Reino: Input Validation and Representation
Los problemas de validación y representación de entradas están causados por metacaracteres, codificaciones alternativas y representaciones numéricas. Los problemas de seguridad surgen de entradas en las que se confía. Estos problemas incluyen: «desbordamientos de búfer», ataques de «scripts de sitios», "SQL injection" y muchas otras acciones.
Denial of Service: Regular Expression
Abstract
Los datos que no son de confianza se transfieren a la aplicación y se utilizan como expresión regular. Esto puede ocasionar que el subproceso consuma de forma excesiva recursos de CPU.
Explanation
Hay una vulnerabilidad en las implementaciones de evaluadores de expresiones regulares y métodos relacionados que puede provocar que el subproceso se bloquee al evaluar expresiones regulares que contienen una expresión de agrupación repetida. Adicionalmente, los atacantes pueden explotar cualquier expresión regular que contenga subexpresiones alternativas que se solapen entre sí. Este defecto se puede utilizar para ejecutar un ataque Denial of Service (DoS).
Ejemplo 1:
No hay implementaciones de expresiones regulares conocidas que sean inmunes a esta vulnerabilidad. Todas las plataformas y los lenguajes son vulnerables a este ataque.
Ejemplo 1:
(e+)+
([a-zA-Z]+)*
(e|ee)+
No hay implementaciones de expresiones regulares conocidas que sean inmunes a esta vulnerabilidad. Todas las plataformas y los lenguajes son vulnerables a este ataque.
References
[1] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 185, CWE ID 730
[2] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-001094, CCI-001310
[3] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 SC-5 Denial of Service Protection (P1), SI-10 Information Input Validation (P1)
[4] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SC-5 Denial of Service Protection, SI-10 Information Input Validation
[5] Standards Mapping - OWASP API 2023 API4 Unrestricted Resource Consumption
[6] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M4 Insufficient Input/Output Validation
[7] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CODE-4
[8] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A9 Application Denial of Service
[9] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.9
[10] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.6
[11] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.6
[12] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.6
[13] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.6
[14] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[15] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
[16] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection
[17] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation
[18] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective C.3.2 - Web Software Attack Mitigation
[19] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP6080 CAT II
[20] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP6080 CAT II
[21] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP6080 CAT II
[22] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP6080 CAT II
[23] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP6080 CAT II
[24] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP6080 CAT II
[25] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP6080 CAT II
[26] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[27] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[28] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[29] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[30] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[31] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[32] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[33] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[34] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[35] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[36] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[37] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II, APSC-DV-002530 CAT II
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II, APSC-DV-002530 CAT II
[41] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Denial of Service (WASC-10)
[42] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium 24 + 2 Denial of Service
desc.dataflow.abap.denial_of_service_regular_expression
Abstract
Los datos que no son de confianza se transfieren a la aplicación y se utilizan como expresión regular. Esto puede ocasionar que el subproceso consuma de forma excesiva recursos de CPU.
Explanation
Hay una vulnerabilidad en las implementaciones de evaluadores de expresiones regulares y métodos relacionados que puede provocar que el subproceso se cuelgue al evaluar expresiones regulares que contengan una expresión de agrupación que esté repetida. Adicionalmente, cualquier expresión regular que contenga subexpresiones alternativas que se solapen entre sí también se puede explotar. Este defecto se puede utilizar para ejecutar un ataque de denegación de servicio (DoS).
Ejemplo 1:
No hay implementaciones de expresiones regulares conocidas que sean inmunes a esta vulnerabilidad. Todas las plataformas y los lenguajes son vulnerables a este ataque.
Ejemplo 1:
(e+)+
([a-zA-Z]+)*
(e|ee)+
No hay implementaciones de expresiones regulares conocidas que sean inmunes a esta vulnerabilidad. Todas las plataformas y los lenguajes son vulnerables a este ataque.
References
[1] Microsoft Best Practices for Regular Expressions in the .NET Framework
[2] Bryan Sullivan Regular Expression Denial of Service Attacks and Defenses
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 185, CWE ID 730
[4] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-001094, CCI-001310
[5] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 SC-5 Denial of Service Protection (P1), SI-10 Information Input Validation (P1)
[6] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SC-5 Denial of Service Protection, SI-10 Information Input Validation
[7] Standards Mapping - OWASP API 2023 API4 Unrestricted Resource Consumption
[8] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M4 Insufficient Input/Output Validation
[9] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CODE-4
[10] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A9 Application Denial of Service
[11] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.9
[12] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.6
[13] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.6
[14] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.6
[15] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.6
[16] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[17] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
[18] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection
[19] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation
[20] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective C.3.2 - Web Software Attack Mitigation
[21] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP6080 CAT II
[22] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP6080 CAT II
[23] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP6080 CAT II
[24] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP6080 CAT II
[25] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP6080 CAT II
[26] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP6080 CAT II
[27] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP6080 CAT II
[28] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[29] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[30] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[31] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[32] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[33] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[34] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[35] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[36] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[37] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II, APSC-DV-002530 CAT II
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II, APSC-DV-002530 CAT II
[43] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Denial of Service (WASC-10)
[44] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium 24 + 2 Denial of Service
desc.dataflow.dotnet.denial_of_service_regular_expression
Abstract
Los datos que no son de confianza se transfieren a la aplicación y se utilizan como expresión regular. Esto puede ocasionar que el subproceso consuma de forma excesiva recursos de CPU.
Explanation
Hay una vulnerabilidad en las implementaciones de evaluadores de expresiones regulares y métodos relacionados que puede provocar que el subproceso se cuelgue al evaluar expresiones regulares que contengan una expresión de agrupación repetida. Adicionalmente, cualquier expresión regular que contenga subexpresiones alternativas que se solapen entre sí también se puede explotar. Este defecto se puede utilizar para ejecutar un ataque Denial of Service (DoS).
Ejemplo 1:
No hay implementaciones de expresiones regulares conocidas que sean inmunes a esta vulnerabilidad. Todas las plataformas y los lenguajes son vulnerables a este ataque.
Ejemplo 1:
(e+)+
([a-zA-Z]+)*
(e|ee)+
No hay implementaciones de expresiones regulares conocidas que sean inmunes a esta vulnerabilidad. Todas las plataformas y los lenguajes son vulnerables a este ataque.
References
[1] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 185, CWE ID 730
[2] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-001094, CCI-001310
[3] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 SC-5 Denial of Service Protection (P1), SI-10 Information Input Validation (P1)
[4] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SC-5 Denial of Service Protection, SI-10 Information Input Validation
[5] Standards Mapping - OWASP API 2023 API4 Unrestricted Resource Consumption
[6] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M4 Insufficient Input/Output Validation
[7] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CODE-4
[8] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A9 Application Denial of Service
[9] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.9
[10] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.6
[11] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.6
[12] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.6
[13] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.6
[14] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[15] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
[16] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection
[17] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation
[18] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective C.3.2 - Web Software Attack Mitigation
[19] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP6080 CAT II
[20] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP6080 CAT II
[21] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP6080 CAT II
[22] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP6080 CAT II
[23] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP6080 CAT II
[24] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP6080 CAT II
[25] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP6080 CAT II
[26] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[27] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[28] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[29] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[30] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[31] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[32] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[33] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[34] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[35] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[36] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[37] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II, APSC-DV-002530 CAT II
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II, APSC-DV-002530 CAT II
[41] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Denial of Service (WASC-10)
[42] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium 24 + 2 Denial of Service
desc.dataflow.dart.denial_of_service_regular_expression
Abstract
Los datos que no son de confianza se transfieren a la aplicación y se utilizan como expresión regular. Esto puede ocasionar que el subproceso consuma de forma excesiva recursos de CPU.
Explanation
Hay una vulnerabilidad en las implementaciones de evaluadores de expresiones regulares y métodos relacionados que puede provocar que el subproceso se bloquee al evaluar expresiones regulares que contienen una expresión de agrupación repetida. Adicionalmente, los atacantes pueden explotar cualquier expresión regular que contenga subexpresiones alternativas que se solapen entre sí. Este defecto se puede utilizar para ejecutar un ataque Denial of Service (DoS).
Ejemplo 1:
No hay implementaciones de expresiones regulares conocidas que sean inmunes a esta vulnerabilidad. Todas las plataformas y los lenguajes son vulnerables a este ataque.
Ejemplo 1:
(e+)+
([a-zA-Z]+)*
(e|ee)+
No hay implementaciones de expresiones regulares conocidas que sean inmunes a esta vulnerabilidad. Todas las plataformas y los lenguajes son vulnerables a este ataque.
References
[1] Bryan Sullivan Regular Expression Denial of Service Attacks and Defenses
[2] IDS08-J. Sanitize untrusted data included in a regular expression CERT
[3] DOS-1: Beware of activities that may use disproportionate resources Oracle
[4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 185, CWE ID 730
[5] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-001094, CCI-001310
[6] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 SC-5 Denial of Service Protection (P1), SI-10 Information Input Validation (P1)
[7] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SC-5 Denial of Service Protection, SI-10 Information Input Validation
[8] Standards Mapping - OWASP API 2023 API4 Unrestricted Resource Consumption
[9] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M4 Insufficient Input/Output Validation
[10] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CODE-4
[11] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A9 Application Denial of Service
[12] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.9
[13] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.6
[14] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.6
[15] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.6
[16] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.6
[17] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[18] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
[19] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection
[20] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation
[21] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective C.3.2 - Web Software Attack Mitigation
[22] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP6080 CAT II
[23] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP6080 CAT II
[24] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP6080 CAT II
[25] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP6080 CAT II
[26] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP6080 CAT II
[27] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP6080 CAT II
[28] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP6080 CAT II
[29] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[30] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[31] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[32] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[33] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[34] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[35] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[36] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[37] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II, APSC-DV-002530 CAT II
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II, APSC-DV-002530 CAT II
[44] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Denial of Service (WASC-10)
[45] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium 24 + 2 Denial of Service
desc.dataflow.golang.denial_of_service_regular_expression
Abstract
Los datos que no son de confianza se transfieren a la aplicación y se utilizan como expresión regular. Esto puede ocasionar que el subproceso consuma de forma excesiva recursos de CPU.
Explanation
Hay una vulnerabilidad en las implementaciones de evaluadores de expresiones regulares y métodos relacionados que puede provocar que el subproceso se cuelgue al evaluar expresiones regulares que contengan una expresión de agrupación que esté repetida. Adicionalmente, cualquier expresión regular que contenga subexpresiones alternativas que se solapen entre sí también se puede explotar. Este defecto se puede utilizar para ejecutar un ataque de denegación de servicio (DoS).
Ejemplo 1:
No hay implementaciones de expresiones regulares conocidas que sean inmunes a esta vulnerabilidad. Todas las plataformas y los lenguajes son vulnerables a este ataque.
Ejemplo 1:
(e+)+
([a-zA-Z]+)*
(e|ee)+
No hay implementaciones de expresiones regulares conocidas que sean inmunes a esta vulnerabilidad. Todas las plataformas y los lenguajes son vulnerables a este ataque.
References
[1] Bryan Sullivan Regular Expression Denial of Service Attacks and Defenses
[2] IDS08-J. Sanitize untrusted data included in a regular expression CERT
[3] DOS-1: Beware of activities that may use disproportionate resources Oracle
[4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 185, CWE ID 730
[5] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-001094, CCI-001310
[6] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 SC-5 Denial of Service Protection (P1), SI-10 Information Input Validation (P1)
[7] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SC-5 Denial of Service Protection, SI-10 Information Input Validation
[8] Standards Mapping - OWASP API 2023 API4 Unrestricted Resource Consumption
[9] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M4 Insufficient Input/Output Validation
[10] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CODE-4
[11] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A9 Application Denial of Service
[12] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.9
[13] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.6
[14] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.6
[15] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.6
[16] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.6
[17] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[18] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
[19] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection
[20] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation
[21] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective C.3.2 - Web Software Attack Mitigation
[22] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP6080 CAT II
[23] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP6080 CAT II
[24] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP6080 CAT II
[25] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP6080 CAT II
[26] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP6080 CAT II
[27] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP6080 CAT II
[28] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP6080 CAT II
[29] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[30] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[31] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[32] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[33] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[34] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[35] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[36] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[37] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II, APSC-DV-002530 CAT II
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II, APSC-DV-002530 CAT II
[44] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Denial of Service (WASC-10)
[45] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium 24 + 2 Denial of Service
desc.dataflow.java.denial_of_service_regular_expression
Abstract
Los datos que no son de confianza se transfieren a la aplicación y se utilizan como expresión regular. Esto puede ocasionar que el subproceso consuma de forma excesiva recursos de CPU.
Explanation
Hay una vulnerabilidad en las implementaciones de evaluadores de expresiones regulares y métodos relacionados que puede provocar que el subproceso se cuelgue al evaluar expresiones regulares que contengan una expresión de agrupación que esté repetida. Adicionalmente, cualquier expresión regular que contenga subexpresiones alternativas que se solapen entre sí también se puede explotar. Este defecto se puede utilizar para ejecutar un ataque de denegación de servicio (DoS).
Ejemplo 1:
No hay implementaciones de expresiones regulares conocidas que sean inmunes a esta vulnerabilidad. Todas las plataformas y los lenguajes son vulnerables a este ataque.
Ejemplo 1:
(e+)+
([a-zA-Z]+)*
(e|ee)+
No hay implementaciones de expresiones regulares conocidas que sean inmunes a esta vulnerabilidad. Todas las plataformas y los lenguajes son vulnerables a este ataque.
References
[1] Bryan Sullivan Regular Expression Denial of Service Attacks and Defenses
[2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 185, CWE ID 730
[3] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-001094, CCI-001310
[4] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 SC-5 Denial of Service Protection (P1), SI-10 Information Input Validation (P1)
[5] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SC-5 Denial of Service Protection, SI-10 Information Input Validation
[6] Standards Mapping - OWASP API 2023 API4 Unrestricted Resource Consumption
[7] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M4 Insufficient Input/Output Validation
[8] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CODE-4
[9] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A9 Application Denial of Service
[10] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.9
[11] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.6
[12] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.6
[13] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.6
[14] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.6
[15] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[16] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
[17] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection
[18] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation
[19] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective C.3.2 - Web Software Attack Mitigation
[20] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP6080 CAT II
[21] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP6080 CAT II
[22] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP6080 CAT II
[23] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP6080 CAT II
[24] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP6080 CAT II
[25] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP6080 CAT II
[26] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP6080 CAT II
[27] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[28] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[29] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[30] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[31] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[32] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[33] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[34] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[35] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[36] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[37] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II, APSC-DV-002530 CAT II
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II, APSC-DV-002530 CAT II
[42] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Denial of Service (WASC-10)
[43] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium 24 + 2 Denial of Service
desc.dataflow.javascript.denial_of_service_regular_expression
Abstract
Los datos que no son de confianza se transfieren a la aplicación y se utilizan como expresión regular. Esto puede ocasionar que el subproceso consuma de forma excesiva recursos de CPU.
Explanation
Hay una vulnerabilidad en las implementaciones de evaluadores de expresiones regulares y métodos relacionados que puede provocar que el subproceso se cuelgue al evaluar expresiones regulares que contengan una expresión de agrupación repetida. Adicionalmente, cualquier expresión regular que contenga subexpresiones alternativas que se solapen entre sí también se puede explotar. Los atacantes pueden aprovechar este defecto para ejecutar un ataque de denegación de servicio (DoS).
Ejemplo 1:
No hay implementaciones de expresiones regulares conocidas que sean inmunes a esta vulnerabilidad. Todas las plataformas y los lenguajes son vulnerables a este ataque.
Ejemplo 1:
(e+)+
([a-zA-Z]+)*
(e|ee)+
No hay implementaciones de expresiones regulares conocidas que sean inmunes a esta vulnerabilidad. Todas las plataformas y los lenguajes son vulnerables a este ataque.
References
[1] Bryan Sullivan Regular Expression Denial of Service Attacks and Defenses
[2] IDS08-J. Sanitize untrusted data included in a regular expression CERT
[3] DOS-1: Beware of activities that may use disproportionate resources Oracle
[4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 185, CWE ID 730
[5] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-001094, CCI-001310
[6] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 SC-5 Denial of Service Protection (P1), SI-10 Information Input Validation (P1)
[7] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SC-5 Denial of Service Protection, SI-10 Information Input Validation
[8] Standards Mapping - OWASP API 2023 API4 Unrestricted Resource Consumption
[9] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M4 Insufficient Input/Output Validation
[10] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CODE-4
[11] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A9 Application Denial of Service
[12] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.9
[13] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.6
[14] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.6
[15] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.6
[16] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.6
[17] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[18] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
[19] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection
[20] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation
[21] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective C.3.2 - Web Software Attack Mitigation
[22] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP6080 CAT II
[23] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP6080 CAT II
[24] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP6080 CAT II
[25] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP6080 CAT II
[26] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP6080 CAT II
[27] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP6080 CAT II
[28] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP6080 CAT II
[29] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[30] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[31] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[32] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[33] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[34] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[35] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[36] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[37] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II, APSC-DV-002530 CAT II
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II, APSC-DV-002530 CAT II
[44] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Denial of Service (WASC-10)
[45] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium 24 + 2 Denial of Service
desc.dataflow.kotlin.denial_of_service_regular_expression
Abstract
Los datos que no son de confianza se transfieren a la aplicación y se utilizan como expresión regular. Esto puede ocasionar que el subproceso consuma de forma excesiva recursos de CPU.
Explanation
Hay una vulnerabilidad en las implementaciones de evaluadores de expresiones regulares y métodos relacionados que puede provocar que el subproceso se cuelgue al evaluar expresiones regulares que contengan una expresión de agrupación que esté repetida. Adicionalmente, cualquier expresión regular que contenga subexpresiones alternativas que se solapen entre sí también se puede explotar. Este defecto se puede utilizar para ejecutar un ataque de denegación de servicio (DoS).
Ejemplo 1: Si se utilizan las siguientes expresiones regulares en el código vulnerable identificado se podría producir una denegación de servicio:
Ejemplo de código problemático que depende de las expresiones regulares con errores:
La mayoría de los analizadores de expresión regulares crean estructuras de autómata finito no determinista (Nondeterministic Finite Automaton, NFA) al evaluar las expresiones regulares. Las NFA prueban todas las coincidencias posibles hasta que se encuentra una coincidencia completa. Teniendo en cuenta el ejemplo anterior, si el usuario malintencionado proporciona la cadena "eeeeZ", a continuación, habrá 16 evaluaciones internas que el analizador regex deberá seguir para identificar una coincidencia. Si el usuario malintencionado proporciona 16 "e" ("eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeZ") como cadena, el analizador regex deberá realizar 65536 (2^16) evaluaciones. El usuario malintencionado puede llegar a consumir recursos informáticos al aumentar el número de caracteres consecutivos de coincidencia. No hay implementaciones de expresiones regulares conocidas que sean inmunes a esta vulnerabilidad. Todas las plataformas y los lenguajes son vulnerables a este ataque.
Ejemplo 1: Si se utilizan las siguientes expresiones regulares en el código vulnerable identificado se podría producir una denegación de servicio:
(e+)+
([a-zA-Z]+)*
(e|ee)+
Ejemplo de código problemático que depende de las expresiones regulares con errores:
NSString *regex = @"^(e+)+$";
NSPredicate *pred = [NSPRedicate predicateWithFormat:@"SELF MATCHES %@", regex];
if ([pred evaluateWithObject:mystring]) {
//do something
}
La mayoría de los analizadores de expresión regulares crean estructuras de autómata finito no determinista (Nondeterministic Finite Automaton, NFA) al evaluar las expresiones regulares. Las NFA prueban todas las coincidencias posibles hasta que se encuentra una coincidencia completa. Teniendo en cuenta el ejemplo anterior, si el usuario malintencionado proporciona la cadena "eeeeZ", a continuación, habrá 16 evaluaciones internas que el analizador regex deberá seguir para identificar una coincidencia. Si el usuario malintencionado proporciona 16 "e" ("eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeZ") como cadena, el analizador regex deberá realizar 65536 (2^16) evaluaciones. El usuario malintencionado puede llegar a consumir recursos informáticos al aumentar el número de caracteres consecutivos de coincidencia. No hay implementaciones de expresiones regulares conocidas que sean inmunes a esta vulnerabilidad. Todas las plataformas y los lenguajes son vulnerables a este ataque.
References
[1] Bryan Sullivan Regular Expression Denial of Service Attacks and Defenses
[2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 185, CWE ID 730
[3] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-001094, CCI-001310
[4] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 SC-5 Denial of Service Protection (P1), SI-10 Information Input Validation (P1)
[5] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SC-5 Denial of Service Protection, SI-10 Information Input Validation
[6] Standards Mapping - OWASP API 2023 API4 Unrestricted Resource Consumption
[7] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M4 Insufficient Input/Output Validation
[8] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CODE-4
[9] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A9 Application Denial of Service
[10] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.9
[11] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.6
[12] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.6
[13] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.6
[14] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.6
[15] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[16] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
[17] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection
[18] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation
[19] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective C.3.2 - Web Software Attack Mitigation
[20] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP6080 CAT II
[21] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP6080 CAT II
[22] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP6080 CAT II
[23] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP6080 CAT II
[24] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP6080 CAT II
[25] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP6080 CAT II
[26] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP6080 CAT II
[27] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[28] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[29] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[30] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[31] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[32] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[33] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[34] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[35] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[36] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[37] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II, APSC-DV-002530 CAT II
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II, APSC-DV-002530 CAT II
[42] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Denial of Service (WASC-10)
[43] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium 24 + 2 Denial of Service
desc.dataflow.objc.denial_of_service_regular_expression
Abstract
Los datos que no son de confianza se transfieren a la aplicación y se utilizan como expresión regular. Esto puede ocasionar que el subproceso consuma de forma excesiva recursos de CPU.
Explanation
Hay una vulnerabilidad en las implementaciones de evaluadores de expresiones regulares y métodos relacionados que puede provocar que el subproceso se cuelgue al evaluar expresiones regulares que contengan una expresión de agrupación que esté repetida. Adicionalmente, cualquier expresión regular que contenga subexpresiones alternativas que se solapen entre sí también se puede explotar. Este defecto se puede utilizar para ejecutar un ataque de denegación de servicio (DoS).
Ejemplo 1:
No hay implementaciones de expresiones regulares conocidas que sean inmunes a esta vulnerabilidad. Todas las plataformas y los lenguajes son vulnerables a este ataque.
Ejemplo 1:
(e+)+
([a-zA-Z]+)*
(e|ee)+
No hay implementaciones de expresiones regulares conocidas que sean inmunes a esta vulnerabilidad. Todas las plataformas y los lenguajes son vulnerables a este ataque.
References
[1] Bryan Sullivan Regular Expression Denial of Service Attacks and Defenses
[2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 185, CWE ID 730
[3] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-001094, CCI-001310
[4] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 SC-5 Denial of Service Protection (P1), SI-10 Information Input Validation (P1)
[5] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SC-5 Denial of Service Protection, SI-10 Information Input Validation
[6] Standards Mapping - OWASP API 2023 API4 Unrestricted Resource Consumption
[7] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M4 Insufficient Input/Output Validation
[8] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CODE-4
[9] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A9 Application Denial of Service
[10] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.9
[11] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.6
[12] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.6
[13] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.6
[14] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.6
[15] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[16] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
[17] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection
[18] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation
[19] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective C.3.2 - Web Software Attack Mitigation
[20] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP6080 CAT II
[21] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP6080 CAT II
[22] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP6080 CAT II
[23] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP6080 CAT II
[24] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP6080 CAT II
[25] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP6080 CAT II
[26] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP6080 CAT II
[27] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[28] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[29] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[30] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[31] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[32] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[33] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[34] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[35] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[36] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[37] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II, APSC-DV-002530 CAT II
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II, APSC-DV-002530 CAT II
[42] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Denial of Service (WASC-10)
[43] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium 24 + 2 Denial of Service
desc.dataflow.php.denial_of_service_regular_expression
Abstract
Los datos que no son de confianza se transfieren a la aplicación y se utilizan como expresión regular. Esto puede ocasionar que el subproceso consuma de forma excesiva recursos de CPU.
Explanation
Hay una vulnerabilidad en las implementaciones de evaluadores de expresiones regulares y métodos relacionados que puede provocar que el subproceso se cuelgue al evaluar expresiones regulares que contengan una expresión de agrupación repetida. Adicionalmente, cualquier expresión regular que contenga subexpresiones alternativas que se solapen entre sí también se puede explotar. Este defecto se puede utilizar para ejecutar un ataque de denegación de servicio (DoS).
Ejemplo 1:
No hay implementaciones de expresiones regulares conocidas que sean inmunes a esta vulnerabilidad. Todas las plataformas y los lenguajes son vulnerables a este ataque.
Ejemplo 1:
(e+)+
([a-zA-Z]+)*
(e|ee)+
No hay implementaciones de expresiones regulares conocidas que sean inmunes a esta vulnerabilidad. Todas las plataformas y los lenguajes son vulnerables a este ataque.
References
[1] Bryan Sullivan Regular Expression Denial of Service Attacks and Defenses
[2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 185, CWE ID 730
[3] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-001094, CCI-001310
[4] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 SC-5 Denial of Service Protection (P1), SI-10 Information Input Validation (P1)
[5] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SC-5 Denial of Service Protection, SI-10 Information Input Validation
[6] Standards Mapping - OWASP API 2023 API4 Unrestricted Resource Consumption
[7] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M4 Insufficient Input/Output Validation
[8] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CODE-4
[9] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A9 Application Denial of Service
[10] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.9
[11] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.6
[12] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.6
[13] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.6
[14] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.6
[15] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[16] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
[17] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection
[18] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation
[19] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective C.3.2 - Web Software Attack Mitigation
[20] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP6080 CAT II
[21] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP6080 CAT II
[22] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP6080 CAT II
[23] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP6080 CAT II
[24] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP6080 CAT II
[25] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP6080 CAT II
[26] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP6080 CAT II
[27] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[28] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[29] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[30] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[31] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[32] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[33] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[34] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[35] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[36] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[37] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II, APSC-DV-002530 CAT II
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II, APSC-DV-002530 CAT II
[42] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Denial of Service (WASC-10)
[43] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium 24 + 2 Denial of Service
desc.dataflow.python.denial_of_service_regular_expression
Abstract
Los datos que no son de confianza se transfieren a la aplicación y se utilizan como expresión regular. Esto puede ocasionar que el subproceso consuma de forma excesiva recursos de CPU.
Explanation
Hay una vulnerabilidad en las implementaciones de evaluadores de expresiones regulares y métodos relacionados que puede provocar que el subproceso se cuelgue al evaluar superposiciones que se repiten y se alternan de grupos regex anidados y repetidos. Este defecto se puede utilizar para ejecutar un ataque de denegación de servicio (DoS).
Ejemplo 1:
No hay implementaciones de expresiones regulares conocidas que sean inmunes a esta vulnerabilidad. Todas las plataformas y los lenguajes son vulnerables a este ataque.
Ejemplo 1:
(e+)+
([a-zA-Z]+)*
No hay implementaciones de expresiones regulares conocidas que sean inmunes a esta vulnerabilidad. Todas las plataformas y los lenguajes son vulnerables a este ataque.
References
[1] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 185, CWE ID 730
[2] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-001094, CCI-001310
[3] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 SC-5 Denial of Service Protection (P1), SI-10 Information Input Validation (P1)
[4] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SC-5 Denial of Service Protection, SI-10 Information Input Validation
[5] Standards Mapping - OWASP API 2023 API4 Unrestricted Resource Consumption
[6] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M4 Insufficient Input/Output Validation
[7] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CODE-4
[8] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A9 Application Denial of Service
[9] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.9
[10] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.6
[11] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.6
[12] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.6
[13] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.6
[14] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[15] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
[16] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection
[17] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation
[18] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective C.3.2 - Web Software Attack Mitigation
[19] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP6080 CAT II
[20] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP6080 CAT II
[21] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP6080 CAT II
[22] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP6080 CAT II
[23] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP6080 CAT II
[24] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP6080 CAT II
[25] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP6080 CAT II
[26] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[27] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[28] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[29] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[30] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[31] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[32] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[33] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[34] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[35] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[36] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[37] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II, APSC-DV-002530 CAT II
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II, APSC-DV-002530 CAT II
[41] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Denial of Service (WASC-10)
[42] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium 24 + 2 Denial of Service
desc.dataflow.ruby.denial_of_service_reqular_expression
Abstract
Los datos que no son de confianza se transfieren a la aplicación y se utilizan como expresión regular. Esto puede ocasionar que el subproceso consuma de forma excesiva recursos de CPU.
Explanation
Hay una vulnerabilidad en las implementaciones de evaluadores de expresiones regulares y métodos relacionados que puede provocar que el subproceso se cuelgue al evaluar expresiones regulares que contengan una expresión de agrupación que esté repetida. Adicionalmente, cualquier expresión regular que contenga subexpresiones alternativas que se solapen entre sí también se puede explotar. Este defecto se puede utilizar para ejecutar un ataque de denegación de servicio (DoS).
Ejemplo 1:
No hay implementaciones de expresiones regulares conocidas que sean inmunes a esta vulnerabilidad. Todas las plataformas y los lenguajes son vulnerables a este ataque.
Ejemplo 1:
(e+)+
([a-zA-Z]+)*
(e|ee)+
No hay implementaciones de expresiones regulares conocidas que sean inmunes a esta vulnerabilidad. Todas las plataformas y los lenguajes son vulnerables a este ataque.
References
[1] Bryan Sullivan Regular Expression Denial of Service Attacks and Defenses
[2] IDS08-J. Sanitize untrusted data included in a regular expression CERT
[3] DOS-1: Beware of activities that may use disproportionate resources Oracle
[4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 185, CWE ID 730
[5] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-001094, CCI-001310
[6] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 SC-5 Denial of Service Protection (P1), SI-10 Information Input Validation (P1)
[7] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SC-5 Denial of Service Protection, SI-10 Information Input Validation
[8] Standards Mapping - OWASP API 2023 API4 Unrestricted Resource Consumption
[9] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M4 Insufficient Input/Output Validation
[10] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CODE-4
[11] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A9 Application Denial of Service
[12] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.9
[13] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.6
[14] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.6
[15] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.6
[16] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.6
[17] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[18] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
[19] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection
[20] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation
[21] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective C.3.2 - Web Software Attack Mitigation
[22] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP6080 CAT II
[23] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP6080 CAT II
[24] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP6080 CAT II
[25] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP6080 CAT II
[26] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP6080 CAT II
[27] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP6080 CAT II
[28] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP6080 CAT II
[29] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[30] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[31] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[32] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[33] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[34] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[35] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[36] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[37] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II, APSC-DV-002530 CAT II
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II, APSC-DV-002530 CAT II
[44] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Denial of Service (WASC-10)
[45] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium 24 + 2 Denial of Service
desc.dataflow.scala.denial_of_service_regular_expression
Abstract
Los datos que no son de confianza se transfieren a la aplicación y se utilizan como expresión regular. Esto puede ocasionar que el subproceso consuma de forma excesiva recursos de CPU.
Explanation
Hay una vulnerabilidad en las implementaciones de evaluadores de expresiones regulares y métodos relacionados que puede provocar que el subproceso se cuelgue al evaluar expresiones regulares que contengan una expresión de agrupación que esté repetida. Adicionalmente, cualquier expresión regular que contenga subexpresiones alternativas que se solapen entre sí también se puede explotar. Este defecto se puede utilizar para ejecutar un ataque de denegación de servicio (DoS).
Ejemplo 1: Si se utilizan las siguientes expresiones regulares en el código vulnerable identificado se podría producir una denegación de servicio:
Ejemplo de código problemático que depende de las expresiones regulares con errores:
La mayoría de los analizadores de expresión regulares crean estructuras de autómata finito no determinista (Nondeterministic Finite Automaton, NFA) al evaluar las expresiones regulares. Las NFA prueban todas las coincidencias posibles hasta que se encuentra una coincidencia completa. Teniendo en cuenta el
Ejemplo 1: Si se utilizan las siguientes expresiones regulares en el código vulnerable identificado se podría producir una denegación de servicio:
(e+)+
([a-zA-Z]+)*
(e|ee)+
Ejemplo de código problemático que depende de las expresiones regulares con errores:
let regex : String = "^(e+)+$"
let pred : NSPredicate = NSPRedicate(format:"SELF MATCHES \(regex)")
if (pred.evaluateWithObject(mystring)) {
//do something
}
La mayoría de los analizadores de expresión regulares crean estructuras de autómata finito no determinista (Nondeterministic Finite Automaton, NFA) al evaluar las expresiones regulares. Las NFA prueban todas las coincidencias posibles hasta que se encuentra una coincidencia completa. Teniendo en cuenta el
Example 1, si el usuario malintencionado proporciona la cadena "eeeeZ", a continuación, habrá 16 evaluaciones internas que el analizador regex deberá seguir para identificar una coincidencia. Si el usuario malintencionado proporciona 16 "e" ("eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeZ") como cadena, el analizador regex deberá realizar 65536 (2^16) evaluaciones. El usuario malintencionado puede llegar a consumir recursos informáticos al aumentar el número de caracteres consecutivos de coincidencia. No hay implementaciones de expresiones regulares conocidas que sean inmunes a esta vulnerabilidad. Todas las plataformas y los lenguajes son vulnerables a este ataque.References
[1] Bryan Sullivan Regular Expression Denial of Service Attacks and Defenses
[2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 185, CWE ID 730
[3] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-001094, CCI-001310
[4] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 SC-5 Denial of Service Protection (P1), SI-10 Information Input Validation (P1)
[5] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SC-5 Denial of Service Protection, SI-10 Information Input Validation
[6] Standards Mapping - OWASP API 2023 API4 Unrestricted Resource Consumption
[7] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M4 Insufficient Input/Output Validation
[8] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CODE-4
[9] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A9 Application Denial of Service
[10] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.9
[11] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.6
[12] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.6
[13] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.6
[14] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.6
[15] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[16] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
[17] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection
[18] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation
[19] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective C.3.2 - Web Software Attack Mitigation
[20] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP6080 CAT II
[21] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP6080 CAT II
[22] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP6080 CAT II
[23] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP6080 CAT II
[24] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP6080 CAT II
[25] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP6080 CAT II
[26] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP6080 CAT II
[27] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[28] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[29] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[30] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[31] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[32] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[33] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[34] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[35] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[36] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[37] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II, APSC-DV-002530 CAT II
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II, APSC-DV-002530 CAT II
[42] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Denial of Service (WASC-10)
[43] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium 24 + 2 Denial of Service
desc.dataflow.swift.denial_of_service_regular_expression