CVE-2017-7559 : Detail

CVE-2017-7559

6.1
/
Medium
A04-Insecure Design
0.4%V3
Network
2018-01-10
15h00 +00:00
2024-09-16
19h56 +00:00
CVE.org
NVD
Notifications for a CVE
Stay informed of any changes for a specific CVE.
Notifications manage

CVE Descriptions

In Undertow 2.x before 2.0.0.Alpha2, 1.4.x before 1.4.17.Final, and 1.3.x before 1.3.31.Final, it was found that the fix for CVE-2017-2666 was incomplete and invalid characters are still allowed in the query string and path parameters. This could be exploited, in conjunction with a proxy that also permitted the invalid characters but with a different interpretation, to inject data into the HTTP response. By manipulating the HTTP response the attacker could poison a web-cache, perform an XSS attack, or obtain sensitive information from requests other than their own.

CVE Informations

Related Weaknesses

CWE-ID Weakness Name Source
CWE-444 Inconsistent Interpretation of HTTP Requests ('HTTP Request/Response Smuggling')
The product acts as an intermediary HTTP agent (such as a proxy or firewall) in the data flow between two entities such as a client and server, but it does not interpret malformed HTTP requests or responses in ways that are consistent with how the messages will be processed by those entities that are at the ultimate destination.

Metrics

Metrics Score Severity CVSS Vector Source
V3.0 6.1 MEDIUM CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:L/I:L/A:N

Base: Exploitabilty Metrics

The Exploitability metrics reflect the characteristics of the thing that is vulnerable, which we refer to formally as the vulnerable component.

Attack Vector

This metric reflects the context by which vulnerability exploitation is possible.

Network

A vulnerability exploitable with network access means the vulnerable component is bound to the network stack and the attacker's path is through OSI layer 3 (the network layer). Such a vulnerability is often termed 'remotely exploitable' and can be thought of as an attack being exploitable one or more network hops away (e.g. across layer 3 boundaries from routers).

Attack Complexity

This metric describes the conditions beyond the attacker's control that must exist in order to exploit the vulnerability.

Low

Specialized access conditions or extenuating circumstances do not exist. An attacker can expect repeatable success against the vulnerable component.

Privileges Required

This metric describes the level of privileges an attacker must possess before successfully exploiting the vulnerability.

None

The attacker is unauthorized prior to attack, and therefore does not require any access to settings or files to carry out an attack.

User Interaction

This metric captures the requirement for a user, other than the attacker, to participate in the successful compromise of the vulnerable component.

Required

Successful exploitation of this vulnerability requires a user to take some action before the vulnerability can be exploited. For example, a successful exploit may only be possible during the installation of an application by a system administrator.

Base: Scope Metrics

An important property captured by CVSS v3.0 is the ability for a vulnerability in one software component to impact resources beyond its means, or privileges.

Scope

Formally, Scope refers to the collection of privileges defined by a computing authority (e.g. an application, an operating system, or a sandbox environment) when granting access to computing resources (e.g. files, CPU, memory, etc). These privileges are assigned based on some method of identification and authorization. In some cases, the authorization may be simple or loosely controlled based upon predefined rules or standards. For example, in the case of Ethernet traffic sent to a network switch, the switch accepts traffic that arrives on its ports and is an authority that controls the traffic flow to other switch ports.

Changed

An exploited vulnerability can affect resources beyond the authorization privileges intended by the vulnerable component. In this case the vulnerable component and the impacted component are different.

Base: Impact Metrics

The Impact metrics refer to the properties of the impacted component.

Confidentiality Impact

This metric measures the impact to the confidentiality of the information resources managed by a software component due to a successfully exploited vulnerability.

Low

There is some loss of confidentiality. Access to some restricted information is obtained, but the attacker does not have control over what information is obtained, or the amount or kind of loss is constrained. The information disclosure does not cause a direct, serious loss to the impacted component.

Integrity Impact

This metric measures the impact to integrity of a successfully exploited vulnerability. Integrity refers to the trustworthiness and veracity of information.

Low

Modification of data is possible, but the attacker does not have control over the consequence of a modification, or the amount of modification is constrained. The data modification does not have a direct, serious impact on the impacted component.

Availability Impact

This metric measures the impact to the availability of the impacted component resulting from a successfully exploited vulnerability.

None

There is no impact to availability within the impacted component.

Temporal Metrics

The Temporal metrics measure the current state of exploit techniques or code availability, the existence of any patches or workarounds, or the confidence that one has in the description of a vulnerability.

Environmental Metrics

 [email protected]
V2 5.8 AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:N [email protected]

EPSS

EPSS is a scoring model that predicts the likelihood of a vulnerability being exploited.

EPSS Score

The EPSS model produces a probability score between 0 and 1 (0 and 100%). The higher the score, the greater the probability that a vulnerability will be exploited.

EPSS Percentile

The percentile is used to rank CVE according to their EPSS score. For example, a CVE in the 95th percentile according to its EPSS score is more likely to be exploited than 95% of other CVE. Thus, the percentile is used to compare the EPSS score of a CVE with that of other CVE.
EPSS First.org

Products Mentioned

Configuraton 0

Redhat>>Undertow >> Version From (including) 1.3.0 To (excluding) 1.3.31

Redhat>>Undertow >> Version From (including) 1.4.0 To (excluding) 1.4.17

Redhat>>Undertow >> Version 2.0.0

    References

    https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2018:1322
    Tags : vendor-advisory, x_refsource_REDHAT
    https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2018:0002
    Tags : vendor-advisory, x_refsource_REDHAT
    https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2017:3458
    Tags : vendor-advisory, x_refsource_REDHAT
    https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2018:0004
    Tags : vendor-advisory, x_refsource_REDHAT
    https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2017:3455
    Tags : vendor-advisory, x_refsource_REDHAT
    https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2017:3456
    Tags : vendor-advisory, x_refsource_REDHAT
    https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2018:0003
    Tags : vendor-advisory, x_refsource_REDHAT
    https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2018:0005
    Tags : vendor-advisory, x_refsource_REDHAT
    https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2017:3454
    Tags : vendor-advisory, x_refsource_REDHAT