@0.36.8

Detailed paths

  • Introduced through: @seneca/github-provider@senecajs/seneca-github-provider msw@0.36.8 @mswjs/interceptors@0.12.7 @xmldom/xmldom@0.7.13
    Remediation: Upgrade to msw@0.44.0.

Overview

@xmldom/xmldom is a javascript ponyfill to provide the following APIs that are present in modern browsers to other runtimes. Since version 0.7.0 this package is published to npm as @xmldom/xmldom and no longer as xmldom

Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to XML Injection in the serialization of DocumentType nodes when attacker-controlled values are provided to the publicId, systemId, or internalSubset fields. An attacker can inject arbitrary XML markup into the serialized output by supplying specially crafted input to these fields, potentially leading to the injection of malicious DOCTYPE declarations or markup outside the intended context.

Note:

This is only exploitable if untrusted data is passed programmatically to createDocumentType or written directly to the relevant properties and then serialized without enabling strict validation.

Workaround

This vulnerability can be mitigated by passing the option { requireWellFormed: true } to XMLSerializer.serializeToString() to enforce validation of the affected fields.

Remediation

Upgrade @xmldom/xmldom to version 0.8.13, 0.9.10 or higher.

References

high severity
new

XML Injection

  • Vulnerable module: @xmldom/xmldom
  • Introduced through: msw@0.36.8

Detailed paths

  • Introduced through: @seneca/github-provider@senecajs/seneca-github-provider msw@0.36.8 @mswjs/interceptors@0.12.7 @xmldom/xmldom@0.7.13
    Remediation: Upgrade to msw@0.44.0.

Overview

@xmldom/xmldom is a javascript ponyfill to provide the following APIs that are present in modern browsers to other runtimes. Since version 0.7.0 this package is published to npm as @xmldom/xmldom and no longer as xmldom

Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to XML Injection via the createProcessingInstruction function. An attacker can inject arbitrary XML nodes into the serialized output by supplying specially crafted data containing the PI-closing sequence, which is not validated or neutralized during serialization. This can alter the structure and meaning of generated XML documents, potentially impacting workflows that store, forward, sign, or parse XML.

Note:

This is only exploitable if the serialization is performed without passing the { requireWellFormed: true } option.

PoC

const { DOMImplementation, XMLSerializer } = require('@xmldom/xmldom');

const doc = new DOMImplementation().createDocument(null, 'r', null);
doc.documentElement.appendChild(
    doc.createProcessingInstruction('a', '?><z/><?q ')
);
console.log(new XMLSerializer().serializeToString(doc));
// <r><?a ?><z/><?q ?></r>
//          ^^^^ injected <z/> element is active markup

Remediation

Upgrade @xmldom/xmldom to version 0.8.13, 0.9.10 or higher.

References

high severity

XML Injection

  • Vulnerable module: @xmldom/xmldom
  • Introduced through: msw@0.36.8

Detailed paths

  • Introduced through: @seneca/github-provider@senecajs/seneca-github-provider msw@0.36.8 @mswjs/interceptors@0.12.7 @xmldom/xmldom@0.7.13
    Remediation: Upgrade to msw@0.44.0.

Overview

@xmldom/xmldom is a javascript ponyfill to provide the following APIs that are present in modern browsers to other runtimes. Since version 0.7.0 this package is published to npm as @xmldom/xmldom and no longer as xmldom

Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to XML Injection via the XMLSerializer() function. An attacker can manipulate the structure and integrity of generated XML documents by injecting attacker-controlled markup containing the CDATA terminator ]]> through CDATA section content, which is not properly validated or sanitized during serialization. This can result in unauthorized XML elements or attributes being inserted, potentially leading to business logic manipulation or privilege escalation in downstream consumers.

Remediation

Upgrade @xmldom/xmldom to version 0.8.12, 0.9.9 or higher.

References

medium severity

Regular Expression Denial of Service (ReDoS)

  • Vulnerable module: @octokit/plugin-paginate-rest
  • Introduced through: @octokit/rest@18.12.0

Detailed paths

  • Introduced through: @seneca/github-provider@senecajs/seneca-github-provider @octokit/rest@18.12.0 @octokit/plugin-paginate-rest@2.21.3
    Remediation: Upgrade to @octokit/rest@20.0.2.

Overview

@octokit/plugin-paginate-rest is an Octokit plugin to paginate REST API endpoint responses

Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Regular Expression Denial of Service (ReDoS) through the octokit.paginate.iterator process. An attacker can cause significant performance degradation and potential service unresponsiveness by injecting a malicious Link header in the request.

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 @octokit/plugin-paginate-rest to version 9.2.2, 11.4.1 or higher.

References

medium severity

Regular Expression Denial of Service (ReDoS)

  • Vulnerable module: @octokit/request
  • Introduced through: @octokit/rest@18.12.0

Detailed paths

  • Introduced through: @seneca/github-provider@senecajs/seneca-github-provider @octokit/rest@18.12.0 @octokit/core@3.6.0 @octokit/request@5.6.3
    Remediation: Upgrade to @octokit/rest@20.0.0.
  • Introduced through: @seneca/github-provider@senecajs/seneca-github-provider @octokit/rest@18.12.0 @octokit/core@3.6.0 @octokit/graphql@4.8.0 @octokit/request@5.6.3
    Remediation: Upgrade to @octokit/rest@20.0.0.

Overview

@octokit/request is a Send parameterized requests to GitHub's APIs with sensible defaults in browsers and Node

Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Regular Expression Denial of Service (ReDoS) through the link header processing. An attacker can cause excessive CPU usage and potentially make the server unresponsive by sending a specially crafted link header designed to trigger inefficient regex backtracking.

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 @octokit/request to version 8.4.1, 9.2.1 or higher.

References

medium severity

Regular Expression Denial of Service (ReDoS)

  • Vulnerable module: @octokit/request-error
  • Introduced through: @octokit/rest@18.12.0

Detailed paths

  • Introduced through: @seneca/github-provider@senecajs/seneca-github-provider @octokit/rest@18.12.0 @octokit/core@3.6.0 @octokit/request-error@2.1.0
    Remediation: Upgrade to @octokit/rest@20.0.0.
  • Introduced through: @seneca/github-provider@senecajs/seneca-github-provider @octokit/rest@18.12.0 @octokit/core@3.6.0 @octokit/request@5.6.3 @octokit/request-error@2.1.0
    Remediation: Upgrade to @octokit/rest@20.0.0.
  • Introduced through: @seneca/github-provider@senecajs/seneca-github-provider @octokit/rest@18.12.0 @octokit/core@3.6.0 @octokit/graphql@4.8.0 @octokit/request@5.6.3 @octokit/request-error@2.1.0
    Remediation: Upgrade to @octokit/rest@20.0.0.

Overview

@octokit/request-error is an Error class for Octokit request errors

Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Regular Expression Denial of Service (ReDoS) due to improper handling of the authorization header. An attacker can cause excessive CPU usage and potentially freeze the server by sending a specially crafted authorization header containing a long sequence of spaces followed by a newline and "@".

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 @octokit/request-error to version 5.1.1, 6.1.7 or higher.

References

medium severity

  • Vulnerable module: cookie
  • Introduced through: msw@0.36.8

Detailed paths

  • Introduced through: @seneca/github-provider@senecajs/seneca-github-provider msw@0.36.8 cookie@0.4.2
    Remediation: Upgrade to msw@2.0.0.

Overview

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

Workaround

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

Details

Cross-site scripting (or XSS) is a code vulnerability that occurs when an attacker “injects” a malicious script into an otherwise trusted website. The injected script gets downloaded and executed by the end user’s browser when the user interacts with the compromised website.

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

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

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

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

Types of attacks

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

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

Affected environments

The following environments are susceptible to an XSS attack:

  • Web servers
  • Application servers
  • Web application environments

How to prevent

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

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

Remediation

Upgrade cookie to version 0.7.0 or higher.

References