Users / Roles" function.">

CVE-2018-14057 : Detail

CVE-2018-14057

8.8
/
High
Cross-Site Request Forgery - CSRF
A01-Broken Access Control
0.58%V3
Network
2018-08-17
16h00 +00:00
2018-08-18
07h57 +00:00
CVE.org
NVD
Notifications for a CVE
Stay informed of any changes for a specific CVE.
Notifications manage

CVE Descriptions

Pimcore before 5.3.0 allows remote attackers to conduct cross-site request forgery (CSRF) attacks by leveraging validation of the X-pimcore-csrf-token anti-CSRF token only in the "Settings > Users / Roles" function.

CVE Informations

Related Weaknesses

CWE-ID Weakness Name Source
CWE-352 Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF)
The web application does not, or can not, sufficiently verify whether a well-formed, valid, consistent request was intentionally provided by the user who submitted the request.

Metrics

Metrics Score Severity CVSS Vector Source
V3.0 8.8 HIGH CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H

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.

Unchanged

An exploited vulnerability can only affect resources managed by the same authority. In this case the vulnerable component and the impacted component are the same.

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.

High

There is total loss of confidentiality, resulting in all resources within the impacted component being divulged to the attacker. Alternatively, access to only some restricted information is obtained, but the disclosed information presents a direct, serious impact. For example, an attacker steals the administrator's password, or private encryption keys of a web server.

Integrity Impact

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

High

There is a total loss of integrity, or a complete loss of protection. For example, the attacker is able to modify any/all files protected by the impacted component. Alternatively, only some files can be modified, but malicious modification would present a direct, serious consequence to the impacted component.

Availability Impact

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

High

There is total loss of availability, resulting in the attacker being able to fully deny access to resources in the impacted component; this loss is either sustained (while the attacker continues to deliver the attack) or persistent (the condition persists even after the attack has completed). Alternatively, the attacker has the ability to deny some availability, but the loss of availability presents a direct, serious consequence to the impacted component (e.g., the attacker cannot disrupt existing connections, but can prevent new connections; the attacker can repeatedly exploit a vulnerability that, in each instance of a successful attack, leaks a only small amount of memory, but after repeated exploitation causes a service to become completely unavailable).

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 6.8 AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:P [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

Exploit information

Exploit Database EDB-ID : 45208

Publication date : 2018-08-15 22h00 +00:00
Author : SEC Consult
EDB Verified : No

SEC Consult Vulnerability Lab Security Advisory < 20180813-0 > ======================================================================= title: SQL Injection, XSS & CSRF vulnerabilities product: Pimcore vulnerable version: 5.2.3 and below fixed version: 5.3.0 CVE number: CVE-2018-14057, CVE-2018-14058, CVE-2018-14059 impact: High homepage: https://pimcore.com/en found: 2018-06-11 by: T. Silpavarangkura (Office Bangkok) N. Rai-Ngoen (Office Bangkok) SEC Consult Vulnerability Lab An integrated part of SEC Consult Europe | Asia | North America https://www.sec-consult.com ======================================================================= Vendor description: ------------------- "Pimcore is an award-winning consolidated open source enterprise platform for master data management (PIM/MDM), user experience management (CMS/UX), digital asset management (DAM) and eCommerce." Source: https://pimcore.com/en Business recommendation: ------------------------ The vendor provides a patch for most identified issues, but XSS will not be fixed according to the vendor. An in-depth security analysis performed by security professionals is highly advised, as the software may be affected from further security issues. Vulnerability overview/description: ----------------------------------- 1. SQL Injection (CVE-2018-14058) Multiple SQL injection vulnerabilities have been identified in the REST web service API. An attacker who obtains a valid API key that is granted a necessary permission could successfully perform an attack to extract information from the database. 2. Stored Cross-site Scripting (CVE-2018-14059) Multiple stored cross-site scripting vulnerabilities have been identified across multiple functions in the application, which allows an authenticated attacker to insert arbitrary JavaScript code in virtually all text fields and data entries in the application. 3. Cross-site Request Forgery (CVE-2018-14057) Multiple functions in the application are not protected by the existing anti-CSRF token, which allows an attacker to perform a cross-site request forgery attack to at least add, update or delete entries, among other actions. Proof of concept: ----------------- 1. SQL Injection (CVE-2018-14058) The following URLs demonstrate the issue: http://<host>/webservice/rest/asset-count?apikey=[...]&condition=<SQL Injection> http://<host>/webservice/rest/asset-inquire?apikey=[...]&id=<SQL Injection> http://<host>/webservice/rest/asset-list?apikey=[...]&condition=<SQL Injection> http://<host>/webservice/rest/document-count?apikey=[...]&condition=<SQL Injection> http://<host>/webservice/rest/document-inquire?apikey=[...]&id=<SQL Injection> http://<host>/webservice/rest/document-list?apikey=[...]&condition=<SQL Injection> http://<host>/webservice/rest/object-count?apikey=[...]&condition=<SQL Injection> http://<host>/webservice/rest/object-inquire?apikey=[...]&id=<SQL Injection> http://<host>/webservice/rest/object-list?apikey=[...]&condition=<SQL Injection> Note that a valid API key that is granted at least either "Assets", "Documents" or "Objects" permission is required to perform an SQL injection attack against associated API endpoints successfully. 2. Stored Cross-site Scripting (CVE-2018-14059) Most of the text fields in pop-up dialogs and data entries in the application are vulnerable to the cross-site scripting vulnerability, which can be exploited by an authenticated attacker. For example, the attacker could insert an attack payload while performing at least the following actions: 1) Edit a user account's first name/last name/e-mail address. 2) Edit a Document Types/Predefined Properties/Predefined Asset Metadata/ Quantity Value/Static Routes entry value in the table. 3) Rename an Assets/Data Objects/Video Thumbnails/Image Thumbnails/ Field-Collections/Objectbrick/Classification Store item. The vendor stated that many identified XSS issues only affect administrative functions and hence the issues will not be fixed: "They are only affecting administrative functionalities (higher privileges required) - so this isn't used by non-trusted users - a check just adds additional overhead without any benefits for security." SEC Consult argued multiple times that XSS can still be exploited e.g. when a higher privileged user gets attacked and the issues should be fixed nevertheless. 3. Cross-site Request Forgery (CVE-2018-14057) The existing anti-CSRF token in the HTTP request header named "X-pimcore-csrf-token" was found to be validated only in the "Settings > Users / Roles" function. Therefore, an attacker could perform a cross-site request forgery attack against virtually all other functions in order to at least add, update and delete data without having to submit the anti-CSRF token. The non-exhaustive list of affected requests are listed below: POST /admin/asset/add-asset POST /admin/asset/add-asset-compatibility GET /admin/asset/delete GET /admin/asset/import-server GET /admin/asset/import-server-files GET /admin/asset/import-url POST /admin/asset/import-zip POST /admin/asset/update GET /admin/document/add GET /admin/document/delete POST /admin/document/doc-types POST /admin/email/blacklist POST /admin/email/email-logs POST /admin/email/save POST /admin/hardlink/save POST /admin/link/save POST /admin/newsletter/save GET /admin/object/add POST /admin/object/save GET /admin/object/delete POST /admin/page/save POST /admin/settings/metadata POST /admin/settings/properties POST /admin/settings/set-system POST /admin/settings/website-settings POST /admin/snippet/save Vulnerable / tested versions: ----------------------------- The vulnerabilities have been identified in Pimcore version 5.2.3 which was the most current version at the time of discovery. Vendor contact timeline: ------------------------ 2018-06-15: Contacting vendor through https://pimcorehq.wufoo.com/forms/pimcore-security-report 2018-06-18: Vendor provides the fixes of SQL injection and CSRF in the nightly build, but has a problem of reproducing the XSS. 2018-06-18: Contacting vendor to request for a secure channel to provide further details of the XSS. 2018-06-18: Sending the details of the XSS. 2018-06-19: Vendor fixes the SQL injection and only fixes the XSS partially. 2018-06-20: Notifying vendor, that SQL injection and XSS are not properly fixed 2018-06-20: Vendor inquires more details about the XSS. 2018-06-21: Explaining vendor the XSS issues and notifying vendor that the CSRF has been fixed. 2018-06-21: Vendor will discuss the open issues internally. 2018-07-11: Following up vendor regarding the fixes of the open issues. 2018-07-11: Vendor completely fixes the SQL injection, but decides not to fix the XSS in the administrative functions, patch release is planned within the next two weeks 2018-07-20: Vendor provides a patched version 2018-08-13: Public release of security advisory Solution: --------- The vendor has published a new release (version 5.3.0) which fixes most of the identified issues, but not the XSS issues that affect administrative functions: https://pimcore.com/en/download Workaround: ----------- None Advisory URL: ------------- https://www.sec-consult.com/en/vulnerability-lab/advisories/index.html ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ SEC Consult Vulnerability Lab SEC Consult Europe | Asia | North America About SEC Consult Vulnerability Lab The SEC Consult Vulnerability Lab is an integrated part of SEC Consult. It ensures the continued knowledge gain of SEC Consult in the field of network and application security to stay ahead of the attacker. The SEC Consult Vulnerability Lab supports high-quality penetration testing and the evaluation of new offensive and defensive technologies for our customers. Hence our customers obtain the most current information about vulnerabilities and valid recommendation about the risk profile of new technologies. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Interested to work with the experts of SEC Consult? Send us your application https://www.sec-consult.com/en/career/index.html Interested in improving your cyber security with the experts of SEC Consult? Contact our local offices https://www.sec-consult.com/en/contact/index.html ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Mail: research at sec-consult dot com Web: https://www.sec-consult.com Blog: http://blog.sec-consult.com Twitter: https://twitter.com/sec_consult EOF Thongchai Silpavarangkura / @2018

Products Mentioned

Configuraton 0

Pimcore>>Pimcore >> Version To (excluding) 5.3.0

References

http://seclists.org/fulldisclosure/2018/Aug/13
Tags : mailing-list, x_refsource_FULLDISC
https://www.exploit-db.com/exploits/45208/
Tags : exploit, x_refsource_EXPLOIT-DB