quick-toolbar@1.0.1
Vulnerabilities |
23 via 239 paths |
---|---|
Dependencies |
483 |
Source |
npm |
Find, fix and prevent vulnerabilities in your code.
high severity
- Vulnerable module: getobject
- Introduced through: update@0.3.6
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › template@0.10.2 › config-cache@1.3.2 › expander@0.3.3 › getobject@0.1.0
Overview
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Prototype Pollution. It allows an attacker to cause a denial of service and may lead to remote code execution.
Remediation
There is no fixed version for getobject
.
References
high severity
new
- Vulnerable module: lodash
- Introduced through: update@0.3.6
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › update-banner@0.1.1 › lodash@3.10.1Remediation: Upgrade to update@0.4.0.
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › update-license@0.3.0 › lodash@3.10.1
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › engine-lodash@0.5.0 › lodash@3.10.1
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › helper-resolve@0.2.0 › lodash@3.10.1
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › template@0.10.2 › engine-lodash@0.5.0 › lodash@3.10.1
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › helper-apidocs@0.4.1 › helper-resolve@0.1.2 › lodash@3.10.1Remediation: Upgrade to update@0.4.0.
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › helper-apidocs@0.4.1 › js-comments@0.3.9 › lodash@3.10.1
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › helper-license@0.1.3 › lodash@2.4.2
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › template@0.10.2 › en-route@0.4.0 › lodash@2.4.2Remediation: Upgrade to update@0.4.0.
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › template@0.10.2 › helper-cache@0.5.2 › lodash@2.4.2Remediation: Upgrade to update@0.4.0.
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › template@0.10.2 › engine-cache@0.9.0 › helper-cache@0.5.2 › lodash@2.4.2Remediation: Upgrade to update@0.4.0.
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › template@0.10.2 › load-templates@0.5.3 › option-cache@0.1.4 › lodash@2.4.2Remediation: Upgrade to update@0.4.0.
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › load-plugins@1.0.2 › resolve-dep@0.5.4 › cwd@0.3.7 › findup-sync@0.1.3 › lodash@2.4.2
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › helper-apidocs@0.4.1 › js-comments@0.3.9 › parse-comments@0.3.4 › code-context@0.2.3 › extract-comments@0.4.2 › lodash@2.4.2
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › template@0.10.2 › config-cache@1.3.2 › expander@0.3.3 › lodash@2.2.1
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › vinyl-fs@0.3.14 › glob-watcher@0.0.6 › gaze@0.5.2 › globule@0.1.0 › lodash@1.0.2
Overview
lodash is a modern JavaScript utility library delivering modularity, performance, & extras.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Command Injection via template
.
PoC
var _ = require('lodash');
_.template('', { variable: '){console.log(process.env)}; with(obj' })()
Remediation
Upgrade lodash
to version 4.17.21 or higher.
References
high severity
- Vulnerable module: lodash
- Introduced through: update@0.3.6
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › update-banner@0.1.1 › lodash@3.10.1Remediation: Upgrade to update@0.4.0.
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › update-license@0.3.0 › lodash@3.10.1
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › engine-lodash@0.5.0 › lodash@3.10.1
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › helper-resolve@0.2.0 › lodash@3.10.1
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › template@0.10.2 › engine-lodash@0.5.0 › lodash@3.10.1
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › helper-apidocs@0.4.1 › helper-resolve@0.1.2 › lodash@3.10.1Remediation: Upgrade to update@0.4.0.
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › helper-apidocs@0.4.1 › js-comments@0.3.9 › lodash@3.10.1
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › helper-license@0.1.3 › lodash@2.4.2
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › template@0.10.2 › en-route@0.4.0 › lodash@2.4.2Remediation: Upgrade to update@0.4.0.
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › template@0.10.2 › helper-cache@0.5.2 › lodash@2.4.2Remediation: Upgrade to update@0.4.0.
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › template@0.10.2 › engine-cache@0.9.0 › helper-cache@0.5.2 › lodash@2.4.2Remediation: Upgrade to update@0.4.0.
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › template@0.10.2 › load-templates@0.5.3 › option-cache@0.1.4 › lodash@2.4.2Remediation: Upgrade to update@0.4.0.
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › load-plugins@1.0.2 › resolve-dep@0.5.4 › cwd@0.3.7 › findup-sync@0.1.3 › lodash@2.4.2
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › helper-apidocs@0.4.1 › js-comments@0.3.9 › parse-comments@0.3.4 › code-context@0.2.3 › extract-comments@0.4.2 › lodash@2.4.2
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › template@0.10.2 › config-cache@1.3.2 › expander@0.3.3 › lodash@2.2.1
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › vinyl-fs@0.3.14 › glob-watcher@0.0.6 › gaze@0.5.2 › globule@0.1.0 › lodash@1.0.2
Overview
lodash is a modern JavaScript utility library delivering modularity, performance, & extras.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Prototype Pollution. The function defaultsDeep
could be tricked into adding or modifying properties of Object.prototype
using a constructor
payload.
PoC by Snyk
const mergeFn = require('lodash').defaultsDeep;
const payload = '{"constructor": {"prototype": {"a0": true}}}'
function check() {
mergeFn({}, JSON.parse(payload));
if (({})[`a0`] === true) {
console.log(`Vulnerable to Prototype Pollution via ${payload}`);
}
}
check();
For more information, check out our blog post
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
How to prevent
- Freeze the prototype— use
Object.freeze (Object.prototype)
. - Require schema validation of JSON input.
- Avoid using unsafe recursive merge functions.
- Consider using objects without prototypes (for example,
Object.create(null)
), breaking the prototype chain and preventing pollution. - As a best practice use
Map
instead ofObject
.
For more information on this vulnerability type:
Arteau, Oliver. “JavaScript prototype pollution attack in NodeJS application.” GitHub, 26 May 2018
Remediation
Upgrade lodash
to version 4.17.12 or higher.
References
high severity
- Vulnerable module: lodash
- Introduced through: update@0.3.6
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › update-banner@0.1.1 › lodash@3.10.1Remediation: Upgrade to update@0.4.0.
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › update-license@0.3.0 › lodash@3.10.1
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › engine-lodash@0.5.0 › lodash@3.10.1
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › helper-resolve@0.2.0 › lodash@3.10.1
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › template@0.10.2 › engine-lodash@0.5.0 › lodash@3.10.1
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › helper-apidocs@0.4.1 › helper-resolve@0.1.2 › lodash@3.10.1Remediation: Upgrade to update@0.4.0.
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › helper-apidocs@0.4.1 › js-comments@0.3.9 › lodash@3.10.1
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › helper-license@0.1.3 › lodash@2.4.2
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › template@0.10.2 › en-route@0.4.0 › lodash@2.4.2Remediation: Upgrade to update@0.4.0.
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › template@0.10.2 › helper-cache@0.5.2 › lodash@2.4.2Remediation: Upgrade to update@0.4.0.
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › template@0.10.2 › engine-cache@0.9.0 › helper-cache@0.5.2 › lodash@2.4.2Remediation: Upgrade to update@0.4.0.
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › template@0.10.2 › load-templates@0.5.3 › option-cache@0.1.4 › lodash@2.4.2Remediation: Upgrade to update@0.4.0.
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › load-plugins@1.0.2 › resolve-dep@0.5.4 › cwd@0.3.7 › findup-sync@0.1.3 › lodash@2.4.2
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › helper-apidocs@0.4.1 › js-comments@0.3.9 › parse-comments@0.3.4 › code-context@0.2.3 › extract-comments@0.4.2 › lodash@2.4.2
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › template@0.10.2 › config-cache@1.3.2 › expander@0.3.3 › lodash@2.2.1
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › vinyl-fs@0.3.14 › glob-watcher@0.0.6 › gaze@0.5.2 › globule@0.1.0 › lodash@1.0.2
Overview
lodash is a modern JavaScript utility library delivering modularity, performance, & extras.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Prototype Pollution in zipObjectDeep
due to an incomplete fix for CVE-2020-8203.
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
How to prevent
- Freeze the prototype— use
Object.freeze (Object.prototype)
. - Require schema validation of JSON input.
- Avoid using unsafe recursive merge functions.
- Consider using objects without prototypes (for example,
Object.create(null)
), breaking the prototype chain and preventing pollution. - As a best practice use
Map
instead ofObject
.
For more information on this vulnerability type:
Arteau, Oliver. “JavaScript prototype pollution attack in NodeJS application.” GitHub, 26 May 2018
Remediation
Upgrade lodash
to version 4.17.20 or higher.
References
high severity
- Vulnerable module: lodash
- Introduced through: update@0.3.6
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › update-banner@0.1.1 › lodash@3.10.1Remediation: Upgrade to update@0.4.0.
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › update-license@0.3.0 › lodash@3.10.1
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › engine-lodash@0.5.0 › lodash@3.10.1
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › helper-resolve@0.2.0 › lodash@3.10.1
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › template@0.10.2 › engine-lodash@0.5.0 › lodash@3.10.1
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › helper-apidocs@0.4.1 › helper-resolve@0.1.2 › lodash@3.10.1Remediation: Upgrade to update@0.4.0.
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › helper-apidocs@0.4.1 › js-comments@0.3.9 › lodash@3.10.1
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › helper-license@0.1.3 › lodash@2.4.2
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › template@0.10.2 › en-route@0.4.0 › lodash@2.4.2Remediation: Upgrade to update@0.4.0.
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › template@0.10.2 › helper-cache@0.5.2 › lodash@2.4.2Remediation: Upgrade to update@0.4.0.
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › template@0.10.2 › engine-cache@0.9.0 › helper-cache@0.5.2 › lodash@2.4.2Remediation: Upgrade to update@0.4.0.
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › template@0.10.2 › load-templates@0.5.3 › option-cache@0.1.4 › lodash@2.4.2Remediation: Upgrade to update@0.4.0.
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › load-plugins@1.0.2 › resolve-dep@0.5.4 › cwd@0.3.7 › findup-sync@0.1.3 › lodash@2.4.2
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › helper-apidocs@0.4.1 › js-comments@0.3.9 › parse-comments@0.3.4 › code-context@0.2.3 › extract-comments@0.4.2 › lodash@2.4.2
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › template@0.10.2 › config-cache@1.3.2 › expander@0.3.3 › lodash@2.2.1
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › vinyl-fs@0.3.14 › glob-watcher@0.0.6 › gaze@0.5.2 › globule@0.1.0 › lodash@1.0.2
Overview
lodash is a modern JavaScript utility library delivering modularity, performance, & extras.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Prototype Pollution via the setWith
and set
functions.
PoC by awarau
- Create a JS file with this contents:
lod = require('lodash') lod.setWith({}, "__proto__[test]", "123") lod.set({}, "__proto__[test2]", "456") console.log(Object.prototype)
- Execute it with
node
- Observe that
test
andtest2
is now in theObject.prototype
.
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
How to prevent
- Freeze the prototype— use
Object.freeze (Object.prototype)
. - Require schema validation of JSON input.
- Avoid using unsafe recursive merge functions.
- Consider using objects without prototypes (for example,
Object.create(null)
), breaking the prototype chain and preventing pollution. - As a best practice use
Map
instead ofObject
.
For more information on this vulnerability type:
Arteau, Oliver. “JavaScript prototype pollution attack in NodeJS application.” GitHub, 26 May 2018
Remediation
Upgrade lodash
to version 4.17.17 or higher.
References
high severity
- Vulnerable module: lodash
- Introduced through: update@0.3.6
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › update-banner@0.1.1 › lodash@3.10.1Remediation: Upgrade to update@0.4.0.
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › update-license@0.3.0 › lodash@3.10.1
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › engine-lodash@0.5.0 › lodash@3.10.1
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › helper-resolve@0.2.0 › lodash@3.10.1
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › template@0.10.2 › engine-lodash@0.5.0 › lodash@3.10.1
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › helper-apidocs@0.4.1 › helper-resolve@0.1.2 › lodash@3.10.1Remediation: Upgrade to update@0.4.0.
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › helper-apidocs@0.4.1 › js-comments@0.3.9 › lodash@3.10.1
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › helper-license@0.1.3 › lodash@2.4.2
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › template@0.10.2 › en-route@0.4.0 › lodash@2.4.2Remediation: Upgrade to update@0.4.0.
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › template@0.10.2 › helper-cache@0.5.2 › lodash@2.4.2Remediation: Upgrade to update@0.4.0.
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › template@0.10.2 › engine-cache@0.9.0 › helper-cache@0.5.2 › lodash@2.4.2Remediation: Upgrade to update@0.4.0.
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › template@0.10.2 › load-templates@0.5.3 › option-cache@0.1.4 › lodash@2.4.2Remediation: Upgrade to update@0.4.0.
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › load-plugins@1.0.2 › resolve-dep@0.5.4 › cwd@0.3.7 › findup-sync@0.1.3 › lodash@2.4.2
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › helper-apidocs@0.4.1 › js-comments@0.3.9 › parse-comments@0.3.4 › code-context@0.2.3 › extract-comments@0.4.2 › lodash@2.4.2
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › template@0.10.2 › config-cache@1.3.2 › expander@0.3.3 › lodash@2.2.1
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › vinyl-fs@0.3.14 › glob-watcher@0.0.6 › gaze@0.5.2 › globule@0.1.0 › lodash@1.0.2
Overview
lodash is a modern JavaScript utility library delivering modularity, performance, & extras.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Prototype Pollution. The functions merge
, mergeWith
, and defaultsDeep
could be tricked into adding or modifying properties of Object.prototype
. This is due to an incomplete fix to CVE-2018-3721
.
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
How to prevent
- Freeze the prototype— use
Object.freeze (Object.prototype)
. - Require schema validation of JSON input.
- Avoid using unsafe recursive merge functions.
- Consider using objects without prototypes (for example,
Object.create(null)
), breaking the prototype chain and preventing pollution. - As a best practice use
Map
instead ofObject
.
For more information on this vulnerability type:
Arteau, Oliver. “JavaScript prototype pollution attack in NodeJS application.” GitHub, 26 May 2018
Remediation
Upgrade lodash
to version 4.17.11 or higher.
References
high severity
- Vulnerable module: merge
- Introduced through: apply-selector-and-css@1.1.1
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › apply-selector-and-css@1.1.1 › cssobject-from-selector@1.0.2 › merge@1.2.1
Overview
merge is a library that allows you to merge multiple objects into one, optionally creating a new cloned object. Similar to the jQuery.extend but more flexible. Works in Node.js and the browser.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Prototype Pollution. The 'merge' function already checks for 'proto' keys in an object to prevent prototype pollution, but does not check for 'constructor' or 'prototype' keys.
Details
Prototype Pollution is a vulnerability affecting JavaScript. Prototype Pollution refers to the ability to inject properties into existing JavaScript language construct prototypes, such as objects. JavaScript allows all Object attributes to be altered, including their magical attributes such as _proto_
, constructor
and prototype
. An attacker manipulates these attributes to overwrite, or pollute, a JavaScript application object prototype of the base object by injecting other values. Properties on the Object.prototype
are then inherited by all the JavaScript objects through the prototype chain. When that happens, this leads to either denial of service by triggering JavaScript exceptions, or it tampers with the application source code to force the code path that the attacker injects, thereby leading to remote code execution.
There are two main ways in which the pollution of prototypes occurs:
- Unsafe
Object
recursive 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
How to prevent
- Freeze the prototype— use
Object.freeze (Object.prototype)
. - Require schema validation of JSON input.
- Avoid using unsafe recursive merge functions.
- Consider using objects without prototypes (for example,
Object.create(null)
), breaking the prototype chain and preventing pollution. - As a best practice use
Map
instead ofObject
.
For more information on this vulnerability type:
Arteau, Oliver. “JavaScript prototype pollution attack in NodeJS application.” GitHub, 26 May 2018
Remediation
Upgrade merge
to version 2.1.0 or higher.
References
high severity
new
- Vulnerable module: merge
- Introduced through: apply-selector-and-css@1.1.1
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › apply-selector-and-css@1.1.1 › cssobject-from-selector@1.0.2 › merge@1.2.1
Overview
merge is a library that allows you to merge multiple objects into one, optionally creating a new cloned object. Similar to the jQuery.extend but more flexible. Works in Node.js and the browser.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Prototype Pollution via _recursiveMerge
.
PoC:
const merge = require('merge');
const payload2 = JSON.parse('{"x": {"__proto__":{"polluted":"yes"}}}');
let obj1 = {x: {y:1}};
console.log("Before : " + obj1.polluted);
merge.recursive(obj1, payload2);
console.log("After : " + obj1.polluted);
console.log("After : " + {}.polluted);
Output:
Before : undefined
After : yes
After : yes
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
How to prevent
- Freeze the prototype— use
Object.freeze (Object.prototype)
. - Require schema validation of JSON input.
- Avoid using unsafe recursive merge functions.
- Consider using objects without prototypes (for example,
Object.create(null)
), breaking the prototype chain and preventing pollution. - As a best practice use
Map
instead ofObject
.
For more information on this vulnerability type:
Arteau, Oliver. “JavaScript prototype pollution attack in NodeJS application.” GitHub, 26 May 2018
Remediation
Upgrade merge
to version 2.1.1 or higher.
References
high severity
new
- Vulnerable module: merge-deep
- Introduced through: update@0.3.6
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › merge-deep@1.0.3Remediation: Upgrade to update@0.4.0.
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › merge-deep@1.0.3Remediation: Upgrade to update@0.4.0.
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › helper-copyright@1.4.0 › merge-deep@1.0.3
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › update-package@0.2.0 › merge-deep@0.1.5
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › template-utils@0.5.1 › merge-deep@0.1.5Remediation: Upgrade to update@0.4.0.
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › helper-apidocs@0.4.1 › template-utils@0.5.1 › merge-deep@0.1.5Remediation: Upgrade to update@0.4.0.
Overview
merge-deep is a recursively merges values in a javascript object.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Prototype Pollution. Merge-deep actively attempts to prevent prototype pollution by blocking object property merges into __proto__
, however it still allows for prototype pollution of Object.prototype via a constructor payload.
PoC
var mergeDeep = require("merge-deep");
var payload = '{"constructor": {"prototype": {"isAdmin": true}}}';
mergeDeep({}, JSON.parse(payload));
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
How to prevent
- Freeze the prototype— use
Object.freeze (Object.prototype)
. - Require schema validation of JSON input.
- Avoid using unsafe recursive merge functions.
- Consider using objects without prototypes (for example,
Object.create(null)
), breaking the prototype chain and preventing pollution. - As a best practice use
Map
instead ofObject
.
For more information on this vulnerability type:
Arteau, Oliver. “JavaScript prototype pollution attack in NodeJS application.” GitHub, 26 May 2018
Remediation
Upgrade merge-deep
to version 3.0.3 or higher.
References
high severity
- Vulnerable module: minimatch
- Introduced through: update@0.3.6
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › glob@4.5.3 › minimatch@2.0.10Remediation: Upgrade to update@0.4.0.
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › globby@1.2.0 › glob@4.5.3 › minimatch@2.0.10Remediation: Upgrade to update@0.4.0.
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › vinyl-fs@0.3.14 › glob-stream@3.1.18 › minimatch@2.0.10
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › helper-apidocs@0.4.1 › globby@1.2.0 › glob@4.5.3 › minimatch@2.0.10Remediation: Upgrade to update@0.4.0.
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › map-files@0.5.1 › globby@1.2.0 › glob@4.5.3 › minimatch@2.0.10Remediation: Upgrade to update@0.4.0.
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › template@0.10.2 › globby@1.2.0 › glob@4.5.3 › minimatch@2.0.10Remediation: Upgrade to update@0.4.0.
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › vinyl-fs@0.3.14 › glob-stream@3.1.18 › glob@4.5.3 › minimatch@2.0.10Remediation: Upgrade to update@0.4.0.
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › helper-apidocs@0.4.1 › js-comments@0.3.9 › globby@1.2.0 › glob@4.5.3 › minimatch@2.0.10
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › load-plugins@1.0.2 › resolve-dep@0.5.4 › globby@1.2.0 › glob@4.5.3 › minimatch@2.0.10Remediation: Upgrade to update@0.4.0.
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › template@0.10.2 › load-templates@0.5.3 › map-files@0.3.0 › globby@0.1.1 › glob@4.5.3 › minimatch@2.0.10Remediation: Upgrade to update@0.4.0.
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › helper-apidocs@0.4.1 › js-comments@0.3.9 › parse-comments@0.3.4 › code-context@0.2.3 › extract-comments@0.4.2 › map-files@0.1.2 › globby@0.1.1 › glob@4.5.3 › minimatch@2.0.10
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › load-plugins@1.0.2 › resolve-dep@0.5.4 › cwd@0.3.7 › findup-sync@0.1.3 › glob@3.2.11 › minimatch@0.3.0
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › vinyl-fs@0.3.14 › glob-watcher@0.0.6 › gaze@0.5.2 › globule@0.1.0 › minimatch@0.2.14
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › vinyl-fs@0.3.14 › glob-watcher@0.0.6 › gaze@0.5.2 › globule@0.1.0 › glob@3.1.21 › minimatch@0.2.14
Overview
minimatch is a minimal matching utility.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Regular Expression Denial of Service (ReDoS) via complicated and illegal regexes.
Details
Denial of Service (DoS) describes a family of attacks, all aimed at making a system inaccessible to its original and legitimate users. There are many types of DoS attacks, ranging from trying to clog the network pipes to the system by generating a large volume of traffic from many machines (a Distributed Denial of Service - DDoS - attack) to sending crafted requests that cause a system to crash or take a disproportional amount of time to process.
The Regular expression Denial of Service (ReDoS) is a type of Denial of Service attack. Regular expressions are incredibly powerful, but they aren't very intuitive and can ultimately end up making it easy for attackers to take your site down.
Let’s take the following regular expression as an example:
regex = /A(B|C+)+D/
This regular expression accomplishes the following:
A
The string must start with the letter 'A'(B|C+)+
The string must then follow the letter A with either the letter 'B' or some number of occurrences of the letter 'C' (the+
matches one or more times). The+
at the end of this section states that we can look for one or more matches of this section.D
Finally, we ensure this section of the string ends with a 'D'
The expression would match inputs such as ABBD
, ABCCCCD
, ABCBCCCD
and ACCCCCD
It most cases, it doesn't take very long for a regex engine to find a match:
$ time node -e '/A(B|C+)+D/.test("ACCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCD")'
0.04s user 0.01s system 95% cpu 0.052 total
$ time node -e '/A(B|C+)+D/.test("ACCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCX")'
1.79s user 0.02s system 99% cpu 1.812 total
The entire process of testing it against a 30 characters long string takes around ~52ms. But when given an invalid string, it takes nearly two seconds to complete the test, over ten times as long as it took to test a valid string. The dramatic difference is due to the way regular expressions get evaluated.
Most Regex engines will work very similarly (with minor differences). The engine will match the first possible way to accept the current character and proceed to the next one. If it then fails to match the next one, it will backtrack and see if there was another way to digest the previous character. If it goes too far down the rabbit hole only to find out the string doesn’t match in the end, and if many characters have multiple valid regex paths, the number of backtracking steps can become very large, resulting in what is known as catastrophic backtracking.
Let's look at how our expression runs into this problem, using a shorter string: "ACCCX". While it seems fairly straightforward, there are still four different ways that the engine could match those three C's:
- CCC
- CC+C
- C+CC
- C+C+C.
The engine has to try each of those combinations to see if any of them potentially match against the expression. When you combine that with the other steps the engine must take, we can use RegEx 101 debugger to see the engine has to take a total of 38 steps before it can determine the string doesn't match.
From there, the number of steps the engine must use to validate a string just continues to grow.
String | Number of C's | Number of steps |
---|---|---|
ACCCX | 3 | 38 |
ACCCCX | 4 | 71 |
ACCCCCX | 5 | 136 |
ACCCCCCCCCCCCCCX | 14 | 65,553 |
By the time the string includes 14 C's, the engine has to take over 65,000 steps just to see if the string is valid. These extreme situations can cause them to work very slowly (exponentially related to input size, as shown above), allowing an attacker to exploit this and can cause the service to excessively consume CPU, resulting in a Denial of Service.
Remediation
Upgrade minimatch
to version 3.0.2 or higher.
References
high severity
- Vulnerable module: minimatch
- Introduced through: update@0.3.6
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › glob@4.5.3 › minimatch@2.0.10Remediation: Upgrade to update@0.4.0.
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › globby@1.2.0 › glob@4.5.3 › minimatch@2.0.10Remediation: Upgrade to update@0.4.0.
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › vinyl-fs@0.3.14 › glob-stream@3.1.18 › minimatch@2.0.10Remediation: Open PR to patch minimatch@2.0.10.
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › helper-apidocs@0.4.1 › globby@1.2.0 › glob@4.5.3 › minimatch@2.0.10Remediation: Upgrade to update@0.4.0.
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › map-files@0.5.1 › globby@1.2.0 › glob@4.5.3 › minimatch@2.0.10Remediation: Upgrade to update@0.4.0.
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › template@0.10.2 › globby@1.2.0 › glob@4.5.3 › minimatch@2.0.10Remediation: Upgrade to update@0.4.0.
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › vinyl-fs@0.3.14 › glob-stream@3.1.18 › glob@4.5.3 › minimatch@2.0.10Remediation: Upgrade to update@0.4.0.
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › helper-apidocs@0.4.1 › js-comments@0.3.9 › globby@1.2.0 › glob@4.5.3 › minimatch@2.0.10Remediation: Open PR to patch minimatch@2.0.10.
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › load-plugins@1.0.2 › resolve-dep@0.5.4 › globby@1.2.0 › glob@4.5.3 › minimatch@2.0.10Remediation: Upgrade to update@0.4.0.
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › template@0.10.2 › load-templates@0.5.3 › map-files@0.3.0 › globby@0.1.1 › glob@4.5.3 › minimatch@2.0.10Remediation: Upgrade to update@0.4.0.
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › helper-apidocs@0.4.1 › js-comments@0.3.9 › parse-comments@0.3.4 › code-context@0.2.3 › extract-comments@0.4.2 › map-files@0.1.2 › globby@0.1.1 › glob@4.5.3 › minimatch@2.0.10Remediation: Open PR to patch minimatch@2.0.10.
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › load-plugins@1.0.2 › resolve-dep@0.5.4 › cwd@0.3.7 › findup-sync@0.1.3 › glob@3.2.11 › minimatch@0.3.0Remediation: Open PR to patch minimatch@0.3.0.
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › vinyl-fs@0.3.14 › glob-watcher@0.0.6 › gaze@0.5.2 › globule@0.1.0 › minimatch@0.2.14Remediation: Open PR to patch minimatch@0.2.14.
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › vinyl-fs@0.3.14 › glob-watcher@0.0.6 › gaze@0.5.2 › globule@0.1.0 › glob@3.1.21 › minimatch@0.2.14Remediation: Open PR to patch minimatch@0.2.14.
Overview
minimatch is a minimal matching utility.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Regular Expression Denial of Service (ReDoS).
Details
Denial of Service (DoS) describes a family of attacks, all aimed at making a system inaccessible to its original and legitimate users. There are many types of DoS attacks, ranging from trying to clog the network pipes to the system by generating a large volume of traffic from many machines (a Distributed Denial of Service - DDoS - attack) to sending crafted requests that cause a system to crash or take a disproportional amount of time to process.
The Regular expression Denial of Service (ReDoS) is a type of Denial of Service attack. Regular expressions are incredibly powerful, but they aren't very intuitive and can ultimately end up making it easy for attackers to take your site down.
Let’s take the following regular expression as an example:
regex = /A(B|C+)+D/
This regular expression accomplishes the following:
A
The string must start with the letter 'A'(B|C+)+
The string must then follow the letter A with either the letter 'B' or some number of occurrences of the letter 'C' (the+
matches one or more times). The+
at the end of this section states that we can look for one or more matches of this section.D
Finally, we ensure this section of the string ends with a 'D'
The expression would match inputs such as ABBD
, ABCCCCD
, ABCBCCCD
and ACCCCCD
It most cases, it doesn't take very long for a regex engine to find a match:
$ time node -e '/A(B|C+)+D/.test("ACCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCD")'
0.04s user 0.01s system 95% cpu 0.052 total
$ time node -e '/A(B|C+)+D/.test("ACCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCX")'
1.79s user 0.02s system 99% cpu 1.812 total
The entire process of testing it against a 30 characters long string takes around ~52ms. But when given an invalid string, it takes nearly two seconds to complete the test, over ten times as long as it took to test a valid string. The dramatic difference is due to the way regular expressions get evaluated.
Most Regex engines will work very similarly (with minor differences). The engine will match the first possible way to accept the current character and proceed to the next one. If it then fails to match the next one, it will backtrack and see if there was another way to digest the previous character. If it goes too far down the rabbit hole only to find out the string doesn’t match in the end, and if many characters have multiple valid regex paths, the number of backtracking steps can become very large, resulting in what is known as catastrophic backtracking.
Let's look at how our expression runs into this problem, using a shorter string: "ACCCX". While it seems fairly straightforward, there are still four different ways that the engine could match those three C's:
- CCC
- CC+C
- C+CC
- C+C+C.
The engine has to try each of those combinations to see if any of them potentially match against the expression. When you combine that with the other steps the engine must take, we can use RegEx 101 debugger to see the engine has to take a total of 38 steps before it can determine the string doesn't match.
From there, the number of steps the engine must use to validate a string just continues to grow.
String | Number of C's | Number of steps |
---|---|---|
ACCCX | 3 | 38 |
ACCCCX | 4 | 71 |
ACCCCCX | 5 | 136 |
ACCCCCCCCCCCCCCX | 14 | 65,553 |
By the time the string includes 14 C's, the engine has to take over 65,000 steps just to see if the string is valid. These extreme situations can cause them to work very slowly (exponentially related to input size, as shown above), allowing an attacker to exploit this and can cause the service to excessively consume CPU, resulting in a Denial of Service.
Remediation
Upgrade minimatch
to version 3.0.2 or higher.
References
high severity
- Vulnerable module: mixin-deep
- Introduced through: update@0.3.6
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › template@0.10.2 › mixin-deep@0.1.0Remediation: Upgrade to update@0.4.0.
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › engine-lodash@0.5.0 › delims@0.4.2 › mixin-deep@0.1.0
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › template@0.10.2 › engine-lodash@0.5.0 › delims@0.4.2 › mixin-deep@0.1.0
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › template-utils@0.5.1 › escape-delims@0.4.0 › delims@0.4.2 › mixin-deep@0.1.0
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › helper-apidocs@0.4.1 › template-utils@0.5.1 › escape-delims@0.4.0 › delims@0.4.2 › mixin-deep@0.1.0
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › helper-apidocs@0.4.1 › js-comments@0.3.9 › parse-comments@0.3.4 › code-context@0.2.3 › extract-comments@0.4.2 › mixin-deep@0.1.0
Overview
mixin-deep is a package that deeply mixes the properties of objects into the first object.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Prototype Pollution. The function mixin-deep
could be tricked into adding or modifying properties of Object.prototype
using a constructor
payload.
PoC by Snyk
const mixin = require('mixin-deep');
const payload = '{"constructor": {"prototype": {"a0": true}}}'
function check() {
mixin({}, JSON.parse(payload));
if (({})[`a0`] === true) {
console.log(`Vulnerable to Prototype Pollution via ${payload}`)
}
}
check();
Details
Denial of Service (DoS) describes a family of attacks, all aimed at making a system inaccessible to its original and legitimate users. There are many types of DoS attacks, ranging from trying to clog the network pipes to the system by generating a large volume of traffic from many machines (a Distributed Denial of Service - DDoS - attack) to sending crafted requests that cause a system to crash or take a disproportional amount of time to process.
The Regular expression Denial of Service (ReDoS) is a type of Denial of Service attack. Regular expressions are incredibly powerful, but they aren't very intuitive and can ultimately end up making it easy for attackers to take your site down.
Let’s take the following regular expression as an example:
regex = /A(B|C+)+D/
This regular expression accomplishes the following:
A
The string must start with the letter 'A'(B|C+)+
The string must then follow the letter A with either the letter 'B' or some number of occurrences of the letter 'C' (the+
matches one or more times). The+
at the end of this section states that we can look for one or more matches of this section.D
Finally, we ensure this section of the string ends with a 'D'
The expression would match inputs such as ABBD
, ABCCCCD
, ABCBCCCD
and ACCCCCD
It most cases, it doesn't take very long for a regex engine to find a match:
$ time node -e '/A(B|C+)+D/.test("ACCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCD")'
0.04s user 0.01s system 95% cpu 0.052 total
$ time node -e '/A(B|C+)+D/.test("ACCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCX")'
1.79s user 0.02s system 99% cpu 1.812 total
The entire process of testing it against a 30 characters long string takes around ~52ms. But when given an invalid string, it takes nearly two seconds to complete the test, over ten times as long as it took to test a valid string. The dramatic difference is due to the way regular expressions get evaluated.
Most Regex engines will work very similarly (with minor differences). The engine will match the first possible way to accept the current character and proceed to the next one. If it then fails to match the next one, it will backtrack and see if there was another way to digest the previous character. If it goes too far down the rabbit hole only to find out the string doesn’t match in the end, and if many characters have multiple valid regex paths, the number of backtracking steps can become very large, resulting in what is known as catastrophic backtracking.
Let's look at how our expression runs into this problem, using a shorter string: "ACCCX". While it seems fairly straightforward, there are still four different ways that the engine could match those three C's:
- CCC
- CC+C
- C+CC
- C+C+C.
The engine has to try each of those combinations to see if any of them potentially match against the expression. When you combine that with the other steps the engine must take, we can use RegEx 101 debugger to see the engine has to take a total of 38 steps before it can determine the string doesn't match.
From there, the number of steps the engine must use to validate a string just continues to grow.
String | Number of C's | Number of steps |
---|---|---|
ACCCX | 3 | 38 |
ACCCCX | 4 | 71 |
ACCCCCX | 5 | 136 |
ACCCCCCCCCCCCCCX | 14 | 65,553 |
By the time the string includes 14 C's, the engine has to take over 65,000 steps just to see if the string is valid. These extreme situations can cause them to work very slowly (exponentially related to input size, as shown above), allowing an attacker to exploit this and can cause the service to excessively consume CPU, resulting in a Denial of Service.
Remediation
Upgrade mixin-deep
to version 2.0.1, 1.3.2 or higher.
References
high severity
- Vulnerable module: set-value
- Introduced through: update@0.3.6
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › update-banner@0.1.1 › update-copyright@0.1.1 › engine@0.1.12 › set-value@0.2.0
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › update-license@0.3.0 › update-copyright@0.1.1 › engine@0.1.12 › set-value@0.2.0
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › template@0.10.2 › config-cache@1.3.2 › option-cache@1.5.0 › set-value@0.2.0
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › template@0.10.2 › config-cache@1.3.2 › plasma@0.8.4 › option-cache@1.5.0 › set-value@0.2.0
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › template@0.10.2 › config-cache@1.3.2 › set-value@0.1.6
Overview
set-value is a package that creates nested values and any intermediaries using dot notation ('a.b.c') paths.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Prototype Pollution. The function set-value
could be tricked into adding or modifying properties of Object.prototype
using any of the constructor
, prototype
and _proto_
payloads.
PoC by Snyk
const setFn = require('set-value');
const paths = [
'constructor.prototype.a0',
'__proto__.a1',
];
function check() {
for (const p of paths) {
setFn({}, p, true);
}
for (let i = 0; i < paths.length; i++) {
if (({})[`a${i}`] === true) {
console.log(`Yes with ${paths[i]}`);
}
}
}
check();
Details
Denial of Service (DoS) describes a family of attacks, all aimed at making a system inaccessible to its original and legitimate users. There are many types of DoS attacks, ranging from trying to clog the network pipes to the system by generating a large volume of traffic from many machines (a Distributed Denial of Service - DDoS - attack) to sending crafted requests that cause a system to crash or take a disproportional amount of time to process.
The Regular expression Denial of Service (ReDoS) is a type of Denial of Service attack. Regular expressions are incredibly powerful, but they aren't very intuitive and can ultimately end up making it easy for attackers to take your site down.
Let’s take the following regular expression as an example:
regex = /A(B|C+)+D/
This regular expression accomplishes the following:
A
The string must start with the letter 'A'(B|C+)+
The string must then follow the letter A with either the letter 'B' or some number of occurrences of the letter 'C' (the+
matches one or more times). The+
at the end of this section states that we can look for one or more matches of this section.D
Finally, we ensure this section of the string ends with a 'D'
The expression would match inputs such as ABBD
, ABCCCCD
, ABCBCCCD
and ACCCCCD
It most cases, it doesn't take very long for a regex engine to find a match:
$ time node -e '/A(B|C+)+D/.test("ACCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCD")'
0.04s user 0.01s system 95% cpu 0.052 total
$ time node -e '/A(B|C+)+D/.test("ACCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCX")'
1.79s user 0.02s system 99% cpu 1.812 total
The entire process of testing it against a 30 characters long string takes around ~52ms. But when given an invalid string, it takes nearly two seconds to complete the test, over ten times as long as it took to test a valid string. The dramatic difference is due to the way regular expressions get evaluated.
Most Regex engines will work very similarly (with minor differences). The engine will match the first possible way to accept the current character and proceed to the next one. If it then fails to match the next one, it will backtrack and see if there was another way to digest the previous character. If it goes too far down the rabbit hole only to find out the string doesn’t match in the end, and if many characters have multiple valid regex paths, the number of backtracking steps can become very large, resulting in what is known as catastrophic backtracking.
Let's look at how our expression runs into this problem, using a shorter string: "ACCCX". While it seems fairly straightforward, there are still four different ways that the engine could match those three C's:
- CCC
- CC+C
- C+CC
- C+C+C.
The engine has to try each of those combinations to see if any of them potentially match against the expression. When you combine that with the other steps the engine must take, we can use RegEx 101 debugger to see the engine has to take a total of 38 steps before it can determine the string doesn't match.
From there, the number of steps the engine must use to validate a string just continues to grow.
String | Number of C's | Number of steps |
---|---|---|
ACCCX | 3 | 38 |
ACCCCX | 4 | 71 |
ACCCCCX | 5 | 136 |
ACCCCCCCCCCCCCCX | 14 | 65,553 |
By the time the string includes 14 C's, the engine has to take over 65,000 steps just to see if the string is valid. These extreme situations can cause them to work very slowly (exponentially related to input size, as shown above), allowing an attacker to exploit this and can cause the service to excessively consume CPU, resulting in a Denial of Service.
Remediation
Upgrade set-value
to version 2.0.1, 3.0.1 or higher.
References
medium severity
- Vulnerable module: glob-parent
- Introduced through: update@0.3.6
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › export-files@1.3.0 › micromatch@2.3.11 › parse-glob@3.0.4 › glob-base@0.3.0 › glob-parent@2.0.0
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › array-intersection@0.1.2 › filter-array@0.2.0 › micromatch@2.3.11 › parse-glob@3.0.4 › glob-base@0.3.0 › glob-parent@2.0.0
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › export-files@1.3.0 › micromatch@2.3.11 › parse-glob@3.0.4 › glob-base@0.3.0 › glob-parent@2.0.0
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › template-utils@0.5.1 › export-files@1.3.0 › micromatch@2.3.11 › parse-glob@3.0.4 › glob-base@0.3.0 › glob-parent@2.0.0
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › helper-apidocs@0.4.1 › template-utils@0.5.1 › export-files@1.3.0 › micromatch@2.3.11 › parse-glob@3.0.4 › glob-base@0.3.0 › glob-parent@2.0.0
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › update-banner@0.1.1 › load-pkg@1.3.0 › cwd@0.7.0 › look-up@0.7.2 › micromatch@2.3.11 › parse-glob@3.0.4 › glob-base@0.3.0 › glob-parent@2.0.0
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › update-package@0.2.0 › load-pkg@1.3.0 › cwd@0.7.0 › look-up@0.7.2 › micromatch@2.3.11 › parse-glob@3.0.4 › glob-base@0.3.0 › glob-parent@2.0.0
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › helper-related@0.1.0 › get-pkgs@0.2.3 › filter-object@2.1.0 › filter-keys@1.1.0 › micromatch@2.3.11 › parse-glob@3.0.4 › glob-base@0.3.0 › glob-parent@2.0.0
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › helper-related@0.1.0 › get-pkgs@0.2.3 › filter-object@2.1.0 › filter-values@0.4.1 › is-match@0.4.1 › micromatch@2.3.11 › parse-glob@3.0.4 › glob-base@0.3.0 › glob-parent@2.0.0
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › micromatch@1.6.2 › parse-glob@2.1.1 › glob-base@0.1.1 › glob-parent@1.3.0
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › micromatch@1.6.2 › parse-glob@2.1.1 › glob-base@0.1.1 › glob-parent@1.3.0
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › micromatch@1.6.2 › extglob@0.2.0 › micromatch@1.6.2 › parse-glob@2.1.1 › glob-base@0.1.1 › glob-parent@1.3.0
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › micromatch@1.6.2 › regex-cache@0.3.0 › micromatch@1.6.2 › parse-glob@2.1.1 › glob-base@0.1.1 › glob-parent@1.3.0
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › micromatch@1.6.2 › extglob@0.2.0 › micromatch@1.6.2 › parse-glob@2.1.1 › glob-base@0.1.1 › glob-parent@1.3.0
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › micromatch@1.6.2 › regex-cache@0.3.0 › micromatch@1.6.2 › parse-glob@2.1.1 › glob-base@0.1.1 › glob-parent@1.3.0
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › load-plugins@1.0.2 › resolve-dep@0.5.4 › micromatch@1.6.2 › parse-glob@2.1.1 › glob-base@0.1.1 › glob-parent@1.3.0
Overview
glob-parent is a package that helps extracting the non-magic parent path from a glob string.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Regular Expression Denial of Service (ReDoS). The enclosure
regex used to check for strings ending in enclosure containing path separator.
PoC by Yeting Li
var globParent = require("glob-parent")
function build_attack(n) {
var ret = "{"
for (var i = 0; i < n; i++) {
ret += "/"
}
return ret;
}
globParent(build_attack(5000));
Details
Denial of Service (DoS) describes a family of attacks, all aimed at making a system inaccessible to its original and legitimate users. There are many types of DoS attacks, ranging from trying to clog the network pipes to the system by generating a large volume of traffic from many machines (a Distributed Denial of Service - DDoS - attack) to sending crafted requests that cause a system to crash or take a disproportional amount of time to process.
The Regular expression Denial of Service (ReDoS) is a type of Denial of Service attack. Regular expressions are incredibly powerful, but they aren't very intuitive and can ultimately end up making it easy for attackers to take your site down.
Let’s take the following regular expression as an example:
regex = /A(B|C+)+D/
This regular expression accomplishes the following:
A
The string must start with the letter 'A'(B|C+)+
The string must then follow the letter A with either the letter 'B' or some number of occurrences of the letter 'C' (the+
matches one or more times). The+
at the end of this section states that we can look for one or more matches of this section.D
Finally, we ensure this section of the string ends with a 'D'
The expression would match inputs such as ABBD
, ABCCCCD
, ABCBCCCD
and ACCCCCD
It most cases, it doesn't take very long for a regex engine to find a match:
$ time node -e '/A(B|C+)+D/.test("ACCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCD")'
0.04s user 0.01s system 95% cpu 0.052 total
$ time node -e '/A(B|C+)+D/.test("ACCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCX")'
1.79s user 0.02s system 99% cpu 1.812 total
The entire process of testing it against a 30 characters long string takes around ~52ms. But when given an invalid string, it takes nearly two seconds to complete the test, over ten times as long as it took to test a valid string. The dramatic difference is due to the way regular expressions get evaluated.
Most Regex engines will work very similarly (with minor differences). The engine will match the first possible way to accept the current character and proceed to the next one. If it then fails to match the next one, it will backtrack and see if there was another way to digest the previous character. If it goes too far down the rabbit hole only to find out the string doesn’t match in the end, and if many characters have multiple valid regex paths, the number of backtracking steps can become very large, resulting in what is known as catastrophic backtracking.
Let's look at how our expression runs into this problem, using a shorter string: "ACCCX". While it seems fairly straightforward, there are still four different ways that the engine could match those three C's:
- CCC
- CC+C
- C+CC
- C+C+C.
The engine has to try each of those combinations to see if any of them potentially match against the expression. When you combine that with the other steps the engine must take, we can use RegEx 101 debugger to see the engine has to take a total of 38 steps before it can determine the string doesn't match.
From there, the number of steps the engine must use to validate a string just continues to grow.
String | Number of C's | Number of steps |
---|---|---|
ACCCX | 3 | 38 |
ACCCCX | 4 | 71 |
ACCCCCX | 5 | 136 |
ACCCCCCCCCCCCCCX | 14 | 65,553 |
By the time the string includes 14 C's, the engine has to take over 65,000 steps just to see if the string is valid. These extreme situations can cause them to work very slowly (exponentially related to input size, as shown above), allowing an attacker to exploit this and can cause the service to excessively consume CPU, resulting in a Denial of Service.
Remediation
There is no fixed version for glob-parent
.
References
medium severity
- Vulnerable module: lodash
- Introduced through: update@0.3.6
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › update-banner@0.1.1 › lodash@3.10.1Remediation: Upgrade to update@0.4.0.
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › update-license@0.3.0 › lodash@3.10.1
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › engine-lodash@0.5.0 › lodash@3.10.1
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › helper-resolve@0.2.0 › lodash@3.10.1
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › template@0.10.2 › engine-lodash@0.5.0 › lodash@3.10.1
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › helper-apidocs@0.4.1 › helper-resolve@0.1.2 › lodash@3.10.1Remediation: Upgrade to update@0.4.0.
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › helper-apidocs@0.4.1 › js-comments@0.3.9 › lodash@3.10.1
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › helper-license@0.1.3 › lodash@2.4.2
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › template@0.10.2 › en-route@0.4.0 › lodash@2.4.2Remediation: Upgrade to update@0.4.0.
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › template@0.10.2 › helper-cache@0.5.2 › lodash@2.4.2Remediation: Upgrade to update@0.4.0.
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › template@0.10.2 › engine-cache@0.9.0 › helper-cache@0.5.2 › lodash@2.4.2Remediation: Upgrade to update@0.4.0.
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › template@0.10.2 › load-templates@0.5.3 › option-cache@0.1.4 › lodash@2.4.2Remediation: Upgrade to update@0.4.0.
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › load-plugins@1.0.2 › resolve-dep@0.5.4 › cwd@0.3.7 › findup-sync@0.1.3 › lodash@2.4.2
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › helper-apidocs@0.4.1 › js-comments@0.3.9 › parse-comments@0.3.4 › code-context@0.2.3 › extract-comments@0.4.2 › lodash@2.4.2
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › template@0.10.2 › config-cache@1.3.2 › expander@0.3.3 › lodash@2.2.1
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › vinyl-fs@0.3.14 › glob-watcher@0.0.6 › gaze@0.5.2 › globule@0.1.0 › lodash@1.0.2
Overview
lodash is a modern JavaScript utility library delivering modularity, performance, & extras.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Prototype Pollution. The function zipObjectDeep
can be tricked into adding or modifying properties of the Object prototype. These properties will be present on all objects.
PoC
const _ = require('lodash');
_.zipObjectDeep(['__proto__.z'],[123])
console.log(z) // 123
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
How to prevent
- Freeze the prototype— use
Object.freeze (Object.prototype)
. - Require schema validation of JSON input.
- Avoid using unsafe recursive merge functions.
- Consider using objects without prototypes (for example,
Object.create(null)
), breaking the prototype chain and preventing pollution. - As a best practice use
Map
instead ofObject
.
For more information on this vulnerability type:
Arteau, Oliver. “JavaScript prototype pollution attack in NodeJS application.” GitHub, 26 May 2018
Remediation
Upgrade lodash
to version 4.17.16 or higher.
References
medium severity
- Vulnerable module: lodash
- Introduced through: update@0.3.6
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › update-banner@0.1.1 › lodash@3.10.1Remediation: Upgrade to update@0.4.0.
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › update-license@0.3.0 › lodash@3.10.1Remediation: Open PR to patch lodash@3.10.1.
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › engine-lodash@0.5.0 › lodash@3.10.1Remediation: Open PR to patch lodash@3.10.1.
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › helper-resolve@0.2.0 › lodash@3.10.1Remediation: Open PR to patch lodash@3.10.1.
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › template@0.10.2 › engine-lodash@0.5.0 › lodash@3.10.1Remediation: Open PR to patch lodash@3.10.1.
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › helper-apidocs@0.4.1 › helper-resolve@0.1.2 › lodash@3.10.1Remediation: Upgrade to update@0.4.0.
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › helper-apidocs@0.4.1 › js-comments@0.3.9 › lodash@3.10.1Remediation: Open PR to patch lodash@3.10.1.
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › helper-license@0.1.3 › lodash@2.4.2
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › template@0.10.2 › en-route@0.4.0 › lodash@2.4.2Remediation: Upgrade to update@0.4.0.
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › template@0.10.2 › helper-cache@0.5.2 › lodash@2.4.2Remediation: Upgrade to update@0.4.0.
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › template@0.10.2 › engine-cache@0.9.0 › helper-cache@0.5.2 › lodash@2.4.2Remediation: Upgrade to update@0.4.0.
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › template@0.10.2 › load-templates@0.5.3 › option-cache@0.1.4 › lodash@2.4.2Remediation: Upgrade to update@0.4.0.
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › load-plugins@1.0.2 › resolve-dep@0.5.4 › cwd@0.3.7 › findup-sync@0.1.3 › lodash@2.4.2
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › helper-apidocs@0.4.1 › js-comments@0.3.9 › parse-comments@0.3.4 › code-context@0.2.3 › extract-comments@0.4.2 › lodash@2.4.2
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › template@0.10.2 › config-cache@1.3.2 › expander@0.3.3 › lodash@2.2.1
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › vinyl-fs@0.3.14 › glob-watcher@0.0.6 › gaze@0.5.2 › globule@0.1.0 › lodash@1.0.2
Overview
lodash is a modern JavaScript utility library delivering modularity, performance, & extras.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Prototype Pollution. The utilities function allow modification of the Object
prototype. If an attacker can control part of the structure passed to this function, they could add or modify an existing property.
PoC by Olivier Arteau (HoLyVieR)
var _= require('lodash');
var malicious_payload = '{"__proto__":{"oops":"It works !"}}';
var a = {};
console.log("Before : " + a.oops);
_.merge({}, JSON.parse(malicious_payload));
console.log("After : " + a.oops);
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
How to prevent
- Freeze the prototype— use
Object.freeze (Object.prototype)
. - Require schema validation of JSON input.
- Avoid using unsafe recursive merge functions.
- Consider using objects without prototypes (for example,
Object.create(null)
), breaking the prototype chain and preventing pollution. - As a best practice use
Map
instead ofObject
.
For more information on this vulnerability type:
Arteau, Oliver. “JavaScript prototype pollution attack in NodeJS application.” GitHub, 26 May 2018
Remediation
Upgrade lodash
to version 4.17.5 or higher.
References
medium severity
new
- Vulnerable module: lodash
- Introduced through: update@0.3.6
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › update-banner@0.1.1 › lodash@3.10.1Remediation: Upgrade to update@0.4.0.
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › update-license@0.3.0 › lodash@3.10.1
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › engine-lodash@0.5.0 › lodash@3.10.1
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › helper-resolve@0.2.0 › lodash@3.10.1
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › template@0.10.2 › engine-lodash@0.5.0 › lodash@3.10.1
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › helper-apidocs@0.4.1 › helper-resolve@0.1.2 › lodash@3.10.1Remediation: Upgrade to update@0.4.0.
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › helper-apidocs@0.4.1 › js-comments@0.3.9 › lodash@3.10.1
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › helper-license@0.1.3 › lodash@2.4.2
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › template@0.10.2 › en-route@0.4.0 › lodash@2.4.2Remediation: Upgrade to update@0.4.0.
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › template@0.10.2 › helper-cache@0.5.2 › lodash@2.4.2Remediation: Upgrade to update@0.4.0.
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › template@0.10.2 › engine-cache@0.9.0 › helper-cache@0.5.2 › lodash@2.4.2Remediation: Upgrade to update@0.4.0.
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › template@0.10.2 › load-templates@0.5.3 › option-cache@0.1.4 › lodash@2.4.2Remediation: Upgrade to update@0.4.0.
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › load-plugins@1.0.2 › resolve-dep@0.5.4 › cwd@0.3.7 › findup-sync@0.1.3 › lodash@2.4.2
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › helper-apidocs@0.4.1 › js-comments@0.3.9 › parse-comments@0.3.4 › code-context@0.2.3 › extract-comments@0.4.2 › lodash@2.4.2
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › template@0.10.2 › config-cache@1.3.2 › expander@0.3.3 › lodash@2.2.1
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › vinyl-fs@0.3.14 › glob-watcher@0.0.6 › gaze@0.5.2 › globule@0.1.0 › lodash@1.0.2
Overview
lodash is a modern JavaScript utility library delivering modularity, performance, & extras.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Regular Expression Denial of Service (ReDoS) via the toNumber
, trim
and trimEnd
functions.
POC
var lo = require('lodash');
function build_blank (n) {
var ret = "1"
for (var i = 0; i < n; i++) {
ret += " "
}
return ret + "1";
}
var s = build_blank(50000)
var time0 = Date.now();
lo.trim(s)
var time_cost0 = Date.now() - time0;
console.log("time_cost0: " + time_cost0)
var time1 = Date.now();
lo.toNumber(s)
var time_cost1 = Date.now() - time1;
console.log("time_cost1: " + time_cost1)
var time2 = Date.now();
lo.trimEnd(s)
var time_cost2 = Date.now() - time2;
console.log("time_cost2: " + time_cost2)
Details
Denial of Service (DoS) describes a family of attacks, all aimed at making a system inaccessible to its original and legitimate users. There are many types of DoS attacks, ranging from trying to clog the network pipes to the system by generating a large volume of traffic from many machines (a Distributed Denial of Service - DDoS - attack) to sending crafted requests that cause a system to crash or take a disproportional amount of time to process.
The Regular expression Denial of Service (ReDoS) is a type of Denial of Service attack. Regular expressions are incredibly powerful, but they aren't very intuitive and can ultimately end up making it easy for attackers to take your site down.
Let’s take the following regular expression as an example:
regex = /A(B|C+)+D/
This regular expression accomplishes the following:
A
The string must start with the letter 'A'(B|C+)+
The string must then follow the letter A with either the letter 'B' or some number of occurrences of the letter 'C' (the+
matches one or more times). The+
at the end of this section states that we can look for one or more matches of this section.D
Finally, we ensure this section of the string ends with a 'D'
The expression would match inputs such as ABBD
, ABCCCCD
, ABCBCCCD
and ACCCCCD
It most cases, it doesn't take very long for a regex engine to find a match:
$ time node -e '/A(B|C+)+D/.test("ACCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCD")'
0.04s user 0.01s system 95% cpu 0.052 total
$ time node -e '/A(B|C+)+D/.test("ACCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCX")'
1.79s user 0.02s system 99% cpu 1.812 total
The entire process of testing it against a 30 characters long string takes around ~52ms. But when given an invalid string, it takes nearly two seconds to complete the test, over ten times as long as it took to test a valid string. The dramatic difference is due to the way regular expressions get evaluated.
Most Regex engines will work very similarly (with minor differences). The engine will match the first possible way to accept the current character and proceed to the next one. If it then fails to match the next one, it will backtrack and see if there was another way to digest the previous character. If it goes too far down the rabbit hole only to find out the string doesn’t match in the end, and if many characters have multiple valid regex paths, the number of backtracking steps can become very large, resulting in what is known as catastrophic backtracking.
Let's look at how our expression runs into this problem, using a shorter string: "ACCCX". While it seems fairly straightforward, there are still four different ways that the engine could match those three C's:
- CCC
- CC+C
- C+CC
- C+C+C.
The engine has to try each of those combinations to see if any of them potentially match against the expression. When you combine that with the other steps the engine must take, we can use RegEx 101 debugger to see the engine has to take a total of 38 steps before it can determine the string doesn't match.
From there, the number of steps the engine must use to validate a string just continues to grow.
String | Number of C's | Number of steps |
---|---|---|
ACCCX | 3 | 38 |
ACCCCX | 4 | 71 |
ACCCCCX | 5 | 136 |
ACCCCCCCCCCCCCCX | 14 | 65,553 |
By the time the string includes 14 C's, the engine has to take over 65,000 steps just to see if the string is valid. These extreme situations can cause them to work very slowly (exponentially related to input size, as shown above), allowing an attacker to exploit this and can cause the service to excessively consume CPU, resulting in a Denial of Service.
Remediation
Upgrade lodash
to version 4.17.21 or higher.
References
medium severity
- Vulnerable module: lodash
- Introduced through: update@0.3.6
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › update-banner@0.1.1 › lodash@3.10.1Remediation: Upgrade to update@0.4.0.
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › update-license@0.3.0 › lodash@3.10.1
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › engine-lodash@0.5.0 › lodash@3.10.1
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › helper-resolve@0.2.0 › lodash@3.10.1
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › template@0.10.2 › engine-lodash@0.5.0 › lodash@3.10.1
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › helper-apidocs@0.4.1 › helper-resolve@0.1.2 › lodash@3.10.1Remediation: Upgrade to update@0.4.0.
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › helper-apidocs@0.4.1 › js-comments@0.3.9 › lodash@3.10.1
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › helper-license@0.1.3 › lodash@2.4.2
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › template@0.10.2 › en-route@0.4.0 › lodash@2.4.2Remediation: Upgrade to update@0.4.0.
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › template@0.10.2 › helper-cache@0.5.2 › lodash@2.4.2Remediation: Upgrade to update@0.4.0.
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › template@0.10.2 › engine-cache@0.9.0 › helper-cache@0.5.2 › lodash@2.4.2Remediation: Upgrade to update@0.4.0.
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › template@0.10.2 › load-templates@0.5.3 › option-cache@0.1.4 › lodash@2.4.2Remediation: Upgrade to update@0.4.0.
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › load-plugins@1.0.2 › resolve-dep@0.5.4 › cwd@0.3.7 › findup-sync@0.1.3 › lodash@2.4.2
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › helper-apidocs@0.4.1 › js-comments@0.3.9 › parse-comments@0.3.4 › code-context@0.2.3 › extract-comments@0.4.2 › lodash@2.4.2
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › template@0.10.2 › config-cache@1.3.2 › expander@0.3.3 › lodash@2.2.1
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › vinyl-fs@0.3.14 › glob-watcher@0.0.6 › gaze@0.5.2 › globule@0.1.0 › lodash@1.0.2
Overview
lodash is a modern JavaScript utility library delivering modularity, performance, & extras.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Regular Expression Denial of Service (ReDoS). It parses dates using regex strings, which may cause a slowdown of 2 seconds per 50k characters.
Details
Denial of Service (DoS) describes a family of attacks, all aimed at making a system inaccessible to its original and legitimate users. There are many types of DoS attacks, ranging from trying to clog the network pipes to the system by generating a large volume of traffic from many machines (a Distributed Denial of Service - DDoS - attack) to sending crafted requests that cause a system to crash or take a disproportional amount of time to process.
The Regular expression Denial of Service (ReDoS) is a type of Denial of Service attack. Regular expressions are incredibly powerful, but they aren't very intuitive and can ultimately end up making it easy for attackers to take your site down.
Let’s take the following regular expression as an example:
regex = /A(B|C+)+D/
This regular expression accomplishes the following:
A
The string must start with the letter 'A'(B|C+)+
The string must then follow the letter A with either the letter 'B' or some number of occurrences of the letter 'C' (the+
matches one or more times). The+
at the end of this section states that we can look for one or more matches of this section.D
Finally, we ensure this section of the string ends with a 'D'
The expression would match inputs such as ABBD
, ABCCCCD
, ABCBCCCD
and ACCCCCD
It most cases, it doesn't take very long for a regex engine to find a match:
$ time node -e '/A(B|C+)+D/.test("ACCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCD")'
0.04s user 0.01s system 95% cpu 0.052 total
$ time node -e '/A(B|C+)+D/.test("ACCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCX")'
1.79s user 0.02s system 99% cpu 1.812 total
The entire process of testing it against a 30 characters long string takes around ~52ms. But when given an invalid string, it takes nearly two seconds to complete the test, over ten times as long as it took to test a valid string. The dramatic difference is due to the way regular expressions get evaluated.
Most Regex engines will work very similarly (with minor differences). The engine will match the first possible way to accept the current character and proceed to the next one. If it then fails to match the next one, it will backtrack and see if there was another way to digest the previous character. If it goes too far down the rabbit hole only to find out the string doesn’t match in the end, and if many characters have multiple valid regex paths, the number of backtracking steps can become very large, resulting in what is known as catastrophic backtracking.
Let's look at how our expression runs into this problem, using a shorter string: "ACCCX". While it seems fairly straightforward, there are still four different ways that the engine could match those three C's:
- CCC
- CC+C
- C+CC
- C+C+C.
The engine has to try each of those combinations to see if any of them potentially match against the expression. When you combine that with the other steps the engine must take, we can use RegEx 101 debugger to see the engine has to take a total of 38 steps before it can determine the string doesn't match.
From there, the number of steps the engine must use to validate a string just continues to grow.
String | Number of C's | Number of steps |
---|---|---|
ACCCX | 3 | 38 |
ACCCCX | 4 | 71 |
ACCCCCX | 5 | 136 |
ACCCCCCCCCCCCCCX | 14 | 65,553 |
By the time the string includes 14 C's, the engine has to take over 65,000 steps just to see if the string is valid. These extreme situations can cause them to work very slowly (exponentially related to input size, as shown above), allowing an attacker to exploit this and can cause the service to excessively consume CPU, resulting in a Denial of Service.
Remediation
Upgrade lodash
to version 4.17.11 or higher.
References
medium severity
- Vulnerable module: merge-deep
- Introduced through: update@0.3.6
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › merge-deep@1.0.3Remediation: Upgrade to update@0.4.0.
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › merge-deep@1.0.3Remediation: Upgrade to update@0.4.0.
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › helper-copyright@1.4.0 › merge-deep@1.0.3
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › update-package@0.2.0 › merge-deep@0.1.5
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › template-utils@0.5.1 › merge-deep@0.1.5Remediation: Upgrade to update@0.4.0.
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › helper-apidocs@0.4.1 › template-utils@0.5.1 › merge-deep@0.1.5Remediation: Upgrade to update@0.4.0.
Overview
merge-deep is a recursively merges values in a javascript object.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Prototype Pollution
via merging functions. These functions allows a malicious user to modify the prototype of Object
via __proto__
, causing the addition or modification of an existing property that will exist on all objects.
PoC by Olivier Arteau (HoLyVieR)
The simplest test case to reproduce the issue is the following code snippet. In the code snippet, "malicious_payload" would come from an endpoint which accepts JSON data.
var merge = require('merge-deep');
var malicious_payload = '{"__proto__":{"oops":"It works !"}}';
var a = {};
console.log("Before : " + a.oops);
merge({}, JSON.parse(malicious_payload));
console.log("After : " + a.oops);
This shows that an attacker can add attributes to all existing object on the server. Additional attribute can be used to change the execution code flow or cause error on every subsequent request by replacing "toString" or "valueOf".
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
How to prevent
- Freeze the prototype— use
Object.freeze (Object.prototype)
. - Require schema validation of JSON input.
- Avoid using unsafe recursive merge functions.
- Consider using objects without prototypes (for example,
Object.create(null)
), breaking the prototype chain and preventing pollution. - As a best practice use
Map
instead ofObject
.
For more information on this vulnerability type:
Arteau, Oliver. “JavaScript prototype pollution attack in NodeJS application.” GitHub, 26 May 2018
Remediation
Upgrade merge-deep
to version 3.0.1 or higher.
References
low severity
- Vulnerable module: braces
- Introduced through: update@0.3.6
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › micromatch@1.6.2 › braces@1.8.5Remediation: Upgrade to update@0.5.0.
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › export-files@1.3.0 › micromatch@2.3.11 › braces@1.8.5
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › micromatch@1.6.2 › braces@1.8.5
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › load-plugins@1.0.2 › braces@1.8.5Remediation: Upgrade to update@0.4.0.
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › array-intersection@0.1.2 › filter-array@0.2.0 › micromatch@2.3.11 › braces@1.8.5
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › export-files@1.3.0 › micromatch@2.3.11 › braces@1.8.5Remediation: Upgrade to update@0.4.0.
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › micromatch@1.6.2 › extglob@0.2.0 › micromatch@1.6.2 › braces@1.8.5Remediation: Upgrade to update@0.5.0.
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › micromatch@1.6.2 › regex-cache@0.3.0 › micromatch@1.6.2 › braces@1.8.5Remediation: Upgrade to update@0.5.0.
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › template-utils@0.5.1 › export-files@1.3.0 › micromatch@2.3.11 › braces@1.8.5Remediation: Upgrade to update@0.4.0.
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › micromatch@1.6.2 › extglob@0.2.0 › micromatch@1.6.2 › braces@1.8.5Remediation: Upgrade to update@0.4.0.
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › micromatch@1.6.2 › regex-cache@0.3.0 › micromatch@1.6.2 › braces@1.8.5Remediation: Upgrade to update@0.4.0.
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › load-plugins@1.0.2 › resolve-dep@0.5.4 › micromatch@1.6.2 › braces@1.8.5
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › helper-apidocs@0.4.1 › template-utils@0.5.1 › export-files@1.3.0 › micromatch@2.3.11 › braces@1.8.5Remediation: Upgrade to update@0.4.0.
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › update-banner@0.1.1 › load-pkg@1.3.0 › cwd@0.7.0 › look-up@0.7.2 › micromatch@2.3.11 › braces@1.8.5
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › update-package@0.2.0 › load-pkg@1.3.0 › cwd@0.7.0 › look-up@0.7.2 › micromatch@2.3.11 › braces@1.8.5
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › helper-related@0.1.0 › get-pkgs@0.2.3 › filter-object@2.1.0 › filter-keys@1.1.0 › micromatch@2.3.11 › braces@1.8.5
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › helper-related@0.1.0 › get-pkgs@0.2.3 › filter-object@2.1.0 › filter-values@0.4.1 › is-match@0.4.1 › micromatch@2.3.11 › braces@1.8.5
Overview
braces is a Bash-like brace expansion, implemented in JavaScript.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Regular Expression Denial of Service (ReDoS). It used a regular expression (^\{(,+(?:(\{,+\})*),*|,*(?:(\{,+\})*),+)\}
) in order to detects empty braces. This can cause an impact of about 10 seconds matching time for data 50K characters long.
Disclosure Timeline
- Feb 15th, 2018 - Initial Disclosure to package owner
- Feb 16th, 2018 - Initial Response from package owner
- Feb 18th, 2018 - Fix issued
- Feb 19th, 2018 - Vulnerability published
Details
Denial of Service (DoS) describes a family of attacks, all aimed at making a system inaccessible to its original and legitimate users. There are many types of DoS attacks, ranging from trying to clog the network pipes to the system by generating a large volume of traffic from many machines (a Distributed Denial of Service - DDoS - attack) to sending crafted requests that cause a system to crash or take a disproportional amount of time to process.
The Regular expression Denial of Service (ReDoS) is a type of Denial of Service attack. Regular expressions are incredibly powerful, but they aren't very intuitive and can ultimately end up making it easy for attackers to take your site down.
Let’s take the following regular expression as an example:
regex = /A(B|C+)+D/
This regular expression accomplishes the following:
A
The string must start with the letter 'A'(B|C+)+
The string must then follow the letter A with either the letter 'B' or some number of occurrences of the letter 'C' (the+
matches one or more times). The+
at the end of this section states that we can look for one or more matches of this section.D
Finally, we ensure this section of the string ends with a 'D'
The expression would match inputs such as ABBD
, ABCCCCD
, ABCBCCCD
and ACCCCCD
It most cases, it doesn't take very long for a regex engine to find a match:
$ time node -e '/A(B|C+)+D/.test("ACCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCD")'
0.04s user 0.01s system 95% cpu 0.052 total
$ time node -e '/A(B|C+)+D/.test("ACCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCX")'
1.79s user 0.02s system 99% cpu 1.812 total
The entire process of testing it against a 30 characters long string takes around ~52ms. But when given an invalid string, it takes nearly two seconds to complete the test, over ten times as long as it took to test a valid string. The dramatic difference is due to the way regular expressions get evaluated.
Most Regex engines will work very similarly (with minor differences). The engine will match the first possible way to accept the current character and proceed to the next one. If it then fails to match the next one, it will backtrack and see if there was another way to digest the previous character. If it goes too far down the rabbit hole only to find out the string doesn’t match in the end, and if many characters have multiple valid regex paths, the number of backtracking steps can become very large, resulting in what is known as catastrophic backtracking.
Let's look at how our expression runs into this problem, using a shorter string: "ACCCX". While it seems fairly straightforward, there are still four different ways that the engine could match those three C's:
- CCC
- CC+C
- C+CC
- C+C+C.
The engine has to try each of those combinations to see if any of them potentially match against the expression. When you combine that with the other steps the engine must take, we can use RegEx 101 debugger to see the engine has to take a total of 38 steps before it can determine the string doesn't match.
From there, the number of steps the engine must use to validate a string just continues to grow.
String | Number of C's | Number of steps |
---|---|---|
ACCCX | 3 | 38 |
ACCCCX | 4 | 71 |
ACCCCCX | 5 | 136 |
ACCCCCCCCCCCCCCX | 14 | 65,553 |
By the time the string includes 14 C's, the engine has to take over 65,000 steps just to see if the string is valid. These extreme situations can cause them to work very slowly (exponentially related to input size, as shown above), allowing an attacker to exploit this and can cause the service to excessively consume CPU, resulting in a Denial of Service.
Remediation
Upgrade braces
to version 2.3.1 or higher.
References
low severity
- Vulnerable module: debug
- Introduced through: update@0.3.6
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › template@0.10.2 › en-route@0.4.0 › debug@1.0.5Remediation: Upgrade to update@0.4.0.
Overview
debug
is a JavaScript debugging utility modelled after Node.js core's debugging technique..
debug
uses printf-style formatting. Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Regular expression Denial of Service (ReDoS) attacks via the the %o
formatter (Pretty-print an Object all on a single line). It used a regular expression (/\s*\n\s*/g
) in order to strip whitespaces and replace newlines with spaces, in order to join the data into a single line. This can cause a very low impact of about 2 seconds matching time for data 50k characters long.
Details
Denial of Service (DoS) describes a family of attacks, all aimed at making a system inaccessible to its original and legitimate users. There are many types of DoS attacks, ranging from trying to clog the network pipes to the system by generating a large volume of traffic from many machines (a Distributed Denial of Service - DDoS - attack) to sending crafted requests that cause a system to crash or take a disproportional amount of time to process.
The Regular expression Denial of Service (ReDoS) is a type of Denial of Service attack. Regular expressions are incredibly powerful, but they aren't very intuitive and can ultimately end up making it easy for attackers to take your site down.
Let’s take the following regular expression as an example:
regex = /A(B|C+)+D/
This regular expression accomplishes the following:
A
The string must start with the letter 'A'(B|C+)+
The string must then follow the letter A with either the letter 'B' or some number of occurrences of the letter 'C' (the+
matches one or more times). The+
at the end of this section states that we can look for one or more matches of this section.D
Finally, we ensure this section of the string ends with a 'D'
The expression would match inputs such as ABBD
, ABCCCCD
, ABCBCCCD
and ACCCCCD
It most cases, it doesn't take very long for a regex engine to find a match:
$ time node -e '/A(B|C+)+D/.test("ACCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCD")'
0.04s user 0.01s system 95% cpu 0.052 total
$ time node -e '/A(B|C+)+D/.test("ACCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCX")'
1.79s user 0.02s system 99% cpu 1.812 total
The entire process of testing it against a 30 characters long string takes around ~52ms. But when given an invalid string, it takes nearly two seconds to complete the test, over ten times as long as it took to test a valid string. The dramatic difference is due to the way regular expressions get evaluated.
Most Regex engines will work very similarly (with minor differences). The engine will match the first possible way to accept the current character and proceed to the next one. If it then fails to match the next one, it will backtrack and see if there was another way to digest the previous character. If it goes too far down the rabbit hole only to find out the string doesn’t match in the end, and if many characters have multiple valid regex paths, the number of backtracking steps can become very large, resulting in what is known as catastrophic backtracking.
Let's look at how our expression runs into this problem, using a shorter string: "ACCCX". While it seems fairly straightforward, there are still four different ways that the engine could match those three C's:
- CCC
- CC+C
- C+CC
- C+C+C.
The engine has to try each of those combinations to see if any of them potentially match against the expression. When you combine that with the other steps the engine must take, we can use RegEx 101 debugger to see the engine has to take a total of 38 steps before it can determine the string doesn't match.
From there, the number of steps the engine must use to validate a string just continues to grow.
String | Number of C's | Number of steps |
---|---|---|
ACCCX | 3 | 38 |
ACCCCX | 4 | 71 |
ACCCCCX | 5 | 136 |
ACCCCCCCCCCCCCCX | 14 | 65,553 |
By the time the string includes 14 C's, the engine has to take over 65,000 steps just to see if the string is valid. These extreme situations can cause them to work very slowly (exponentially related to input size, as shown above), allowing an attacker to exploit this and can cause the service to excessively consume CPU, resulting in a Denial of Service.
Remediation
Upgrade debug
to version 2.6.9, 3.1.0 or higher.
References
low severity
- Vulnerable module: git-username
- Introduced through: update@0.3.6
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › git-username@0.4.0Remediation: Upgrade to update@0.4.0.
Overview
git-username
is a package that gets the username from a git remote origin URL.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Regular Expression Denial of Service (ReDoS) attacks. This can cause an impact of about 10 seconds matching time for data 43K characters long.
Disclosure Timeline
- Feb 22th, 2018 - Initial Disclosure to package owner
- Feb 22th, 2018 - Initial Response by package owner
- Feb 22th, 2018 - Fixed Issue
- Feb 26th, 2018 - Vulnerability published
Details
Denial of Service (DoS) describes a family of attacks, all aimed at making a system inaccessible to its original and legitimate users. There are many types of DoS attacks, ranging from trying to clog the network pipes to the system by generating a large volume of traffic from many machines (a Distributed Denial of Service - DDoS - attack) to sending crafted requests that cause a system to crash or take a disproportional amount of time to process.
The Regular expression Denial of Service (ReDoS) is a type of Denial of Service attack. Regular expressions are incredibly powerful, but they aren't very intuitive and can ultimately end up making it easy for attackers to take your site down.
Let’s take the following regular expression as an example:
regex = /A(B|C+)+D/
This regular expression accomplishes the following:
A
The string must start with the letter 'A'(B|C+)+
The string must then follow the letter A with either the letter 'B' or some number of occurrences of the letter 'C' (the+
matches one or more times). The+
at the end of this section states that we can look for one or more matches of this section.D
Finally, we ensure this section of the string ends with a 'D'
The expression would match inputs such as ABBD
, ABCCCCD
, ABCBCCCD
and ACCCCCD
It most cases, it doesn't take very long for a regex engine to find a match:
$ time node -e '/A(B|C+)+D/.test("ACCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCD")'
0.04s user 0.01s system 95% cpu 0.052 total
$ time node -e '/A(B|C+)+D/.test("ACCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCX")'
1.79s user 0.02s system 99% cpu 1.812 total
The entire process of testing it against a 30 characters long string takes around ~52ms. But when given an invalid string, it takes nearly two seconds to complete the test, over ten times as long as it took to test a valid string. The dramatic difference is due to the way regular expressions get evaluated.
Most Regex engines will work very similarly (with minor differences). The engine will match the first possible way to accept the current character and proceed to the next one. If it then fails to match the next one, it will backtrack and see if there was another way to digest the previous character. If it goes too far down the rabbit hole only to find out the string doesn’t match in the end, and if many characters have multiple valid regex paths, the number of backtracking steps can become very large, resulting in what is known as catastrophic backtracking.
Let's look at how our expression runs into this problem, using a shorter string: "ACCCX". While it seems fairly straightforward, there are still four different ways that the engine could match those three C's:
- CCC
- CC+C
- C+CC
- C+C+C.
The engine has to try each of those combinations to see if any of them potentially match against the expression. When you combine that with the other steps the engine must take, we can use RegEx 101 debugger to see the engine has to take a total of 38 steps before it can determine the string doesn't match.
From there, the number of steps the engine must use to validate a string just continues to grow.
String | Number of C's | Number of steps |
---|---|---|
ACCCX | 3 | 38 |
ACCCCX | 4 | 71 |
ACCCCCX | 5 | 136 |
ACCCCCCCCCCCCCCX | 14 | 65,553 |
By the time the string includes 14 C's, the engine has to take over 65,000 steps just to see if the string is valid. These extreme situations can cause them to work very slowly (exponentially related to input size, as shown above), allowing an attacker to exploit this and can cause the service to excessively consume CPU, resulting in a Denial of Service.
Remediation
Update git-username
to version 0.5.1 or higher.
References
low severity
- Vulnerable module: mixin-deep
- Introduced through: update@0.3.6
Detailed paths
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › template@0.10.2 › mixin-deep@0.1.0Remediation: Upgrade to update@0.4.0.
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › engine-lodash@0.5.0 › delims@0.4.2 › mixin-deep@0.1.0
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › template@0.10.2 › engine-lodash@0.5.0 › delims@0.4.2 › mixin-deep@0.1.0
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › template-utils@0.5.1 › escape-delims@0.4.0 › delims@0.4.2 › mixin-deep@0.1.0
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › helper-apidocs@0.4.1 › template-utils@0.5.1 › escape-delims@0.4.0 › delims@0.4.2 › mixin-deep@0.1.0
-
Introduced through: quick-toolbar@1.0.1 › update@0.3.6 › verb@0.6.2 › helper-apidocs@0.4.1 › js-comments@0.3.9 › parse-comments@0.3.4 › code-context@0.2.3 › extract-comments@0.4.2 › mixin-deep@0.1.0
Overview
mixin-deep is a package that deeply mixes the properties of objects into the first object.
Affected versions of this package are vulnerable to Prototype Pollution
via merging functions. These functions allows a malicious user to modify the prototype of Object
via __proto__
, causing the addition or modification of an existing property that will exist on all objects.
PoC by Olivier Arteau (HoLyVieR)
The simplest test case to reproduce the issue is the following code snippet. In the code snippet, "malicious_payload" would come from an endpoint which accepts JSON data.
var merge = require('mixin-deep');
var malicious_payload = '{"__proto__":{"oops":"It works !"}}';
var a = {};
console.log("Before : " + a.oops);
merge({}, JSON.parse(malicious_payload));
console.log("After : " + a.oops);
This shows that an attacker can add attributes to all existing object on the server. Additional attribute can be used to change the execution code flow or cause error on every subsequent request by replacing "toString" or "valueOf".
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
How to prevent
- Freeze the prototype— use
Object.freeze (Object.prototype)
. - Require schema validation of JSON input.
- Avoid using unsafe recursive merge functions.
- Consider using objects without prototypes (for example,
Object.create(null)
), breaking the prototype chain and preventing pollution. - As a best practice use
Map
instead ofObject
.
For more information on this vulnerability type:
Arteau, Oliver. “JavaScript prototype pollution attack in NodeJS application.” GitHub, 26 May 2018
Remediation
Upgrade mixin-deep
to version 1.3.1 or higher.