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.

gRPC Metadata Manipulation

C#/VB.NET/ASP.NET
Java/JSP

Abstract

Se crea un objeto Google Remote Procedure Call (gRPC) Metadata a partir de un objeto que no proviene de una fuente de confianza, lo que podría permitir a un atacante controlar campos de protocolo críticos.

Explanation

La clase Metadata se usa a menudo para albergar datos de cabeceras para un protocolo subyacente que usa Google Remote Procedure Call (gRPC). Cuando el protocolo subyacente es HTTP, el control de los datos en un objeto Metadata puede hacer que el sistema sea vulnerable a la manipulación de cabeceras HTTP. Son posibles otros vectores de ataque y se basan principalmente en el protocolo subyacente.

Ejemplo 1: El siguiente código muestra los datos que no son de confianza que se usan como entrada para un objeto gRPC Metadata.


    ...
    String? evnVar = System.Environment.GetEnvironmentVariable("evnVar ");
    Metadata headers = new Metadata();
    headers.Add("field", evnVar);
    CallOptions callOptions = new CallOptions(headers);
    ...

References

[1] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-002754

[2] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 SI

[3] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Indirect Access to Sensitive Data

[4] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 SI-10 Information Input Validation (P1)

[5] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SI-10 Information Input Validation

[6] Standards Mapping - OWASP API 2023 API3 Broken Object Property Level Authorization

[7] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M8 Security Decisions Via Untrusted Inputs

[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, MASVS-PLATFORM-1

[10] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A1 Unvalidated Input

[11] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A2 Injection Flaws

[12] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A1 Injection

[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A1 Injection

[14] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A1 Injection

[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A03 Injection

[16] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.1

[17] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.1, Requirement 6.5.2

[18] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.5.1

[19] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.1

[20] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.1

[21] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.1

[22] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.1

[23] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4

[24] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4

[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection

[26] 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

[27] 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

[28] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3510 CAT I

[29] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3510 CAT I

[30] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3510 CAT I

[31] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3510 CAT I

[32] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3510 CAT I

[33] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3510 CAT I

[34] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3510 CAT I

[35] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I

[36] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I

[37] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I

[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I

[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I

[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I

[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I

[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I

[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I

[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I

[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I

[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I

[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I

[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I

[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I

desc.dataflow.dotnet.grpc_metadata_manipulation

Abstract

Explanation

La clase Metadata se usa a menudo para albergar datos de cabeceras para un protocolo subyacente que usa Google Remote Procedure Call (gRPC). Cuando el protocolo subyacente es HTTP, el control de los datos en un objeto Metadata puede hacer que el sistema sea vulnerable a la manipulación de cabeceras HTTP. Son posibles otros vectores de ataque y se basan principalmente en el protocolo subyacente.

Ejemplo 1: El siguiente código muestra los datos controlables por el usuario que se usan como entrada para un objeto gRPC Metadata.


...
String badData = getUserInput();
Metadata headers = new Metadata();
headers.put(Metadata.Key.of("sample", Metadata.ASCII_STRING_MARSHALLER), badData);
...