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.

183 elementos encontrados
Debilidades
Abstract
La evaluación de expresiones OGNL no validadas puede llevar a la ejecución remota de código.
Explanation
Object-Graph Navigation Language (OGNL) es un lenguaje de expresiones (EL) de código abierto para Java que permite evaluar expresiones de EL en el contexto de Value Stack de Struts 2. Al permitir que se evalúen expresiones no validadas contrastándolas con la Value Stack, puede permitir que un atacante acceda y modifique variables del sistema o ejecute un código arbitrario.

En el siguiente ejemplo, la aplicación utiliza datos no validados controlados por el usuario para crear y evaluar una expresión OGNL:

OgnlContext ctx = new OgnlContext();
String expression = request.getParameter("input");
Object expr = Ognl.parseExpression(expression);
Object value = Ognl.getValue(expr, ctx, root);
System.out.println("Value: " + value);


Un atacante puede enviar la siguiente expresión para ejecutar código arbitrario en el contexto del servidor de aplicaciones:

(#rt = @java.lang.Runtime@getRuntime(),#rt.exec("calc.exe"))
References
[1] Apache Commons OGNL - Object-Graph Navigation Library
[2] Meder Kydyraliev Milking a horse or executing remote code in modern Java frameworks
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 94, CWE ID 95
[4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2019 [18] CWE ID 094
[5] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2020 [17] CWE ID 094
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2022 [25] CWE ID 094
[7] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2023 [23] CWE ID 094
[8] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [11] CWE ID 094
[9] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-002754
[10] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 SI
[11] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Indirect Access to Sensitive Data
[12] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 SI-10 Information Input Validation (P1)
[13] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SI-10 Information Input Validation
[14] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 5.2.4 Sanitization and Sandboxing Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 5.2.5 Sanitization and Sandboxing Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 5.2.8 Sanitization and Sandboxing Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 5.3.6 Output Encoding and Injection Prevention Requirements (L1 L2 L3)
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M7 Client Side Injection
[16] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M4 Insufficient Input/Output Validation
[17] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A6 Injection Flaws
[18] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A2 Injection Flaws
[19] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A1 Injection
[20] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A1 Injection
[21] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A1 Injection
[22] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A03 Injection
[23] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.6
[24] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.1, Requirement 6.5.2
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.5.1
[26] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.1
[27] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.1
[29] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[30] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[31] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
[32] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection
[33] 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
[34] 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
[35] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2009 Risky Resource Management - CWE ID 094
[36] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3510 CAT I, APP3570 CAT I
[37] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3510 CAT I, APP3570 CAT I
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3510 CAT I, APP3570 CAT I
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3510 CAT I, APP3570 CAT I
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3510 CAT I, APP3570 CAT I
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3510 CAT I, APP3570 CAT I
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3510 CAT I, APP3570 CAT I
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[53] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[54] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[55] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[56] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[57] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[58] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Improper Input Handling (WASC-20)
desc.dataflow.java.ognl_expression_injection
Abstract
La evaluación OGNL doble permite a los usuarios malintencionados evaluar expresiones OGNL arbitrarias cuando se controla la salida de la primera evaluación.
Explanation
La aplicación utiliza una expresión OGNL forzada (%{expr}) en una etiqueta Struts que evalúa la expresión OGNL dos veces. Un usuario malintencionado que controlase el resultado de la primera evaluación podría controlar la expresión evaluada en la segunda evaluación OGNL e inyectar expresiones OGNL arbitrarias.

Ejemplo 1: Se sabe que el resultado redirectAction evalúa sus parámetros dos veces. En este caso, un usuario malintencionado podría controlar el resultado de la expresión OGNL forzada en el parámetro actionName mediante un parámetro de solicitud redirect.


...
<action name="index" class="com.acme.MyAction">
<result type="redirectAction">
<param name="actionName">${#parameters['redirect']}</param>
<param name="namespace">/foo</param>
</result>
</action>
...


El código de Struts 2 evaluará internamente la expresión %{#parameters['redirect']} que devuelve una cadena que controla el usuario como una expresión OGNL, lo que permitiría al usuario malintencionado evaluar expresiones OGNL arbitrarias.
References
[1] Struts 2 - Security Bulletin S2-029 Apache Struts
[2] Struts 2 - Security Bulletin S2-036 Apache Struts
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 94, CWE ID 95
[4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2019 [18] CWE ID 094
[5] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2020 [17] CWE ID 094
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2022 [25] CWE ID 094
[7] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2023 [23] CWE ID 094
[8] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [11] CWE ID 094
[9] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-002754
[10] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 SI
[11] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Indirect Access to Sensitive Data
[12] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 SI-10 Information Input Validation (P1)
[13] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SI-10 Information Input Validation
[14] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 5.2.4 Sanitization and Sandboxing Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 5.2.5 Sanitization and Sandboxing Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 5.2.8 Sanitization and Sandboxing Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 5.3.6 Output Encoding and Injection Prevention Requirements (L1 L2 L3)
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M1 Weak Server Side Controls
[16] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M4 Insufficient Input/Output Validation
[17] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A6 Injection Flaws
[18] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A2 Injection Flaws
[19] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A1 Injection
[20] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A1 Injection
[21] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A1 Injection
[22] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A03 Injection
[23] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.6
[24] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.1, Requirement 6.5.2
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.5.1
[26] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.1
[27] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.1
[29] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[30] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[31] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
[32] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection
[33] 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
[34] 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
[35] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2009 Risky Resource Management - CWE ID 094
[36] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3510 CAT I, APP3570 CAT I
[37] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3510 CAT I, APP3570 CAT I
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3510 CAT I, APP3570 CAT I
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3510 CAT I, APP3570 CAT I
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3510 CAT I, APP3570 CAT I
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3510 CAT I, APP3570 CAT I
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3510 CAT I, APP3570 CAT I
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[53] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[54] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[55] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[56] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[57] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[58] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Improper Input Handling (WASC-20)
desc.configuration.java.ognl_expression_injection_double_evaluation
Abstract
La aplicación de Struts 2 permite Dynamic Method Invocation, que se sabe que es vulnerable a los ataques de inyección OGNL en algunas versiones de Struts 2.
Explanation
Struts 2 introdujo una característica llamada "Dynamic Method Invocation" que permite que una acción exponga métodos distintos a execute(). El carácter ! (signo de admiración) o el prefijo method: se pueden usar en la dirección URL de la acción para invocar cualquier método público en la acción si "Dynamic Method Invocation" está habilitada. En la versión 2.3.20 de Struts 2 el mecanismo para invocar el método alternativo que anteriormente se basaba en la reflexión, se sustituyó por OGNL, lo que permitía a los atacantes proporcionar expresiones OGNL malintencionadas en lugar de un nombre de método alternativo.
References
[1] Struts 2 Security Vulnerability - Dynamic Method Invocation
[2] Struts 2 - Dynamic Method Invocation Apache Struts
[3] Struts 2 - Security Bulletin S2-032 Apache Struts
[4] Struts 2 - Security Bulletin S2-033 Apache Struts
[5] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 94, CWE ID 95
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2019 [18] CWE ID 094
[7] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2020 [17] CWE ID 094
[8] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2022 [25] CWE ID 094
[9] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2023 [23] CWE ID 094
[10] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [11] CWE ID 094
[11] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-001764, CCI-001774, CCI-002754
[12] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 SI
[13] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Indirect Access to Sensitive Data
[14] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 CM-7 Least Functionality (P1), SI-2 Flaw Remediation (P1), SI-10 Information Input Validation (P1)
[15] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 CM-7 Least Functionality, SI-2 Flaw Remediation, SI-10 Information Input Validation
[16] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 5.2.4 Sanitization and Sandboxing Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 5.2.5 Sanitization and Sandboxing Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 5.2.8 Sanitization and Sandboxing Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 5.3.6 Output Encoding and Injection Prevention Requirements (L1 L2 L3)
[17] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M1 Weak Server Side Controls
[18] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M4 Insufficient Input/Output Validation
[19] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A6 Injection Flaws
[20] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A2 Injection Flaws
[21] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A1 Injection
[22] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A1 Injection
[23] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A1 Injection
[24] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A03 Injection
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.6
[26] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.1, Requirement 6.5.2
[27] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.5.1
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.1
[29] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[30] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.1
[31] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[32] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[33] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
[34] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection
[35] 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
[36] 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
[37] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2009 Risky Resource Management - CWE ID 094
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3510 CAT I, APP3570 CAT I
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3510 CAT I, APP3570 CAT I
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3510 CAT I, APP3570 CAT I
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3510 CAT I, APP3570 CAT I
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3510 CAT I, APP3570 CAT I
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3510 CAT I, APP3570 CAT I
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3510 CAT I, APP3570 CAT I
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[53] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[54] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[55] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[56] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[57] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[58] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[59] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[60] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Improper Input Handling (WASC-20)
desc.config.java.ognl_expression_injection_dynamic_method_invocation
Abstract
La aplicación se implementa en modo de desarrollo (devMode), lo que permite la ejecución de comandos arbitrarios en el servidor y la fuga de información detallada sobre el código de la aplicación.
Explanation
Struts 2 tiene una configuración llamada devMode (modo de desarrollo). Cuando esta configuración está habilitada, Struts 2 proporcionará información adicional de registro y depuración, lo que puede acelerar considerablemente el desarrollo a cambio de un alto impacto en el rendimiento y la seguridad. devMode elevará el nivel de problemas de depuración o que normalmente se omiten a excepciones que normalmente no se lanzarían en modo normal.

devMode también habilita algunas funcionalidades de depuración que permiten a los desarrolladores comprobar las variables almacenadas en la pila de valores. Estas características se pueden activar mediante el parámetro de solicitud debug:
- debug =console mostrará una consola de evaluación OGNL que permite a los desarrolladores evaluar cualquier expresión OGNL arbitraria en el servidor.
- debug =command permitirá a los desarrolladores enviar expresiones OGNL arbitrarias para su evaluación usando el parámetro de solicitudexpression.
- debug=xml volcará los parámetros, el contexto, la sesión y la pila de valores en un documento XML.
- debug=browser volcará los parámetros, el contexto, la sesión y la pila de valores en un documento HTML navegable.
References
[1] Apache Struts 2 Documentation - devMode
[2] Apache Struts 2 Documentation - Debugging
[3] Meder Kydyraliev Milking a horse or executing remote code in modern Java frameworks
[4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 94, CWE ID 95
[5] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2019 [18] CWE ID 094
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2020 [17] CWE ID 094
[7] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2022 [25] CWE ID 094
[8] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2023 [23] CWE ID 094
[9] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [11] CWE ID 094
[10] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-002754
[11] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 SI
[12] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Indirect Access to Sensitive Data
[13] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 SI-10 Information Input Validation (P1)
[14] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SI-10 Information Input Validation
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 5.2.4 Sanitization and Sandboxing Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 5.2.5 Sanitization and Sandboxing Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 5.2.8 Sanitization and Sandboxing Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 5.3.6 Output Encoding and Injection Prevention Requirements (L1 L2 L3)
[16] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M1 Weak Server Side Controls
[17] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M4 Insufficient Input/Output Validation
[18] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A6 Injection Flaws
[19] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A2 Injection Flaws
[20] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A1 Injection
[21] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A1 Injection
[22] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A1 Injection
[23] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A03 Injection
[24] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.6
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.1, Requirement 6.5.2
[26] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.5.1
[27] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.1
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[29] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.1
[30] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[31] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[32] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
[33] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection
[34] 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
[35] 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
[36] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2009 Risky Resource Management - CWE ID 094
[37] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3510 CAT I, APP3570 CAT I
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3510 CAT I, APP3570 CAT I
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3510 CAT I, APP3570 CAT I
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3510 CAT I, APP3570 CAT I
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3510 CAT I, APP3570 CAT I
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3510 CAT I, APP3570 CAT I
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3510 CAT I, APP3570 CAT I
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[53] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[54] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[55] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[56] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[57] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[58] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[59] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Improper Input Handling (WASC-20)
desc.config.java.ognl_expression_injection_struts2_devmode
Abstract
si se permite la entrada sin validar para controlar la dirección URL utilizada en un redireccionamiento, se puede ayudar a los ataques de suplantación de identidad.
Explanation
Los redireccionamientos permiten a las aplicaciones web dirigir a los usuarios a distintas páginas dentro de la misma aplicación o a sitios externos. Las aplicaciones utilizan los redireccionamientos para ayudar con la navegación del sitio y, en algunos casos, para realizar un seguimiento de cómo los usuarios salen del sitio. Las vulnerabilidades de redireccionamiento abierto se producen cuando una aplicación web redirige a los clientes a cualquier dirección URL arbitraria que un usuario malintencionado pueda controlar.

Los atacantes pueden utilizar ataques de redireccionamiento abierto (Open Redirect) para engañar a los usuarios a que visiten una dirección URL en un sitio de confianza y redirigirlos a un sitio malintencionado. Mediante la codificación de la dirección URL, un atacante puede hacer que los usuarios finales tengan mayor dificultad para reconocer el destino malintencionado del redireccionamiento, incluso cuando se pasa como un parámetro de URL al sitio de confianza. A menudo se abusa de los redireccionamientos abiertos como parte de las estafas de suplantación de identidad (phishing) para recopilar datos confidenciales del usuario final.

Ejemplo 1: El siguiente código ABAP indica al explorador del usuario que abra una dirección URL que se analiza desde el parámetro de solicitud de dest cuando un usuario hace clic en el vínculo.


...
DATA: str_dest TYPE c.

str_dest = request->get_form_field( 'dest' ).
response->redirect( str_dest ).
...


Si una víctima recibe un mensaje de correo electrónico indicándole que siga un vínculo a "http://trusted.example.com/ecommerce/redirect.asp?dest=www.wilyhacker.com", el usuario puede hacer clic en el mismo creyendo que se le redireccionará al sitio de confianza. Sin embargo, cuando la víctima haga clic en el vínculo, el código del Example 1 redireccionará el explorador a "http://www.wilyhacker.com".

Se ha educado a muchos usuarios a que analicen siempre las direcciones URL que reciben en mensajes de correo electrónico para asegurarse de que el vínculo especifica un sitio de confianza que conocen. Sin embargo, si el usuario malintencionado codifica la dirección URL de destino mediante Hex como se indica a continuación:
"http://trusted.example.com/ecommerce/redirect.asp?dest=%77%69%6C%79%68%61%63%6B%65%72%2E%63%6F%6D"

, incluso un usuario final más experimentado puede ser engañado en el vínculo.
References
[1] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 601
[2] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-002754
[3] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 SI
[4] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Indirect Access to Sensitive Data
[5] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 SI-10 Information Input Validation (P1)
[6] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SI-10 Information Input Validation
[7] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 5.1.5 Input Validation Requirements (L1 L2 L3)
[8] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M1 Weak Server Side Controls
[9] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M4 Insufficient Input/Output Validation
[10] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A1 Unvalidated Input
[11] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A10 Unvalidated Redirects and Forwards
[12] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A10 Unvalidated Redirects and Forwards
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A01 Broken Access Control
[14] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[15] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.1
[16] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.5.1
[17] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.1
[18] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[19] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.1
[20] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[21] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[22] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
[23] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection
[24] 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
[25] 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
[26] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2010 Insecure Interaction - CWE ID 601
[27] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2011 Insecure Interaction - CWE ID 601
[28] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[29] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[30] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[31] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[32] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[33] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[34] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[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
[50] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 URL Redirector Abuse (WASC-38)
[51] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium 24 + 2 Content Spoofing
desc.dataflow.abap.open_redirect
Abstract
si se permite la entrada sin validar para controlar la dirección URL utilizada en un redireccionamiento, se puede ayudar a los ataques de suplantación de identidad.
Explanation
Los redireccionamientos permiten a las aplicaciones web dirigir a los usuarios a distintas páginas dentro de la misma aplicación o a sitios externos. Las aplicaciones utilizan los redireccionamientos para ayudar con la navegación del sitio y, en algunos casos, para realizar un seguimiento de cómo los usuarios salen del sitio. Las vulnerabilidades de redireccionamiento abierto se producen cuando una aplicación web redirige a los clientes a cualquier dirección URL arbitraria que un usuario malintencionado pueda controlar.

Los atacantes pueden utilizar ataques de redireccionamiento abierto (Open Redirect) para engañar a los usuarios a que visiten una dirección URL en un sitio de confianza y redirigirlos a un sitio malintencionado. Mediante la codificación de la dirección URL, un atacante puede hacer que los usuarios finales tengan mayor dificultad para reconocer el destino malintencionado del redireccionamiento, incluso cuando se pasa como un parámetro de URL al sitio de confianza. A menudo se abusa de los redireccionamientos abiertos como parte de las estafas de suplantación de identidad (phishing) para recopilar datos confidenciales del usuario final.

Ejemplo 1: el siguiente código ActionScript indica al explorador del usuario que abra una dirección URL leída desde el parámetro de solicitud dest cuando un usuario hace clic en el vínculo.


...
var params:Object = LoaderInfo(this.root.loaderInfo).parameters;
var strDest:String = String(params["dest"]);
host.updateLocation(strDest);
...


Si una víctima recibe un mensaje de correo electrónico indicándole que siga un vínculo a "http://trusted.example.com/ecommerce/redirect.asp?dest=www.wilyhacker.com", el usuario puede hacer clic en el mismo creyendo que se le redireccionará al sitio de confianza. Sin embargo, cuando la víctima haga clic en el vínculo, el código del Example 1 redireccionará el explorador a "http://www.wilyhacker.com".

Se ha educado a muchos usuarios a que analicen siempre las direcciones URL que reciben en mensajes de correo electrónico para asegurarse de que el vínculo especifica un sitio de confianza que conocen. Sin embargo, si el usuario malintencionado codifica la dirección URL de destino mediante Hex como se indica a continuación:
"http://trusted.example.com/ecommerce/redirect.asp?dest=%77%69%6C%79%68%61%63%6B%65%72%2E%63%6F%6D"

, incluso un usuario final más experimentado puede ser engañado en el vínculo.
References
[1] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 601
[2] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-002754
[3] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 SI
[4] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Indirect Access to Sensitive Data
[5] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 SI-10 Information Input Validation (P1)
[6] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SI-10 Information Input Validation
[7] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 5.1.5 Input Validation Requirements (L1 L2 L3)
[8] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M1 Weak Server Side Controls
[9] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M4 Insufficient Input/Output Validation
[10] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A1 Unvalidated Input
[11] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A10 Unvalidated Redirects and Forwards
[12] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A10 Unvalidated Redirects and Forwards
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A01 Broken Access Control
[14] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[15] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.1
[16] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.5.1
[17] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.1
[18] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[19] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.1
[20] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[21] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[22] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
[23] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection
[24] 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
[25] 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
[26] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2010 Insecure Interaction - CWE ID 601
[27] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2011 Insecure Interaction - CWE ID 601
[28] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[29] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[30] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[31] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[32] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[33] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[34] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[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
[50] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 URL Redirector Abuse (WASC-38)
[51] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium 24 + 2 Content Spoofing
desc.dataflow.actionscript.open_redirect
Abstract
Un archivo pasa datos sin validar a un redireccionamiento de HTTP.
Explanation
si se permite la entrada sin validar para controlar la dirección URL utilizada en un redireccionamiento, se puede ayudar a los ataques de suplantación de identidad. Los redireccionamientos permiten a las aplicaciones web dirigir a los usuarios a distintas páginas dentro de la misma aplicación o a sitios externos. Las aplicaciones utilizan los redireccionamientos para ayudar con la navegación del sitio y, en algunos casos, para realizar un seguimiento de cómo los usuarios salen del sitio. Las vulnerabilidades Open Redirect se producen cuando una aplicación web redirige a los clientes a una dirección URL arbitraria que pueda estar controlada por un atacante.

Los atacantes pueden utilizar ataques de redireccionamiento abierto (Open Redirect) para engañar a los usuarios a que visiten una dirección URL en un sitio de confianza y redirigirlos a un sitio malintencionado. Mediante la codificación de la dirección URL, un atacante puede hacer que los usuarios finales tengan mayor dificultad para reconocer el destino malintencionado del redireccionamiento, incluso cuando se pasa como un parámetro de URL al sitio de confianza. A menudo se abusa de los redireccionamientos abiertos como parte de las estafas de suplantación de identidad (phishing) para recopilar datos confidenciales del usuario final.

Ejemplo 1: El siguiente método de acción de Visualforce devuelve un objeto PageReference que consiste en una URL del parámetro de solicitud dest.


public PageReference pageAction() {
...
PageReference ref = ApexPages.currentPage();
Map<String,String> params = ref.getParameters();
return new PageReference(params.get('dest'));
}


Si una víctima recibe un mensaje de correo electrónico indicándole que siga un vínculo a "http://trusted.vf.force.com/apex/vfpage?dest=www.wilyhacker.com", el usuario puede hacer clic en el mismo creyendo que se le redireccionará al sitio de confianza. Sin embargo, cuando la víctima haga clic en el vínculo, el código del Example 1 redireccionará el explorador a "http://www.wilyhacker.com".

Se ha educado a muchos usuarios para que analicen siempre las direcciones URL que reciben en mensajes de correo electrónico y se aseguren de que el vínculo especifique un sitio de confianza que conocen. Sin embargo, si el atacante codifica la dirección URL de destino de la siguiente manera:
"http://trusted.example.com/ecommerce/redirect.asp?dest=%77%69%6C%79%68%61%63%6B%65%72%2E%63%6F%6D"

es posible que incluso un usuario final experimentado caiga en la trampa y siga el vínculo.
References
[1] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 601
[2] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-002754
[3] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 SI
[4] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Indirect Access to Sensitive Data
[5] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 SI-10 Information Input Validation (P1)
[6] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SI-10 Information Input Validation
[7] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 5.1.5 Input Validation Requirements (L1 L2 L3)
[8] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M1 Weak Server Side Controls
[9] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M4 Insufficient Input/Output Validation
[10] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A1 Unvalidated Input
[11] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A10 Unvalidated Redirects and Forwards
[12] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A10 Unvalidated Redirects and Forwards
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A01 Broken Access Control
[14] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[15] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.1
[16] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.5.1
[17] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.1
[18] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[19] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.1
[20] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[21] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[22] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
[23] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection
[24] 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
[25] 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
[26] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2010 Insecure Interaction - CWE ID 601
[27] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2011 Insecure Interaction - CWE ID 601
[28] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[29] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[30] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[31] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[32] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[33] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[34] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[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
[50] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 URL Redirector Abuse (WASC-38)
[51] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium 24 + 2 Content Spoofing
desc.dataflow.apex.open_redirect
Abstract
si se permite la entrada sin validar para controlar la dirección URL utilizada en un redireccionamiento, se puede ayudar a los ataques de suplantación de identidad.
Explanation
Los redireccionamientos permiten a las aplicaciones web dirigir a los usuarios a distintas páginas dentro de la misma aplicación o a sitios externos. Las aplicaciones utilizan los redireccionamientos para ayudar con la navegación del sitio y, en algunos casos, para realizar un seguimiento de cómo los usuarios salen del sitio. Las vulnerabilidades de redireccionamiento abierto se producen cuando una aplicación web redirige a los clientes a cualquier dirección URL arbitraria que un usuario malintencionado pueda controlar.

Los atacantes pueden utilizar ataques de redireccionamiento abierto (Open Redirect) para engañar a los usuarios a que visiten una dirección URL en un sitio de confianza y redirigirlos a un sitio malintencionado. Mediante la codificación de la dirección URL, un atacante puede hacer que los usuarios finales tengan mayor dificultad para reconocer el destino malintencionado del redireccionamiento, incluso cuando se pasa como un parámetro de URL al sitio de confianza. A menudo se abusa de los redireccionamientos abiertos como parte de las estafas de suplantación de identidad (phishing) para recopilar datos confidenciales del usuario final.

Ejemplo 1: el siguiente código indica al navegador del usuario que abra una URL analizada desde el parámetro de solicitud dest cuando un usuario hace clic en el vínculo.


String redirect = Request["dest"];
Response.Redirect(redirect);


Si una víctima recibe un mensaje de correo electrónico indicándole que siga un vínculo a "http://trusted.example.com/ecommerce/redirect.asp?dest=www.wilyhacker.com", el usuario puede hacer clic en el mismo creyendo que se le redireccionará al sitio de confianza. Sin embargo, cuando la víctima haga clic en el vínculo, el código del Example 1 redireccionará el explorador a "http://www.wilyhacker.com".

Se ha educado a muchos usuarios a que analicen siempre las direcciones URL que reciben en mensajes de correo electrónico para asegurarse de que el vínculo especifica un sitio de confianza que conocen. Sin embargo, si el usuario malintencionado ha codificado la URL de destino de la siguiente forma:
"http://trusted.example.com/ecommerce/redirect.asp?dest=%77%69%6C%79%68%61%63%6B%65%72%2E%63%6F%6D"

, incluso un usuario final más experimentado puede ser engañado en el vínculo.
References
[1] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 601
[2] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-002754
[3] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 SI
[4] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Indirect Access to Sensitive Data
[5] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 SI-10 Information Input Validation (P1)
[6] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SI-10 Information Input Validation
[7] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 5.1.5 Input Validation Requirements (L1 L2 L3)
[8] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M1 Weak Server Side Controls
[9] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M4 Insufficient Input/Output Validation
[10] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A1 Unvalidated Input
[11] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A10 Unvalidated Redirects and Forwards
[12] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A10 Unvalidated Redirects and Forwards
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A01 Broken Access Control
[14] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[15] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.1
[16] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.5.1
[17] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.1
[18] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[19] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.1
[20] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[21] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[22] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
[23] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection
[24] 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
[25] 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
[26] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2010 Insecure Interaction - CWE ID 601
[27] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2011 Insecure Interaction - CWE ID 601
[28] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[29] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[30] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[31] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[32] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[33] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[34] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[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
[50] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 URL Redirector Abuse (WASC-38)
[51] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium 24 + 2 Content Spoofing
desc.dataflow.dotnet.open_redirect
Abstract
si se permite la entrada sin validar para controlar la dirección URL utilizada en un redireccionamiento, se puede ayudar a los ataques de suplantación de identidad.
Explanation
Los redireccionamientos permiten a las aplicaciones web dirigir a los usuarios a distintas páginas dentro de la misma aplicación o a sitios externos. Las aplicaciones utilizan los redireccionamientos para ayudar con la navegación del sitio y, en algunos casos, para realizar un seguimiento de cómo los usuarios salen del sitio. Las vulnerabilidades de redireccionamiento abierto (Open Redirect) se producen cuando una aplicación web redirige a los clientes a una dirección URL arbitraria que puede estar controlada por un atacante.

Los atacantes pueden utilizar ataques de redireccionamiento abierto (Open Redirect) para engañar a los usuarios a que visiten una dirección URL en un sitio de confianza y redirigirlos a un sitio malintencionado. Mediante la codificación de la dirección URL, un atacante puede hacer que los usuarios finales tengan mayor dificultad para reconocer el destino malintencionado del redireccionamiento, incluso cuando se pasa como un parámetro de URL al sitio de confianza. A menudo se abusa de los redireccionamientos abiertos como parte de las estafas de suplantación de identidad (phishing) para recopilar datos confidenciales del usuario final.

Ejemplo 1: El siguiente código JSP indica al explorador del usuario que abra una dirección URL analizada desde el parámetro de solicitud dest cuando un usuario hace clic en el vínculo.


...
final server = await HttpServer.bind(host, port);
await for (HttpRequest request in server) {
final response = request.response;
final headers = request.headers;
final strDest = headers.value('strDest');
response.headers.contentType = ContentType.text;
response.redirect(Uri.parse(strDest!));
await response.close();
}
...


Si una víctima recibe un mensaje de correo electrónico indicándole que siga un vínculo a "http://trusted.example.com/ecommerce/redirect.asp?dest=www.wilyhacker.com", el usuario puede hacer clic en el mismo creyendo que se le redireccionará al sitio de confianza. Sin embargo, cuando la víctima haga clic en el vínculo, el código del Example 1 redireccionará el explorador a "http://www.wilyhacker.com".

Se ha educado a muchos usuarios a que analicen siempre las direcciones URL que reciben en mensajes de correo electrónico para asegurarse de que el vínculo especifique un sitio de confianza que conocen. Sin embargo, si el atacante codifica la dirección URL de destino mediante Hex de la siguiente manera:
"http://trusted.example.com/ecommerce/redirect.asp?dest=%77%69%6C%79%68%61%63%6B%65%72%2E%63%6F%6D",

es posible que incluso un usuario final experimentado caiga en la trampa y siga el vínculo.
References
[1] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 601
[2] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-002754
[3] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 SI
[4] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Indirect Access to Sensitive Data
[5] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 SI-10 Information Input Validation (P1)
[6] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SI-10 Information Input Validation
[7] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 5.1.5 Input Validation Requirements (L1 L2 L3)
[8] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M1 Weak Server Side Controls
[9] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M4 Insufficient Input/Output Validation
[10] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A1 Unvalidated Input
[11] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A10 Unvalidated Redirects and Forwards
[12] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A10 Unvalidated Redirects and Forwards
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A01 Broken Access Control
[14] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[15] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.1
[16] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.5.1
[17] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.1
[18] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[19] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.1
[20] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[21] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[22] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
[23] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection
[24] 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
[25] 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
[26] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2010 Insecure Interaction - CWE ID 601
[27] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2011 Insecure Interaction - CWE ID 601
[28] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[29] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[30] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[31] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[32] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[33] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[34] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[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
[50] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 URL Redirector Abuse (WASC-38)
[51] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium 24 + 2 Content Spoofing
desc.dataflow.dart.open_redirect
Abstract
si se permite la entrada sin validar para controlar la dirección URL utilizada en un redireccionamiento, se puede ayudar a los ataques de suplantación de identidad.
Explanation
Los redireccionamientos permiten a las aplicaciones web dirigir a los usuarios a distintas páginas dentro de la misma aplicación o a sitios externos. Las aplicaciones utilizan los redireccionamientos para ayudar con la navegación del sitio y, en algunos casos, para realizar un seguimiento de cómo los usuarios salen del sitio. Las vulnerabilidades Open Redirect se producen cuando una aplicación web redirige a los clientes a una dirección URL arbitraria que pueda estar controlada por un atacante.

Los atacantes pueden utilizar ataques Open Redirect para engañar a los usuarios a que visiten una dirección URL en un sitio de confianza y redirigirlos a un sitio malintencionado. Mediante la codificación de la dirección URL, un atacante puede hacer que los usuarios finales tengan mayor dificultad para reconocer el destino malintencionado del redireccionamiento, incluso cuando se pasa como un parámetro de URL al sitio de confianza. A menudo se abusa de los redireccionamientos abiertos como parte de las estafas de suplantación de identidad (phishing) para recopilar datos confidenciales del usuario final.

Ejemplo 1: El siguiente código indica al explorador del usuario que abra una dirección URL analizada desde el parámetro de solicitud dest cuando un usuario hace clic en el vínculo.


...
strDest := r.Form.Get("dest")
http.Redirect(w, r, strDest, http.StatusSeeOther)
...


Si una víctima recibe un mensaje de correo electrónico indicándole que siga un vínculo a "http://trusted.example.com/ecommerce/redirect.asp?dest=www.wilyhacker.com", el usuario puede hacer clic en el mismo creyendo que será transferido al sitio de confianza. Sin embargo, cuando la víctima hace clic en el vínculo, el código del Example 1 redirecciona el explorador a "http://www.wilyhacker.com".

Se ha educado a muchos usuarios a que analicen siempre las direcciones URL que reciben en mensajes de correo electrónico para asegurarse de que el vínculo especifique un sitio de confianza que conocen. Sin embargo, si el atacante codifica la dirección URL de destino mediante Hex de la siguiente manera:
"http://trusted.example.com/ecommerce/redirect.asp?dest=%77%69%6C%79%68%61%63%6B%65%72%2E%63%6F%6D",

es posible que incluso un usuario final experimentado caiga en la trampa y siga el vínculo.
References
[1] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 601
[2] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-002754
[3] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 SI
[4] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Indirect Access to Sensitive Data
[5] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 SI-10 Information Input Validation (P1)
[6] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SI-10 Information Input Validation
[7] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 5.1.5 Input Validation Requirements (L1 L2 L3)
[8] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M1 Weak Server Side Controls
[9] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M4 Insufficient Input/Output Validation
[10] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A1 Unvalidated Input
[11] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A10 Unvalidated Redirects and Forwards
[12] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A10 Unvalidated Redirects and Forwards
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A01 Broken Access Control
[14] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[15] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.1
[16] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.5.1
[17] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.1
[18] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[19] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.1
[20] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[21] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[22] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
[23] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection
[24] 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
[25] 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
[26] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2010 Insecure Interaction - CWE ID 601
[27] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2011 Insecure Interaction - CWE ID 601
[28] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[29] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[30] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[31] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[32] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[33] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[34] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[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
[50] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 URL Redirector Abuse (WASC-38)
[51] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium 24 + 2 Content Spoofing
desc.dataflow.golang.open_redirect
Abstract
si se permite la entrada sin validar para controlar la dirección URL utilizada en un redireccionamiento, se puede ayudar a los ataques de suplantación de identidad.
Explanation
Los redireccionamientos permiten a las aplicaciones web dirigir a los usuarios a distintas páginas dentro de la misma aplicación o a sitios externos. Las aplicaciones utilizan los redireccionamientos para ayudar con la navegación del sitio y, en algunos casos, para realizar un seguimiento de cómo los usuarios salen del sitio. Las vulnerabilidades de redireccionamiento abierto (Open Redirect) se producen cuando una aplicación web redirige a los clientes a una dirección URL arbitraria que puede estar controlada por un atacante.

Los atacantes pueden utilizar ataques de redireccionamiento abierto (Open Redirect) para engañar a los usuarios a que visiten una dirección URL en un sitio de confianza y redirigirlos a un sitio malintencionado. Mediante la codificación de la dirección URL, un atacante puede hacer que los usuarios finales tengan mayor dificultad para reconocer el destino malintencionado del redireccionamiento, incluso cuando se pasa como un parámetro de URL al sitio de confianza. A menudo se abusa de los redireccionamientos abiertos como parte de las estafas de suplantación de identidad (phishing) para recopilar datos confidenciales del usuario final.

Ejemplo 1: La siguiente definición de estado de flujo de Spring WebFlow indica al explorador del usuario que abra una dirección URL analizada desde el parámetro de solicitud dest cuando un usuario hace clic en el vínculo.


<end-state id="redirectView" view="externalRedirect:#{requestParameters.dest}" />


Si una víctima recibe un mensaje de correo electrónico indicándole que siga un vínculo a "http://trusted.example.com/ecommerce/redirect?dest=www.wilyhacker.com", el usuario puede hacer clic en el mismo creyendo que se le redireccionará al sitio de confianza. Sin embargo, cuando la víctima haga clic en el vínculo, el código del Example 1 redireccionará el explorador a "http://www.wilyhacker.com".

Se ha educado a muchos usuarios a que analicen siempre las direcciones URL que reciben en mensajes de correo electrónico para asegurarse de que el vínculo especifique un sitio de confianza que conocen. Sin embargo, si el atacante codifica la dirección URL de destino mediante Hex de la siguiente manera:
"http://trusted.example.com/ecommerce/redirect?dest=%77%69%6C%79%68%61%63%6B%65%72%2E%63%6F%6D"

es posible que incluso un usuario final experimentado caiga en la trampa y siga el vínculo.
References
[1] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 601
[2] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-002754
[3] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 SI
[4] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Indirect Access to Sensitive Data
[5] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 SI-10 Information Input Validation (P1)
[6] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SI-10 Information Input Validation
[7] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 5.1.5 Input Validation Requirements (L1 L2 L3)
[8] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M1 Weak Server Side Controls
[9] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M4 Insufficient Input/Output Validation
[10] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A1 Unvalidated Input
[11] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A10 Unvalidated Redirects and Forwards
[12] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A10 Unvalidated Redirects and Forwards
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A01 Broken Access Control
[14] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[15] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.1
[16] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.5.1
[17] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.1
[18] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[19] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.1
[20] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[21] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[22] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
[23] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection
[24] 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
[25] 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
[26] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2010 Insecure Interaction - CWE ID 601
[27] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2011 Insecure Interaction - CWE ID 601
[28] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[29] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[30] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[31] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[32] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[33] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[34] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[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
[50] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 URL Redirector Abuse (WASC-38)
[51] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium 24 + 2 Content Spoofing
desc.configuration.java.open_redirect
Abstract
si se permite la entrada sin validar para controlar la dirección URL utilizada en un redireccionamiento, se puede ayudar a los ataques de suplantación de identidad.
Explanation
Los redireccionamientos permiten a las aplicaciones web dirigir a los usuarios a distintas páginas dentro de la misma aplicación o a sitios externos. Las aplicaciones utilizan los redireccionamientos para ayudar con la navegación del sitio y, en algunos casos, para realizar un seguimiento de cómo los usuarios salen del sitio. Las vulnerabilidades de redireccionamiento abierto se producen cuando una aplicación web redirige a los clientes a cualquier dirección URL arbitraria que un usuario malintencionado pueda controlar.

Los atacantes pueden utilizar ataques de redireccionamiento abierto (Open Redirect) para engañar a los usuarios a que visiten una dirección URL en un sitio de confianza y redirigirlos a un sitio malintencionado. Mediante la codificación de la dirección URL, un atacante puede hacer que los usuarios finales tengan mayor dificultad para reconocer el destino malintencionado del redireccionamiento, incluso cuando se pasa como un parámetro de URL al sitio de confianza. A menudo se abusa de los redireccionamientos abiertos como parte de las estafas de suplantación de identidad (phishing) para recopilar datos confidenciales del usuario final.

Ejemplo 1: el código JavaScript siguiente proporciona instrucciones al explorador del usuario para que abra una lectura de URL desde el parámetro de solicitud dest cuando un usuario hace clic en el enlace.


...
strDest = form.dest.value;
window.open(strDest,"myresults");
...


Si una víctima recibe un mensaje de correo electrónico indicándole que siga un vínculo a "http://trusted.example.com/ecommerce/redirect.asp?dest=www.wilyhacker.com", el usuario puede hacer clic en el mismo creyendo que se le redireccionará al sitio de confianza. Sin embargo, cuando la víctima haga clic en el vínculo, el código del Example 1 redireccionará el explorador a "http://www.wilyhacker.com".

Se ha educado a muchos usuarios a que analicen siempre las direcciones URL que reciben en mensajes de correo electrónico para asegurarse de que el vínculo especifica un sitio de confianza que conocen. Sin embargo, si el usuario malintencionado codifica la dirección URL de destino mediante Hex como se indica a continuación:
"http://trusted.example.com/ecommerce/redirect.asp?dest=%77%69%6C%79%68%61%63%6B%65%72%2E%63%6F%6D"

, incluso un usuario final más experimentado puede ser engañado en el vínculo.
References
[1] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 601
[2] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-002754
[3] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 SI
[4] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Indirect Access to Sensitive Data
[5] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 SI-10 Information Input Validation (P1)
[6] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SI-10 Information Input Validation
[7] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 5.1.5 Input Validation Requirements (L1 L2 L3)
[8] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M1 Weak Server Side Controls
[9] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M4 Insufficient Input/Output Validation
[10] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A1 Unvalidated Input
[11] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A10 Unvalidated Redirects and Forwards
[12] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A10 Unvalidated Redirects and Forwards
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A01 Broken Access Control
[14] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[15] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.1
[16] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.5.1
[17] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.1
[18] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[19] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.1
[20] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[21] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[22] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
[23] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection
[24] 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
[25] 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
[26] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2010 Insecure Interaction - CWE ID 601
[27] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2011 Insecure Interaction - CWE ID 601
[28] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[29] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[30] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[31] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[32] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[33] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[34] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[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
[50] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 URL Redirector Abuse (WASC-38)
[51] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium 24 + 2 Content Spoofing
desc.dataflow.javascript.open_redirect
Abstract
si se permite la entrada sin validar para controlar la dirección URL utilizada en un redireccionamiento, se puede ayudar a los ataques de suplantación de identidad.
Explanation
Los redireccionamientos permiten a las aplicaciones web dirigir a los usuarios a distintas páginas dentro de la misma aplicación o a sitios externos. Las aplicaciones utilizan los redireccionamientos para ayudar con la navegación del sitio y, en algunos casos, para realizar un seguimiento de cómo los usuarios salen del sitio. Las vulnerabilidades de redireccionamiento abierto se producen cuando una aplicación web redirige a los clientes a cualquier dirección URL arbitraria que un usuario malintencionado pueda controlar.

Los atacantes pueden utilizar ataques de redireccionamiento abierto (Open Redirect) para engañar a los usuarios a que visiten una dirección URL en un sitio de confianza y redirigirlos a un sitio malintencionado. Mediante la codificación de la dirección URL, un atacante puede hacer que los usuarios finales tengan mayor dificultad para reconocer el destino malintencionado del redireccionamiento, incluso cuando se pasa como un parámetro de URL al sitio de confianza. A menudo se abusa de los redireccionamientos abiertos como parte de las estafas de suplantación de identidad (phishing) para recopilar datos confidenciales del usuario final.

Ejemplo 1: el siguiente código PHP indica al explorador del usuario que abra una dirección URL analizada desde el parámetro de solicitud dest cuando un usuario hace clic en el vínculo.


<%
...
$strDest = $_GET["dest"];
header("Location: " . $strDest);
...
%>


Si una víctima recibe un correo electrónico que le indica que siga un vínculo a "http://trusted.example.com/ecommerce/redirect.php?dest=www.wilyhacker.com", es probable que haga clic creyendo que el vínculo le transferirá al sitio de confianza. Sin embargo, cuando la víctima haga clic en el vínculo, el código del Example 1 redireccionará el explorador a "http://www.wilyhacker.com".

Se ha educado a muchos usuarios a que analicen siempre las direcciones URL que reciben en mensajes de correo electrónico para asegurarse de que el vínculo especifica un sitio de confianza que conocen. Sin embargo, si el usuario malintencionado codifica la dirección URL de destino mediante Hex como se indica a continuación:
"http://trusted.example.com/ecommerce/redirect.php?dest=%77%69%6C%79%68%61%63%6B%65%72%2E%63%6F%6D"

, incluso un usuario final más experimentado puede ser engañado en el vínculo.
References
[1] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 601
[2] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-002754
[3] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 SI
[4] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Indirect Access to Sensitive Data
[5] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 SI-10 Information Input Validation (P1)
[6] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SI-10 Information Input Validation
[7] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 5.1.5 Input Validation Requirements (L1 L2 L3)
[8] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M1 Weak Server Side Controls
[9] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M4 Insufficient Input/Output Validation
[10] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A1 Unvalidated Input
[11] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A10 Unvalidated Redirects and Forwards
[12] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A10 Unvalidated Redirects and Forwards
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A01 Broken Access Control
[14] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[15] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.1
[16] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.5.1
[17] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.1
[18] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[19] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.1
[20] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[21] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[22] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
[23] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection
[24] 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
[25] 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
[26] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2010 Insecure Interaction - CWE ID 601
[27] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2011 Insecure Interaction - CWE ID 601
[28] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[29] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[30] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[31] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[32] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[33] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[34] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[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
[50] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 URL Redirector Abuse (WASC-38)
[51] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium 24 + 2 Content Spoofing
desc.dataflow.php.open_redirect
Abstract
si se permite la entrada sin validar para controlar la dirección URL utilizada en un redireccionamiento, se puede ayudar a los ataques de suplantación de identidad.
Explanation
Los redireccionamientos permiten a las aplicaciones web dirigir a los usuarios a distintas páginas dentro de la misma aplicación o a sitios externos. Las aplicaciones utilizan los redireccionamientos para ayudar con la navegación del sitio y, en algunos casos, para realizar un seguimiento de cómo los usuarios salen del sitio. Las vulnerabilidades de redireccionamiento abierto se producen cuando una aplicación web redirige a los clientes a cualquier dirección URL arbitraria que un usuario malintencionado pueda controlar.

Los atacantes pueden utilizar ataques de redireccionamiento abierto (Open Redirect) para engañar a los usuarios a que visiten una dirección URL en un sitio de confianza y redirigirlos a un sitio malintencionado. Mediante la codificación de la dirección URL, un atacante puede hacer que los usuarios finales tengan mayor dificultad para reconocer el destino malintencionado del redireccionamiento, incluso cuando se pasa como un parámetro de URL al sitio de confianza. A menudo se abusa de los redireccionamientos abiertos como parte de las estafas de suplantación de identidad (phishing) para recopilar datos confidenciales del usuario final.

Ejemplo 1: El siguiente procedimiento indica al navegador del usuario que abra una dirección URL analizada desde el parámetro de solicitud dest cuando un usuario hace clic en el vínculo.


...
-- Assume QUERY_STRING looks like dest=http://www.wilyhacker.com
dest := SUBSTR(OWA_UTIL.get_cgi_env('QUERY_STRING'), 6);
OWA_UTIL.redirect_url('dest');
...


Si una víctima recibe un correo electrónico que le indica que siga un vínculo a "http://trusted.example.com/pls/hr/showemps?dest=www.wilyhacker.com", es probable que haga clic creyendo que el vínculo le transferirá al sitio de confianza. Sin embargo, cuando la víctima haga clic en el vínculo, el código del Example 1 redireccionará el explorador a "http://www.wilyhacker.com".

Se ha educado a muchos usuarios a que analicen siempre las direcciones URL que reciben en mensajes de correo electrónico para asegurarse de que el vínculo especifica un sitio de confianza que conocen. Sin embargo, si el usuario malintencionado codifica la dirección URL de destino mediante Hex como se indica a continuación:
"http://trusted.example.com/pls/hr/showemps?dest=%77%69%6C%79%68%61%63%6B%65%72%2E%63%6F%6D"

, incluso un usuario final más experimentado puede ser engañado en el vínculo.
References
[1] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 601
[2] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-002754
[3] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 SI
[4] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Indirect Access to Sensitive Data
[5] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 SI-10 Information Input Validation (P1)
[6] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SI-10 Information Input Validation
[7] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 5.1.5 Input Validation Requirements (L1 L2 L3)
[8] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M1 Weak Server Side Controls
[9] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M4 Insufficient Input/Output Validation
[10] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A1 Unvalidated Input
[11] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A10 Unvalidated Redirects and Forwards
[12] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A10 Unvalidated Redirects and Forwards
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A01 Broken Access Control
[14] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[15] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.1
[16] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.5.1
[17] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.1
[18] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[19] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.1
[20] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[21] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[22] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
[23] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection
[24] 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
[25] 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
[26] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2010 Insecure Interaction - CWE ID 601
[27] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2011 Insecure Interaction - CWE ID 601
[28] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[29] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[30] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[31] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[32] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[33] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[34] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[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
[50] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 URL Redirector Abuse (WASC-38)
[51] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium 24 + 2 Content Spoofing
desc.dataflow.sql.open_redirect
Abstract
si se permite la entrada sin validar para controlar la dirección URL utilizada en un redireccionamiento, se puede ayudar a los ataques de suplantación de identidad.
Explanation
Los redireccionamientos permiten a las aplicaciones web dirigir a los usuarios a distintas páginas dentro de la misma aplicación o a sitios externos. Las aplicaciones utilizan los redireccionamientos para ayudar con la navegación del sitio y, en algunos casos, para realizar un seguimiento de cómo los usuarios salen del sitio. Las vulnerabilidades de redireccionamiento abierto se producen cuando una aplicación web redirige a los clientes a cualquier dirección URL arbitraria que un usuario malintencionado pueda controlar.

Los atacantes pueden utilizar ataques de redireccionamiento abierto (Open Redirect) para engañar a los usuarios a que visiten una dirección URL en un sitio de confianza y redirigirlos a un sitio malintencionado. Mediante la codificación de la dirección URL, un atacante puede hacer que los usuarios finales tengan mayor dificultad para reconocer el destino malintencionado del redireccionamiento, incluso cuando se pasa como un parámetro de URL al sitio de confianza. A menudo se abusa de los redireccionamientos abiertos como parte de las estafas de suplantación de identidad (phishing) para recopilar datos confidenciales del usuario final.

Ejemplo 1: El siguiente código Python indica al explorador del usuario que abra una dirección URL que se analiza desde el parámetro de solicitud dest cuando un usuario haga clic en el vínculo.


...
strDest = request.field("dest")
redirect(strDest)
...


Si una víctima recibe un mensaje de correo electrónico indicándole que siga un vínculo a "http://trusted.example.com/ecommerce/redirect.asp?dest=www.wilyhacker.com", el usuario puede hacer clic en el mismo creyendo que se le redireccionará al sitio de confianza. Sin embargo, cuando la víctima haga clic en el vínculo, el código del Example 1 redireccionará el explorador a "http://www.wilyhacker.com".

Se ha educado a muchos usuarios a que analicen siempre las direcciones URL que reciben en mensajes de correo electrónico para asegurarse de que el vínculo especifica un sitio de confianza que conocen. Sin embargo, si el usuario malintencionado codifica la dirección URL de destino mediante Hex como se indica a continuación:
"http://trusted.example.com/ecommerce/redirect.asp?dest=%77%69%6C%79%68%61%63%6B%65%72%2E%63%6F%6D"

, incluso un usuario final más experimentado puede ser engañado en el vínculo.
References
[1] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 601
[2] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-002754
[3] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 SI
[4] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Indirect Access to Sensitive Data
[5] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 SI-10 Information Input Validation (P1)
[6] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SI-10 Information Input Validation
[7] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 5.1.5 Input Validation Requirements (L1 L2 L3)
[8] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M1 Weak Server Side Controls
[9] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M4 Insufficient Input/Output Validation
[10] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A1 Unvalidated Input
[11] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A10 Unvalidated Redirects and Forwards
[12] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A10 Unvalidated Redirects and Forwards
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A01 Broken Access Control
[14] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[15] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.1
[16] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.5.1
[17] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.1
[18] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[19] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.1
[20] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[21] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[22] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
[23] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection
[24] 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
[25] 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
[26] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2010 Insecure Interaction - CWE ID 601
[27] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2011 Insecure Interaction - CWE ID 601
[28] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[29] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[30] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[31] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[32] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[33] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[34] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[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
[50] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 URL Redirector Abuse (WASC-38)
[51] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium 24 + 2 Content Spoofing
desc.dataflow.python.open_redirect
Abstract
si se permite la entrada sin validar para controlar la dirección URL utilizada en un redireccionamiento, se puede ayudar a los ataques de suplantación de identidad.
Explanation
Los redireccionamientos permiten a las aplicaciones web dirigir a los usuarios a distintas páginas dentro de la misma aplicación o a sitios externos. Las aplicaciones utilizan los redireccionamientos para ayudar con la navegación del sitio y, en algunos casos, para realizar un seguimiento de cómo los usuarios salen del sitio. Las vulnerabilidades de redireccionamiento abierto se producen cuando una aplicación web redirige a los clientes a cualquier dirección URL arbitraria que un usuario malintencionado pueda controlar.

Los atacantes pueden utilizar ataques de redireccionamiento abierto (Open Redirect) para engañar a los usuarios a que visiten una dirección URL en un sitio de confianza y redirigirlos a un sitio malintencionado. Mediante la codificación de la dirección URL, un atacante puede hacer que los usuarios finales tengan mayor dificultad para reconocer el destino malintencionado del redireccionamiento, incluso cuando se pasa como un parámetro de URL al sitio de confianza. A menudo se abusa de los redireccionamientos abiertos como parte de las estafas de suplantación de identidad (phishing) para recopilar datos confidenciales del usuario final.

Ejemplo 1: El código de Ruby siguiente indica al explorador del usuario que abra una dirección URL analizada desde el parámetro de solicitud dest.


...
str_dest = req.params['dest']
...
res = Rack::Response.new
...
res.redirect("http://#{dest}")
...


Si una víctima recibe un mensaje de correo electrónico indicándole que siga un vínculo a "http://trusted.example.com/ecommerce/redirect.asp?dest=www.wilyhacker.com", el usuario puede hacer clic en el mismo creyendo que se le redireccionará al sitio de confianza. Sin embargo, cuando la víctima haga clic en el vínculo, el código del Example 1 redireccionará el explorador a "http://www.wilyhacker.com".

Se ha educado a muchos usuarios a que analicen siempre las direcciones URL que reciben en mensajes de correo electrónico para asegurarse de que el vínculo especifica un sitio de confianza que conocen. Sin embargo, si el usuario malintencionado codifica la dirección URL de destino mediante Hex como se indica a continuación:
"http://trusted.example.com/ecommerce/redirect.asp?dest=%77%69%6C%79%68%61%63%6B%65%72%2E%63%6F%6D"

, incluso un usuario final más experimentado puede ser engañado en el vínculo.
References
[1] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 601
[2] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-002754
[3] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 SI
[4] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Indirect Access to Sensitive Data
[5] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 SI-10 Information Input Validation (P1)
[6] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SI-10 Information Input Validation
[7] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 5.1.5 Input Validation Requirements (L1 L2 L3)
[8] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M1 Weak Server Side Controls
[9] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M4 Insufficient Input/Output Validation
[10] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A1 Unvalidated Input
[11] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A10 Unvalidated Redirects and Forwards
[12] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A10 Unvalidated Redirects and Forwards
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A01 Broken Access Control
[14] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[15] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.1
[16] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.5.1
[17] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.1
[18] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[19] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.1
[20] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[21] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[22] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
[23] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection
[24] 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
[25] 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
[26] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2010 Insecure Interaction - CWE ID 601
[27] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2011 Insecure Interaction - CWE ID 601
[28] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[29] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[30] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[31] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[32] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[33] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[34] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[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
[50] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 URL Redirector Abuse (WASC-38)
[51] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium 24 + 2 Content Spoofing
desc.dataflow.ruby.open_redirect
Abstract
si se permite la entrada sin validar para controlar la dirección URL utilizada en un redireccionamiento, se puede ayudar a los ataques de suplantación de identidad.
Explanation
Los redireccionamientos permiten a las aplicaciones web dirigir a los usuarios a distintas páginas dentro de la misma aplicación o a sitios externos. Las aplicaciones utilizan los redireccionamientos para ayudar con la navegación del sitio y, en algunos casos, para realizar un seguimiento de cómo los usuarios salen del sitio. Las vulnerabilidades de redireccionamiento abierto se producen cuando una aplicación web redirige a los clientes a cualquier dirección URL arbitraria que un usuario malintencionado pueda controlar.

Los atacantes pueden utilizar ataques de redireccionamiento abierto (Open Redirect) para engañar a los usuarios a que visiten una dirección URL en un sitio de confianza y redirigirlos a un sitio malintencionado. Mediante la codificación de la dirección URL, un atacante puede hacer que los usuarios finales tengan mayor dificultad para reconocer el destino malintencionado del redireccionamiento, incluso cuando se pasa como un parámetro de URL al sitio de confianza. A menudo se abusa de los redireccionamientos abiertos como parte de las estafas de suplantación de identidad (phishing) para recopilar datos confidenciales del usuario final.

Ejemplo 1: El siguiente método de controlador de reproducción indica al explorador del usuario que abra una dirección URL analizada desde el parámetro de solicitud dest.


def myAction = Action { implicit request =>
...
request.getQueryString("dest") match {
case Some(location) => Redirect(location)
case None => Ok("No url found!")
}
...
}


Si una víctima recibe un mensaje de correo electrónico indicándole que siga un vínculo a "http://trusted.example.com/ecommerce/redirect.asp?dest=www.wilyhacker.com", el usuario puede hacer clic en el mismo creyendo que se le redireccionará al sitio de confianza. Sin embargo, cuando la víctima haga clic en el vínculo, el código del Example 1 redireccionará el explorador a "http://www.wilyhacker.com".

Se ha educado a muchos usuarios a que analicen siempre las direcciones URL que reciben en mensajes de correo electrónico para asegurarse de que el vínculo especifica un sitio de confianza que conocen. Sin embargo, si el usuario malintencionado codifica la dirección URL de destino mediante Hex como se indica a continuación:
"http://trusted.example.com/ecommerce/redirect.asp?dest=%77%69%6C%79%68%61%63%6B%65%72%2E%63%6F%6D",

incluso un usuario final más experimentado puede ser engañado en el vínculo.
References
[1] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 601
[2] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-002754
[3] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 SI
[4] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Indirect Access to Sensitive Data
[5] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 SI-10 Information Input Validation (P1)
[6] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SI-10 Information Input Validation
[7] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 5.1.5 Input Validation Requirements (L1 L2 L3)
[8] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M1 Weak Server Side Controls
[9] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M4 Insufficient Input/Output Validation
[10] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A1 Unvalidated Input
[11] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A10 Unvalidated Redirects and Forwards
[12] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A10 Unvalidated Redirects and Forwards
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A01 Broken Access Control
[14] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[15] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.1
[16] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.5.1
[17] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.1
[18] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[19] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.1
[20] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[21] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[22] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
[23] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection
[24] 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
[25] 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
[26] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2010 Insecure Interaction - CWE ID 601
[27] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2011 Insecure Interaction - CWE ID 601
[28] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[29] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[30] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[31] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[32] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[33] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[34] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[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
[50] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 URL Redirector Abuse (WASC-38)
[51] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium 24 + 2 Content Spoofing
desc.dataflow.scala.open_redirect
Abstract
si se permite la entrada sin validar para controlar la dirección URL utilizada en un redireccionamiento, se puede ayudar a los ataques de suplantación de identidad.
Explanation
Los redireccionamientos permiten a las aplicaciones web dirigir a los usuarios a distintas páginas dentro de la misma aplicación o a sitios externos. Las aplicaciones utilizan los redireccionamientos para ayudar con la navegación del sitio y, en algunos casos, para realizar un seguimiento de cómo los usuarios salen del sitio. Las vulnerabilidades de redireccionamiento abierto se producen cuando una aplicación web redirige a los clientes a cualquier dirección URL arbitraria que pueda estar controlada por un usuario malintencionado.

Los atacantes pueden utilizar ataques de redireccionamiento abierto (Open Redirect) para engañar a los usuarios a que visiten una dirección URL en un sitio de confianza y redirigirlos a un sitio malintencionado. Mediante la codificación de la dirección URL, un atacante puede hacer que los usuarios finales tengan mayor dificultad para reconocer el destino malintencionado del redireccionamiento, incluso cuando se pasa como un parámetro de URL al sitio de confianza. A menudo se abusa de los redireccionamientos abiertos como parte de las estafas de suplantación de identidad (phishing) para recopilar datos confidenciales del usuario final.

Ejemplo 1: el siguiente código controla las solicitudes que usan el esquema de URL personalizado de la aplicación, establece requestToLoad para que señale al parámetro "dest" de la URL original, si existe, y a la URL original que usa el esquema http://, y finalmente carga esta solicitud en una WKWebView:

AppDelegate.swift:

...
let requestToLoad : String
...
func application(app: UIApplication, openURL url: NSURL, options: [String : AnyObject]) -> Bool {
...
if let urlComponents = NSURLComponents(URL: url, resolvingAgainstBaseURL: false) {
if let queryItems = urlComponents.queryItems as? [NSURLQueryItem]{
for queryItem in queryItems {
if queryItem.name == "dest" {
if let value = queryItem.value {
request = NSURLRequest(URL:NSURL(string:value))
requestToLoad = request
break
}
}
}
}
if requestToLoad == nil {
urlComponents.scheme = "http"
requestToLoad = NSURLRequest(URL:urlComponents.URL)
}
}
...
}
...


ViewController.swift

...
let webView : WKWebView
let appDelegate = UIApplication.sharedApplication().delegate as! AppDelegate
webView.loadRequest(appDelegate.requestToLoad)
...


Si una víctima recibe un correo electrónico que indica al usuario que siga un vínculo a "custom_url_scheme://innocent_url?dest=www.wilyhacker.com", es probable que el usuario haga clic creyendo que es una acción inofensiva. Sin embargo, cuando la víctima haga clic en el vínculo, el código en el Example 1 intentará solicitar y cargar "http://www.wilyhacker.com" en WKWebView.

Se ha educado a muchos usuarios a que analicen siempre las direcciones URL que reciben en mensajes de correo electrónico para asegurarse de que el vínculo especifica un sitio de confianza que conocen. Sin embargo, si el usuario malintencionado codifica la dirección URL de destino mediante Hex como se indica a continuación:

"custom_url_scheme://innocent_url?dest=%77%69%6C%79%68%61%63%6B%65%72%2E%63%6F%6D"

, incluso un usuario final más experimentado puede ser engañado en el vínculo.
References
[1] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 601
[2] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-002754
[3] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 SI
[4] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Indirect Access to Sensitive Data
[5] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 SI-10 Information Input Validation (P1)
[6] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SI-10 Information Input Validation
[7] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 5.1.5 Input Validation Requirements (L1 L2 L3)
[8] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M1 Weak Server Side Controls
[9] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M4 Insufficient Input/Output Validation
[10] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A1 Unvalidated Input
[11] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A10 Unvalidated Redirects and Forwards
[12] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A10 Unvalidated Redirects and Forwards
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A01 Broken Access Control
[14] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[15] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.1
[16] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.5.1
[17] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.1
[18] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[19] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.1
[20] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[21] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[22] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
[23] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection
[24] 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
[25] 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
[26] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2010 Insecure Interaction - CWE ID 601
[27] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2011 Insecure Interaction - CWE ID 601
[28] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[29] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[30] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[31] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[32] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[33] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[34] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[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
[50] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 URL Redirector Abuse (WASC-38)
[51] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium 24 + 2 Content Spoofing
desc.dataflow.swift.open_redirect
Abstract
si se permite la entrada sin validar para controlar la dirección URL utilizada en un redireccionamiento, se puede ayudar a los ataques de suplantación de identidad.
Explanation
Los redireccionamientos permiten a las aplicaciones web dirigir a los usuarios a distintas páginas dentro de la misma aplicación o a sitios externos. Las aplicaciones utilizan los redireccionamientos para ayudar con la navegación del sitio y, en algunos casos, para realizar un seguimiento de cómo los usuarios salen del sitio. Las vulnerabilidades de redireccionamiento abierto se producen cuando una aplicación web redirige a los clientes a cualquier dirección URL arbitraria que un usuario malintencionado pueda controlar.

Los atacantes pueden utilizar ataques de redireccionamiento abierto (Open Redirect) para engañar a los usuarios a que visiten una dirección URL en un sitio de confianza y redirigirlos a un sitio malintencionado. Mediante la codificación de la dirección URL, un atacante puede hacer que los usuarios finales tengan mayor dificultad para reconocer el destino malintencionado del redireccionamiento, incluso cuando se pasa como un parámetro de URL al sitio de confianza. A menudo se abusa de los redireccionamientos abiertos como parte de las estafas de suplantación de identidad (phishing) para recopilar datos confidenciales del usuario final.

Ejemplo 1: el código VB siguiente proporciona instrucciones al explorador del usuario para que abra una URL analizada desde el parámetro de solicitud dest cuando un usuario hace clic en el vínculo.


...
strDest = Request.Form('dest')
HyperLink.NavigateTo strDest
...


Si una víctima recibe un correo electrónico que le indica que siga un vínculo a "http://www.trustedsite.com/ecommerce/redirect.asp?dest=www.wilyhacker.com", es probable que haga clic creyendo que el vínculo le transferirá al sitio de confianza. Sin embargo, cuando la víctima haga clic en el vínculo, el código del Example 1 redireccionará el explorador a "http://www.wilyhacker.com".

Se ha educado a muchos usuarios a que analicen siempre las direcciones URL que reciben en mensajes de correo electrónico para asegurarse de que el vínculo especifica un sitio de confianza que conocen. Sin embargo, si el usuario malintencionado codifica la dirección URL de destino mediante Hex como se indica a continuación:
"http://www.trustedsite.com/ecommerce/redirect.asp?dest=%77%69%6C%79%68%61%63%6B%65%72%2E%63%6F%6D"

, incluso un usuario final más experimentado puede ser engañado en el vínculo.
References
[1] Phishers use IRS tax refund as bait CNet News
[2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 601
[3] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-002754
[4] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 SI
[5] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Indirect Access to Sensitive Data
[6] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 SI-10 Information Input Validation (P1)
[7] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SI-10 Information Input Validation
[8] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 5.1.5 Input Validation Requirements (L1 L2 L3)
[9] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M1 Weak Server Side Controls
[10] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M4 Insufficient Input/Output Validation
[11] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A1 Unvalidated Input
[12] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A10 Unvalidated Redirects and Forwards
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A10 Unvalidated Redirects and Forwards
[14] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A01 Broken Access Control
[15] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[16] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.1
[17] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.5.1
[18] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.1
[19] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[20] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.1
[21] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[22] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[23] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
[24] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection
[25] 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
[26] 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
[27] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2010 Insecure Interaction - CWE ID 601
[28] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2011 Insecure Interaction - CWE ID 601
[29] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[30] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[31] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[32] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[33] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[34] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[35] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[36] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[37] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[51] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 URL Redirector Abuse (WASC-38)
[52] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium 24 + 2 Content Spoofing
desc.dataflow.vb.open_redirect
Abstract
El programa lee los datos desde fuera de los límites de la memoria asignada.
Explanation
El buffer overflow es probablemente la forma más conocida de vulnerabilidad de seguridad de software. La mayoría de los desarrolladores de software saben lo que es una vulnerabilidad de buffer overflow, pero a menudo este tipo de ataques contra las aplicaciones existentes y desarrolladas recientemente son aún bastante habituales. Parte del problema se debe a la amplia variedad de formas en las que puede producirse un buffer overflow y otra parte se debe a las técnicas proclives a errores que a menudo se utilizan para evitarlas.

En un ataque de buffer overflow clásico, el usuario malintencionado envía datos a un programa, que los almacena en un búfer de pila demasiado pequeño. El resultado es que se sobrescribe la información de la pila de llamadas, incluido el puntero de devolución de la función. Los datos establecen el valor del puntero de devolución para que, cuando se devuelva la función, esta transfiera el control al código malicioso incluido en los datos del usuario malintencionado.

Aunque este tipo de buffer overflow de pila aún es frecuente en algunas plataformas y comunidades de desarrolladores, existen diversos tipos adicionales de buffer overflow, incluidos los desbordamientos del búfer de montón y los errores por uno ("off-by-one"), entre otros. Hay una serie de libros excelentes que ofrecen información detallada sobre cómo funcionan los ataques de buffer overflow, incluidos "Bilding Secure Software" [1], "Writing Secure Code" [2] y "The Shellcoder's Handbook" [3].

En el nivel de código, las vulnerabilidades de buffer overflow normalmente conllevan la infracción de las presuposiciones de un programador. Muchas funciones de manipulación de la memoria de C y C++ no realizan la comprobación de límites y pueden traspasar fácilmente los límites asignados de los búferes en los que operan. Incluso las funciones limitadas como, por ejemplo, strncpy(), pueden provocar vulnerabilidades cuando se utilizan incorrectamente. La combinación de manipulación de memoria y presuposiciones erróneas acerca del tamaño y la formación de una unidad de datos es el motivo principal de la mayoría de desbordamientos del búfer.

En este caso, el programa lee desde fuera de los límites de la memoria asignada, lo que podría dar acceso a información confidencial, introducir un comportamiento incorrecto u ocasionar el bloqueo del programa.

Ejemplo 1: en el código siguiente, la llamada para memcpy() lee la memoria desde fuera de los límites asignados de cArray, que contiene MAX elementos de tipo char, mientras que iArray contiene MAX elementos de tipo int.


void MemFuncs() {
char array1[MAX];
int array2[MAX];
memcpy(array2, array1, sizeof(array2));
}
Ejemplo 2: el siguiente programa corto usa un argumento de línea de comandos no confiable como búfer de búsqueda en una llamada para memchr() con un número constante de bytes que analizar.


int main(int argc, char** argv) {
char* ret = memchr(argv[0], 'x', MAX_PATH);
printf("%s\n", ret);
}


Se supone que el programa imprime una subcadena de argv[0], buscando el dato argv[0] hasta un número constante de bytes. Sin embargo, como el número (constante) de bytes puede ser mayor que los datos asignados para argv[0], la búsqueda podría continuar más allá de los datos asignados para argv[0]. Este podría ser el caso cuando x no se encuentra en argv[0].
References
[1] J. Viega, G. McGraw Building Secure Software Addison-Wesley
[2] M. Howard, D. LeBlanc Writing Secure Code, Second Edition Microsoft Press
[3] J. Koziol et al. The Shellcoder's Handbook: Discovering and Exploiting Security Holes John Wiley & Sons
[4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 125, CWE ID 129, CWE ID 131, CWE ID 805
[5] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2019 [1] CWE ID 119, [3] CWE ID 020, [5] CWE ID 125
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2020 [5] CWE ID 119, [3] CWE ID 020, [4] CWE ID 125
[7] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2021 [3] CWE ID 125, [4] CWE ID 020, [17] CWE ID 119
[8] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2022 [4] CWE ID 020, [5] CWE ID 125, [19] CWE ID 119
[9] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2023 [6] CWE ID 020, [7] CWE ID 125, [17] CWE ID 119
[10] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [6] CWE ID 125, [12] CWE ID 020, [20] CWE ID 119
[11] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-002754, CCI-002824
[12] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Indirect Access to Sensitive Data
[13] Standards Mapping - Motor Industry Software Reliability Association (MISRA) C Guidelines 2012 Rule 1.3
[14] Standards Mapping - Motor Industry Software Reliability Association (MISRA) C Guidelines 2023 Directive 4.14, Rule 1.3
[15] Standards Mapping - Motor Industry Software Reliability Association (MISRA) C++ Guidelines 2008 Rule 0-3-1
[16] Standards Mapping - Motor Industry Software Reliability Association (MISRA) C++ Guidelines 2023 Rule 4.1.3
[17] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 SI-10 Information Input Validation (P1), SI-16 Memory Protection (P1)
[18] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SI-10 Information Input Validation, SI-16 Memory Protection
[19] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 5.1.3 Input Validation Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 5.1.4 Input Validation Requirements (L1 L2 L3)
[20] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M7 Client Side Injection
[21] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M4 Insufficient Input/Output Validation
[22] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CODE-4
[23] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A5 Buffer Overflow
[24] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.5
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.1
[26] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.5.2
[27] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.2
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.2
[29] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.2
[30] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.2
[31] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[32] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
[33] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection
[34] 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, Control Objective B.3.1.2 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation
[35] 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 B.3.1.2 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective C.3.2 - Web Software Attack Mitigation
[36] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2009 Risky Resource Management - CWE ID 119
[37] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2010 Risky Resource Management - CWE ID 805, Risky Resource Management - CWE ID 129, Risky Resource Management - CWE ID 131
[38] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2011 Risky Resource Management - CWE ID 131
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3510 CAT I, APP3590.1 CAT I
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3510 CAT I, APP3590.1 CAT I
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3510 CAT I, APP3590.1 CAT I
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3510 CAT I, APP3590.1 CAT I
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3510 CAT I, APP3590.1 CAT I
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3510 CAT I, APP3590.1 CAT I
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3510 CAT I, APP3590.1 CAT I
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I, APSC-DV-002590 CAT I
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I, APSC-DV-002590 CAT I
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I, APSC-DV-002590 CAT I
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I, APSC-DV-002590 CAT I
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I, APSC-DV-002590 CAT I
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I, APSC-DV-002590 CAT I
[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I, APSC-DV-002590 CAT I
[53] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I, APSC-DV-002590 CAT I
[54] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I, APSC-DV-002590 CAT I
[55] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I, APSC-DV-002590 CAT I
[56] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I, APSC-DV-002590 CAT I
[57] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I, APSC-DV-002590 CAT I
[58] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I, APSC-DV-002590 CAT I
[59] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I, APSC-DV-002590 CAT I
[60] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I, APSC-DV-002590 CAT I
desc.internal.cpp.out_of_bounds_read
Abstract
El programa lee los datos justo desde fuera de los límites de la memoria asignada.
Explanation
El buffer overflow es probablemente la forma más conocida de vulnerabilidad de seguridad de software. La mayoría de los desarrolladores de software saben lo que es una vulnerabilidad de buffer overflow, pero a menudo este tipo de ataques contra las aplicaciones existentes y desarrolladas recientemente son aún bastante habituales. Parte del problema se debe a la amplia variedad de formas en las que puede producirse un buffer overflow y otra parte se debe a las técnicas proclives a errores que a menudo se utilizan para evitarlas.

En un ataque de buffer overflow clásico, el usuario malintencionado envía datos a un programa, que los almacena en un búfer de pila demasiado pequeño. El resultado es que se sobrescribe la información de la pila de llamadas, incluido el puntero de devolución de la función. Los datos establecen el valor del puntero de devolución para que, cuando se devuelva la función, esta transfiera el control al código malicioso incluido en los datos del usuario malintencionado.

Aunque este tipo de error por uno ("off-by-one") sigue siendo normal en algunas plataformas y comunidades de desarrollo, hay más tipos de buffer overflow, entre los que se incluyen los desbordamientos de búfer de pila y de montón. Hay una serie de libros excelentes que ofrecen información detallada sobre cómo funcionan los ataques de buffer overflow, incluidos "Bilding Secure Software" [1], "Writing Secure Code" [2] y "The Shellcoder's Handbook" [3].

En el nivel de código, las vulnerabilidades de buffer overflow normalmente conllevan la infracción de las presuposiciones de un programador. Muchas funciones de manipulación de la memoria de C y C++ no realizan la comprobación de límites y pueden traspasar fácilmente los límites asignados de los búferes en los que operan. Incluso las funciones limitadas como, por ejemplo, strncpy(), pueden provocar vulnerabilidades cuando se utilizan incorrectamente. La combinación de manipulación de memoria y presuposiciones erróneas acerca del tamaño y la formación de una unidad de datos es el motivo principal de la mayoría de desbordamientos del búfer.

En este caso, el programa lee desde fuera de los límites de la memoria asignada, lo que podría dar acceso a información confidencial, introducir un comportamiento incorrecto u ocasionar el bloqueo del programa.

Ejemplo 1: El código siguiente desreferencia de forma secuencial la matriz de cinco elementos de char, con la última referencia que introduzca un error por uno ("off-by-one").


char Read() {

char buf[5];
return 0
+ buf[0]
+ buf[1]
+ buf[2]
+ buf[3]
+ buf[4]
+ buf[5];
}
References
[1] J. Viega, G. McGraw Building Secure Software Addison-Wesley
[2] M. Howard, D. LeBlanc Writing Secure Code, Second Edition Microsoft Press
[3] J. Koziol et al. The Shellcoder's Handbook: Discovering and Exploiting Security Holes John Wiley & Sons
[4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 125, CWE ID 129, CWE ID 131, CWE ID 193, CWE ID 805
[5] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2019 [1] CWE ID 119, [3] CWE ID 020, [5] CWE ID 125
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2020 [5] CWE ID 119, [3] CWE ID 020, [4] CWE ID 125
[7] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2021 [3] CWE ID 125, [4] CWE ID 020, [17] CWE ID 119
[8] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2022 [4] CWE ID 020, [5] CWE ID 125, [19] CWE ID 119
[9] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2023 [6] CWE ID 020, [7] CWE ID 125, [17] CWE ID 119
[10] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [6] CWE ID 125, [12] CWE ID 020, [20] CWE ID 119
[11] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-002824
[12] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Indirect Access to Sensitive Data
[13] Standards Mapping - Motor Industry Software Reliability Association (MISRA) C Guidelines 2012 Rule 1.3
[14] Standards Mapping - Motor Industry Software Reliability Association (MISRA) C Guidelines 2023 Directive 4.14, Rule 1.3
[15] Standards Mapping - Motor Industry Software Reliability Association (MISRA) C++ Guidelines 2008 Rule 0-3-1
[16] Standards Mapping - Motor Industry Software Reliability Association (MISRA) C++ Guidelines 2023 Rule 4.1.3
[17] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 SI-10 Information Input Validation (P1), SI-16 Memory Protection (P1)
[18] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SI-10 Information Input Validation, SI-16 Memory Protection
[19] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 5.1.3 Input Validation Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 5.1.4 Input Validation Requirements (L1 L2 L3)
[20] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M7 Client Side Injection
[21] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M4 Insufficient Input/Output Validation
[22] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CODE-4
[23] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A5 Buffer Overflow
[24] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.5
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.1
[26] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.5.2
[27] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.2
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.2
[29] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.2
[30] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.2
[31] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[32] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
[33] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection
[34] 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, Control Objective B.3.1.2 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation
[35] 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 B.3.1.2 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective C.3.2 - Web Software Attack Mitigation
[36] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2009 Risky Resource Management - CWE ID 119, Risky Resource Management - CWE ID 682
[37] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2010 Risky Resource Management - CWE ID 805, Risky Resource Management - CWE ID 129, Risky Resource Management - CWE ID 131
[38] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2011 Risky Resource Management - CWE ID 131
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3510 CAT I, APP3590.1 CAT I
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3510 CAT I, APP3590.1 CAT I
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3510 CAT I, APP3590.1 CAT I
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3510 CAT I, APP3590.1 CAT I
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3510 CAT I, APP3590.1 CAT I
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3510 CAT I, APP3590.1 CAT I
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3510 CAT I, APP3590.1 CAT I
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002590 CAT I
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002590 CAT I
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002590 CAT I
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002590 CAT I
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002590 CAT I
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002590 CAT I
[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002590 CAT I
[53] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002590 CAT I
[54] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002590 CAT I
[55] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002590 CAT I
[56] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002590 CAT I
[57] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002590 CAT I
[58] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002590 CAT I
[59] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002590 CAT I
[60] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002590 CAT I
desc.internal.cpp.out_of_bounds_read_off_by_one
Abstract
El programa usa una comparación con signo para comprobar un valor que posteriormente se trata como sin signo. Esto podría provocar que el programa lea los datos desde fuera de los límites de la memoria asignada.
Explanation
El buffer overflow es probablemente la forma más conocida de vulnerabilidad de seguridad de software. La mayoría de los desarrolladores de software saben lo que es una vulnerabilidad de buffer overflow, pero a menudo este tipo de ataques contra las aplicaciones existentes y desarrolladas recientemente son aún bastante habituales. Parte del problema se debe a la amplia variedad de formas en las que puede producirse un buffer overflow y otra parte se debe a las técnicas proclives a errores que a menudo se utilizan para evitarlas.

En un ataque de buffer overflow clásico, el usuario malintencionado envía datos a un programa, que los almacena en un búfer de pila demasiado pequeño. El resultado es que se sobrescribe la información de la pila de llamadas, incluido el puntero de devolución de la función. Los datos establecen el valor del puntero de devolución para que, cuando se devuelva la función, esta transfiera el control al código malicioso incluido en los datos del usuario malintencionado.

Aunque este tipo de buffer overflow de pila aún es frecuente en algunas plataformas y comunidades de desarrolladores, existen diversos tipos adicionales de buffer overflow, incluidos los desbordamientos del búfer de montón y los errores por uno ("off-by-one"), entre otros. Hay una serie de libros excelentes que ofrecen información detallada sobre cómo funcionan los ataques de buffer overflow, incluidos "Bilding Secure Software" [1], "Writing Secure Code" [2] y "The Shellcoder's Handbook" [3].

En el nivel de código, las vulnerabilidades de buffer overflow normalmente conllevan la infracción de las presuposiciones de un programador. Muchas funciones de manipulación de la memoria de C y C++ no realizan la comprobación de límites y pueden traspasar fácilmente los límites asignados de los búferes en los que operan. Incluso las funciones limitadas como, por ejemplo, strncpy(), pueden provocar vulnerabilidades cuando se utilizan incorrectamente. La combinación de manipulación de memoria y presuposiciones erróneas acerca del tamaño y la formación de una unidad de datos es el motivo principal de la mayoría de desbordamientos del búfer.

En este caso, el programa lee desde fuera de los límites de la memoria asignada, lo que podría dar acceso a información confidencial, introducir un comportamiento incorrecto u ocasionar el bloqueo del programa.

Ejemplo 1: El código siguiente intenta evitar un buffer overflow de lectura fuera de los límites comprobando que la lectura de valor no confiable desde getInputLength() tiene un tamaño menor que el de la output del búfer de destino. Sin embargo, como la comparación entre len y MAX tiene signo, si len es negativo, se convertirá en un número positivo muy largo cuando se convierta a un argumento sin signo para memcpy().


void TypeConvert() {
char input[MAX];
char output[MAX];

fillBuffer(input);
int len = getInputLength();

if (len <= MAX) {
memcpy(output, input, len);
}
...
}
References
[1] J. Viega, G. McGraw Building Secure Software Addison-Wesley
[2] M. Howard, D. LeBlanc Writing Secure Code, Second Edition Microsoft Press
[3] J. Koziol et al. The Shellcoder's Handbook: Discovering and Exploiting Security Holes John Wiley & Sons
[4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 195, CWE ID 805
[5] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2019 [1] CWE ID 119
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2020 [5] CWE ID 119
[7] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2021 [17] CWE ID 119
[8] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2022 [19] CWE ID 119
[9] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2023 [17] CWE ID 119
[10] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [12] CWE ID 020, [20] CWE ID 119
[11] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-002824
[12] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Indirect Access to Sensitive Data
[13] Standards Mapping - Motor Industry Software Reliability Association (MISRA) C Guidelines 2012 Rule 1.3
[14] Standards Mapping - Motor Industry Software Reliability Association (MISRA) C Guidelines 2023 Directive 4.14, Rule 1.3
[15] Standards Mapping - Motor Industry Software Reliability Association (MISRA) C++ Guidelines 2008 Rule 0-3-1
[16] Standards Mapping - Motor Industry Software Reliability Association (MISRA) C++ Guidelines 2023 Rule 4.1.3
[17] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 SI-10 Information Input Validation (P1), SI-16 Memory Protection (P1)
[18] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SI-10 Information Input Validation, SI-16 Memory Protection
[19] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M7 Client Side Injection
[20] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M4 Insufficient Input/Output Validation
[21] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CODE-4
[22] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A5 Buffer Overflow
[23] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.5
[24] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.1
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.5.2
[26] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.2
[27] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.2
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.2
[29] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.2
[30] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[31] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
[32] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection
[33] 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.3.1.2 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation
[34] 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.3.1.2 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective C.3.2 - Web Software Attack Mitigation
[35] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2010 Risky Resource Management - CWE ID 805
[36] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3550 CAT I, APP3590.1 CAT I
[37] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3550 CAT I, APP3590.1 CAT I
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3550 CAT I, APP3590.1 CAT I
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3550 CAT I, APP3590.1 CAT I
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3550 CAT I, APP3590.1 CAT I
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3550 CAT I, APP3590.1 CAT I
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3550 CAT I, APP3590.1 CAT I
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002590 CAT I
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002590 CAT I
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002590 CAT I
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002590 CAT I
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002590 CAT I
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002590 CAT I
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002590 CAT I
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002590 CAT I
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002590 CAT I
[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002590 CAT I
[53] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002590 CAT I
[54] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002590 CAT I
[55] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002590 CAT I
[56] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002590 CAT I
[57] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002590 CAT I
desc.internal.cpp.out_of_bounds_read_signed_comparison
Abstract
Permitir que una entrada de usuario controle las rutas de acceso que se usan en operaciones del sistema de archivos, permitiría a un atacante acceder a archivos protegidos o modificarlos de otro modo.
Explanation
Se producen errores de manipulación de la ruta de acceso cuando se cumplen las dos condiciones siguientes:

1. Un atacante puede especificar una ruta de acceso que se utiliza en una operación en el sistema de archivos.

2. Al especificar el recurso, el usuario malintencionado consigue una capacidad que de otro modo no estaría permitida.

Por ejemplo, el programa puede otorgar al atacante la capacidad de sobrescribir el archivo especificado o ejecutar una configuración controlada por el atacante.
Ejemplo 1: el código siguiente utiliza la entrada de una solicitud HTTP para crear un nombre de archivo.


...
*Get the report that is to be deleted
r_name = request->get_form_field( 'report_name' ).
CONCATENATE `C:\\users\\reports\\` r_name INTO dsn.
DELETE DATASET dsn.
...


Si un usuario malintencionado proporciona un nombre de archivo como "..\\..\\usr\\sap\\DVEBMGS00\\exe\\disp+work.exe", la aplicación eliminará un archivo crítico e inmediatamente se bloqueará el sistema SAP.

Ejemplo 2: El siguiente código muestra los detalles de las facturas de cualquier fecha proporcionada por el usuario.


...
PARAMETERS: p_date TYPE string.

*Get the invoice file for the date provided
CALL FUNCTION 'FILE_GET_NAME'
EXPORTING
logical_filename = 'INVOICE'
parameter_1 = p_date
IMPORTING
file_name = v_file
EXCEPTIONS
file_not_found = 1
OTHERS = 2.
IF sy-subrc <> 0.
* Implement suitable error handling here
ENDIF.

OPEN DATASET v_file FOR INPUT IN TEXT MODE.

DO.
READ DATASET v_file INTO v_record.
IF SY-SUBRC NE 0.
EXIT.
ELSE.
WRITE: / v_record.
ENDIF.
ENDDO.
...


Si un usuario malintencionado introduce una cadena como "..\\..\\usr\\sap\\sys\\profile\\default.pfl" en lugar de una fecha válida, la aplicación revelará la configuración predeterminada de todos los parámetros del perfil de servidor de aplicaciones de SAP, lo que posiblemente conduciría a ataques más sofisticados.
References
[1] SAP OSS Notes 1497003, 1543851, 177702 and related ones.
[2] G. Hoglund, G. McGraw Exploiting Software Addison-Wesley
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 22, CWE ID 73
[4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2019 [10] CWE ID 022
[5] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2020 [12] CWE ID 022
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2021 [8] CWE ID 022
[7] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2022 [8] CWE ID 022
[8] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2023 [8] CWE ID 022
[9] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [5] CWE ID 022, [12] CWE ID 020
[10] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-000345, CCI-002754
[11] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 SI
[12] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Access Violation
[13] Standards Mapping - Motor Industry Software Reliability Association (MISRA) C Guidelines 2012 Rule 1.3
[14] Standards Mapping - Motor Industry Software Reliability Association (MISRA) C Guidelines 2023 Directive 4.14, Rule 1.3
[15] Standards Mapping - Motor Industry Software Reliability Association (MISRA) C++ Guidelines 2008 Rule 0-3-1
[16] Standards Mapping - Motor Industry Software Reliability Association (MISRA) C++ Guidelines 2023 Rule 4.1.3
[17] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 CM-5 Access Restrictions for Change (P1), SI-10 Information Input Validation (P1)
[18] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 CM-5 Access Restrictions for Change, SI-10 Information Input Validation
[19] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 5.2.2 Sanitization and Sandboxing Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 12.3.1 File Execution Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 12.3.2 File Execution Requirements (L1 L2 L3)
[20] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M8 Security Decisions Via Untrusted Inputs
[21] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M4 Insufficient Input/Output Validation
[22] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CODE-4, MASVS-PLATFORM-1
[23] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A1 Unvalidated Input
[24] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A4 Insecure Direct Object Reference
[25] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A4 Insecure Direct Object References
[26] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A4 Insecure Direct Object References
[27] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A5 Broken Access Control
[28] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A01 Broken Access Control
[29] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[30] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.1, Requirement 6.5.4
[31] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.5.8
[32] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.8
[33] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.8
[34] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.8
[35] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.8
[36] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[37] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
[38] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control
[39] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation
[40] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective C.2.3 - Web Software Access Controls, Control Objective C.3.2 - Web Software Attack Mitigation
[41] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2009 Risky Resource Management - CWE ID 426
[42] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2010 Risky Resource Management - CWE ID 022
[43] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2011 Risky Resource Management - CWE ID 022
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[53] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[54] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[55] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[56] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[57] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[58] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[59] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[60] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[61] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[62] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[63] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[64] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I, APSC-DV-002960 CAT II
[65] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I, APSC-DV-002960 CAT II
[66] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Path Traversal (WASC-33)
[67] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium 24 + 2 Path Traversal
desc.dataflow.abap.path_manipulation
Abstract
Si se permite que una entrada de usuario controle las rutas de acceso que se usan en operaciones del sistema de archivos, un atacante podría acceder a recursos del sistema protegidos o modificarlos de algún modo.
Explanation
Se producen errores de manipulación de la ruta de acceso cuando se cumplen las dos condiciones siguientes:

1. Un atacante puede especificar una ruta de acceso que se utiliza en una operación en el sistema de archivos.

2. Al especificar el recurso, el usuario malintencionado consigue una capacidad que de otro modo no estaría permitida.

Por ejemplo, el programa puede otorgar al atacante la capacidad de sobrescribir el archivo especificado o ejecutar una configuración controlada por el atacante.
Ejemplo 1: el código siguiente utiliza la entrada de una solicitud HTTP para crear un nombre de archivo. El programador no ha considerado la posibilidad de que un usuario malintencionado pudiese proporcionar un nombre de archivo como "../../tomcat/conf/server.xml", lo que podría causar que la aplicación eliminase uno de sus propios archivos de configuración.


var params:Object = LoaderInfo(this.root.loaderInfo).parameters;
var rName:String = String(params["reportName"]);
var rFile:File = new File("/usr/local/apfr/reports/" + rName);
...
rFile.deleteFile();
Ejemplo 2: el siguiente código utiliza la entrada desde un archivo de configuración para determinar qué archivo abrir y escribir en una consola de depuración o en un archivo de registro. Si el programa se ejecuta con los privilegios adecuados y los usuarios malintencionados pueden cambiar el archivo de configuración, estos podrán utilizar el programa para leer cualquier archivo del sistema que termine con la extensión .txt.


var fs:FileStream = new FileStream();
fs.open(new File(String(configStream.readObject())+".txt"), FileMode.READ);
fs.readBytes(arr);
trace(arr);
References
[1] G. Hoglund, G. McGraw Exploiting Software Addison-Wesley
[2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 22, CWE ID 73
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2019 [10] CWE ID 022
[4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2020 [12] CWE ID 022
[5] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2021 [8] CWE ID 022
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2022 [8] CWE ID 022
[7] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2023 [8] CWE ID 022
[8] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [5] CWE ID 022, [12] CWE ID 020
[9] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-000345, CCI-002754
[10] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 SI
[11] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Access Violation
[12] Standards Mapping - Motor Industry Software Reliability Association (MISRA) C Guidelines 2012 Rule 1.3
[13] Standards Mapping - Motor Industry Software Reliability Association (MISRA) C Guidelines 2023 Directive 4.14, Rule 1.3
[14] Standards Mapping - Motor Industry Software Reliability Association (MISRA) C++ Guidelines 2008 Rule 0-3-1
[15] Standards Mapping - Motor Industry Software Reliability Association (MISRA) C++ Guidelines 2023 Rule 4.1.3
[16] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 CM-5 Access Restrictions for Change (P1), SI-10 Information Input Validation (P1)
[17] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 CM-5 Access Restrictions for Change, SI-10 Information Input Validation
[18] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 5.2.2 Sanitization and Sandboxing Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 12.3.1 File Execution Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 12.3.2 File Execution Requirements (L1 L2 L3)
[19] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M8 Security Decisions Via Untrusted Inputs
[20] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M4 Insufficient Input/Output Validation
[21] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CODE-4, MASVS-PLATFORM-1
[22] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A1 Unvalidated Input
[23] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A4 Insecure Direct Object Reference
[24] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A4 Insecure Direct Object References
[25] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A4 Insecure Direct Object References
[26] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A5 Broken Access Control
[27] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A01 Broken Access Control
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[29] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.1, Requirement 6.5.4
[30] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.5.8
[31] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.8
[32] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.8
[33] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.8
[34] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.8
[35] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[36] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
[37] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control
[38] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation
[39] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective C.2.3 - Web Software Access Controls, Control Objective C.3.2 - Web Software Attack Mitigation
[40] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2009 Risky Resource Management - CWE ID 426
[41] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2010 Risky Resource Management - CWE ID 022
[42] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2011 Risky Resource Management - CWE ID 022
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[53] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[54] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[55] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[56] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[57] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[58] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[59] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[60] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[61] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[62] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[63] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I, APSC-DV-002960 CAT II
[64] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I, APSC-DV-002960 CAT II
[65] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Path Traversal (WASC-33)
[66] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium 24 + 2 Path Traversal
desc.dataflow.actionscript.path_manipulation
Abstract
Si se permite que una entrada de usuario controle las rutas de acceso que se usan en operaciones del sistema de archivos, un atacante podría acceder a recursos del sistema protegidos o modificarlos de algún modo.
Explanation
Se producen errores de manipulación de la ruta de acceso cuando se cumplen las dos condiciones siguientes:

1. Un atacante puede especificar una ruta de acceso que se utiliza en una operación en el sistema de archivos.

2. Al especificar el recurso, el usuario malintencionado consigue una capacidad que de otro modo no estaría permitida.

Ejemplo 1: El siguiente método de acción de Visualforce utiliza la entrada del usuario para acceder a un recurso estático.


public class MyController {
...
public PageRerference loadRes() {
PageReference ref = ApexPages.currentPage();
Map<String,String> params = ref.getParameters();
if (params.containsKey('resName')) {
if (params.containsKey('resPath')) {
return PageReference.forResource(params.get('resName'), params.get('resPath'));
}
}
return null;
}
}


El programador no ha considerado la posibilidad de que un atacante pueda manipular el nombre y la ruta del recurso para acceder a recursos que no están destinados al público.
References
[1] G. Hoglund, G. McGraw Exploiting Software Addison-Wesley
[2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 22, CWE ID 73
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2019 [10] CWE ID 022
[4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2020 [12] CWE ID 022
[5] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2021 [8] CWE ID 022
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2022 [8] CWE ID 022
[7] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2023 [8] CWE ID 022
[8] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [5] CWE ID 022, [12] CWE ID 020
[9] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-000345, CCI-002754
[10] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 SI
[11] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Access Violation
[12] Standards Mapping - Motor Industry Software Reliability Association (MISRA) C Guidelines 2012 Rule 1.3
[13] Standards Mapping - Motor Industry Software Reliability Association (MISRA) C Guidelines 2023 Directive 4.14, Rule 1.3
[14] Standards Mapping - Motor Industry Software Reliability Association (MISRA) C++ Guidelines 2008 Rule 0-3-1
[15] Standards Mapping - Motor Industry Software Reliability Association (MISRA) C++ Guidelines 2023 Rule 4.1.3
[16] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 CM-5 Access Restrictions for Change (P1), SI-10 Information Input Validation (P1)
[17] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 CM-5 Access Restrictions for Change, SI-10 Information Input Validation
[18] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 5.2.2 Sanitization and Sandboxing Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 12.3.1 File Execution Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 12.3.2 File Execution Requirements (L1 L2 L3)
[19] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M8 Security Decisions Via Untrusted Inputs
[20] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M4 Insufficient Input/Output Validation
[21] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CODE-4, MASVS-PLATFORM-1
[22] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A1 Unvalidated Input
[23] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A4 Insecure Direct Object Reference
[24] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A4 Insecure Direct Object References
[25] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A4 Insecure Direct Object References
[26] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A5 Broken Access Control
[27] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A01 Broken Access Control
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[29] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.1, Requirement 6.5.4
[30] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.5.8
[31] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.8
[32] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.8
[33] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.8
[34] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.8
[35] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[36] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
[37] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control
[38] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation
[39] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective C.2.3 - Web Software Access Controls, Control Objective C.3.2 - Web Software Attack Mitigation
[40] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2009 Risky Resource Management - CWE ID 426
[41] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2010 Risky Resource Management - CWE ID 022
[42] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2011 Risky Resource Management - CWE ID 022
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[53] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[54] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[55] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[56] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[57] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[58] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[59] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[60] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[61] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[62] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[63] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I, APSC-DV-002960 CAT II
[64] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I, APSC-DV-002960 CAT II
[65] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Path Traversal (WASC-33)
[66] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium 24 + 2 Path Traversal
desc.dataflow.apex.path_manipulation
Abstract
Si se permite que una entrada de usuario controle las rutas de acceso que se usan en operaciones del sistema de archivos, un atacante podría acceder a recursos del sistema protegidos o modificarlos de algún modo.
Explanation
Se producen errores de manipulación de la ruta de acceso cuando se cumplen las dos condiciones siguientes:

1. Un atacante puede especificar una ruta de acceso que se utiliza en una operación en el sistema de archivos.

2. Al especificar el recurso, el usuario malintencionado consigue una capacidad que de otro modo no estaría permitida.

Por ejemplo, el programa puede otorgar al atacante la capacidad de sobrescribir el archivo especificado o ejecutar una configuración controlada por el atacante.
Ejemplo 1: el código siguiente utiliza la entrada de una solicitud HTTP para crear un nombre de archivo. El programador no ha considerado la posibilidad de que un usuario malintencionado pueda proporcionar un nombre de archivo como "..\\..\\Windows\\System32\\krnl386.exe", lo que hará que la aplicación elimine un archivo importante del sistema de Windows.


String rName = Request.Item("reportName");
...
File.delete("C:\\users\\reports\\" + rName);
Ejemplo 2: el siguiente código utiliza una entrada de un archivo de configuración para determinar el archivo que se debe abrir y reenviar al usuario. Si el programa se ejecuta con privilegios adecuados y los usuarios malintencionados pueden modificar el archivo de configuración, estos podrán utilizar el programa para leer cualquier archivo del sistema que termine con la extensión ".txt".


sr = new StreamReader(resmngr.GetString("sub")+".txt");
while ((line = sr.ReadLine()) != null) {
Console.WriteLine(line);
}
References
[1] G. Hoglund, G. McGraw Exploiting Software Addison-Wesley
[2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 22, CWE ID 73
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2019 [10] CWE ID 022
[4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2020 [12] CWE ID 022
[5] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2021 [8] CWE ID 022
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2022 [8] CWE ID 022
[7] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2023 [8] CWE ID 022
[8] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [5] CWE ID 022, [12] CWE ID 020
[9] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-000345, CCI-002754
[10] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 SI
[11] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Access Violation
[12] Standards Mapping - Motor Industry Software Reliability Association (MISRA) C Guidelines 2012 Rule 1.3
[13] Standards Mapping - Motor Industry Software Reliability Association (MISRA) C Guidelines 2023 Directive 4.14, Rule 1.3
[14] Standards Mapping - Motor Industry Software Reliability Association (MISRA) C++ Guidelines 2008 Rule 0-3-1
[15] Standards Mapping - Motor Industry Software Reliability Association (MISRA) C++ Guidelines 2023 Rule 4.1.3
[16] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 CM-5 Access Restrictions for Change (P1), SI-10 Information Input Validation (P1)
[17] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 CM-5 Access Restrictions for Change, SI-10 Information Input Validation
[18] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 5.2.2 Sanitization and Sandboxing Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 12.3.1 File Execution Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 12.3.2 File Execution Requirements (L1 L2 L3)
[19] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M8 Security Decisions Via Untrusted Inputs
[20] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M4 Insufficient Input/Output Validation
[21] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CODE-4, MASVS-PLATFORM-1
[22] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A1 Unvalidated Input
[23] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A4 Insecure Direct Object Reference
[24] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A4 Insecure Direct Object References
[25] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A4 Insecure Direct Object References
[26] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A5 Broken Access Control
[27] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A01 Broken Access Control
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[29] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.1, Requirement 6.5.4
[30] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.5.8
[31] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.8
[32] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.8
[33] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.8
[34] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.8
[35] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[36] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
[37] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control
[38] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation
[39] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective C.2.3 - Web Software Access Controls, Control Objective C.3.2 - Web Software Attack Mitigation
[40] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2009 Risky Resource Management - CWE ID 426
[41] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2010 Risky Resource Management - CWE ID 022
[42] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2011 Risky Resource Management - CWE ID 022
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[53] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[54] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[55] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[56] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[57] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[58] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[59] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[60] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[61] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[62] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[63] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I, APSC-DV-002960 CAT II
[64] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I, APSC-DV-002960 CAT II
[65] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Path Traversal (WASC-33)
[66] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium 24 + 2 Path Traversal
desc.dataflow.dotnet.path_manipulation
Abstract
Si se permite que una entrada de usuario controle las rutas de acceso que se usan en operaciones del sistema de archivos, un atacante podría acceder a recursos del sistema protegidos o modificarlos de algún modo.
Explanation
Se producen errores de manipulación de la ruta de acceso cuando se cumplen las dos condiciones siguientes:

1. Un atacante puede especificar una ruta de acceso que se utiliza en una operación en el sistema de archivos.

2. Al especificar el recurso, el usuario malintencionado consigue una capacidad que de otro modo no estaría permitida.

Por ejemplo, el programa puede otorgar al atacante la capacidad de sobrescribir el archivo especificado o ejecutar una configuración controlada por el atacante.
Ejemplo 1: el código siguiente utiliza la entrada desde una solicitud CGI para crear un nombre de archivo. El programador no ha tenido en cuenta la posibilidad de que un atacante pueda proporcionar un nombre de archivo como "../../apache/conf/httpd.conf", que provocará que la aplicación elimine el archivo de configuración especificado.


char* rName = getenv("reportName");
...
unlink(rName);
Ejemplo 2: el código siguiente utiliza entrada de la línea de comandos para determinar qué archivo abrir y reenviar al usuario. Si el programa se ejecuta con privilegios adecuados y los usuarios malintencionados pueden crear vínculos simbólicos al archivo, estos también pueden usar el programa para leer la primera parte de cualquier archivo del sistema.


ifstream ifs(argv[0]);
string s;
ifs >> s;
cout << s;
References
[1] G. Hoglund, G. McGraw Exploiting Software Addison-Wesley
[2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 22, CWE ID 73
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2019 [10] CWE ID 022
[4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2020 [12] CWE ID 022
[5] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2021 [8] CWE ID 022
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2022 [8] CWE ID 022
[7] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2023 [8] CWE ID 022
[8] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [5] CWE ID 022, [12] CWE ID 020
[9] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-000345, CCI-002754
[10] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 SI
[11] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Access Violation
[12] Standards Mapping - Motor Industry Software Reliability Association (MISRA) C Guidelines 2012 Rule 1.3
[13] Standards Mapping - Motor Industry Software Reliability Association (MISRA) C Guidelines 2023 Directive 4.14, Rule 1.3
[14] Standards Mapping - Motor Industry Software Reliability Association (MISRA) C++ Guidelines 2008 Rule 0-3-1
[15] Standards Mapping - Motor Industry Software Reliability Association (MISRA) C++ Guidelines 2023 Rule 4.1.3
[16] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 CM-5 Access Restrictions for Change (P1), SI-10 Information Input Validation (P1)
[17] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 CM-5 Access Restrictions for Change, SI-10 Information Input Validation
[18] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 5.2.2 Sanitization and Sandboxing Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 12.3.1 File Execution Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 12.3.2 File Execution Requirements (L1 L2 L3)
[19] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M8 Security Decisions Via Untrusted Inputs
[20] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M4 Insufficient Input/Output Validation
[21] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CODE-4, MASVS-PLATFORM-1
[22] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A1 Unvalidated Input
[23] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A4 Insecure Direct Object Reference
[24] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A4 Insecure Direct Object References
[25] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A4 Insecure Direct Object References
[26] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A5 Broken Access Control
[27] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A01 Broken Access Control
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[29] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.1, Requirement 6.5.4
[30] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.5.8
[31] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.8
[32] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.8
[33] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.8
[34] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.8
[35] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[36] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
[37] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control
[38] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation
[39] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective C.2.3 - Web Software Access Controls, Control Objective C.3.2 - Web Software Attack Mitigation
[40] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2009 Risky Resource Management - CWE ID 426
[41] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2010 Risky Resource Management - CWE ID 022
[42] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2011 Risky Resource Management - CWE ID 022
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[53] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[54] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[55] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[56] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[57] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[58] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[59] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[60] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[61] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[62] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[63] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I, APSC-DV-002960 CAT II
[64] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I, APSC-DV-002960 CAT II
[65] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Path Traversal (WASC-33)
[66] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium 24 + 2 Path Traversal
desc.dataflow.cpp.path_manipulation
Abstract
Si se permite la entrada del usuario a los nombres de recursos de archivos utilizados en las operaciones de archivos, un atacante podría acceder o modificar los conjuntos de datos no previstos por la aplicación.
Explanation
Se producen errores de manipulación de la ruta de acceso en CICS cuando se cumplen las dos condiciones siguientes:

1. Un atacante puede especificar un nombre de recurso de archivo (FCT) utilizado en una operación de archivos en CICS.

2. Al especificar el recurso, el atacante puede obtener acceso sin autorización.

Por ejemplo, el programa puede otorgar al atacante la capacidad de leer o escribir datos configurados para la región CICS a la cual la aplicación normalmente no accede.
Ejemplo 1: El siguiente código utiliza la entrada de un formulario HTML para actualizar o posiblemente eliminar un registro de un archivo.


...
EXEC CICS
WEB READ
FORMFIELD(FILE)
VALUE(FILENAME)
...
END-EXEC.

EXEC CICS
READ
FILE(FILENAME)
INTO(RECORD)
RIDFLD(ACCTNO)
UPDATE
...
END-EXEC.
...
References
[1] G. Hoglund, G. McGraw Exploiting Software Addison-Wesley
[2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 22, CWE ID 73
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2019 [10] CWE ID 022
[4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2020 [12] CWE ID 022
[5] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2021 [8] CWE ID 022
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2022 [8] CWE ID 022
[7] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2023 [8] CWE ID 022
[8] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [5] CWE ID 022, [12] CWE ID 020
[9] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-000345, CCI-002754
[10] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 SI
[11] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Access Violation
[12] Standards Mapping - Motor Industry Software Reliability Association (MISRA) C Guidelines 2012 Rule 1.3
[13] Standards Mapping - Motor Industry Software Reliability Association (MISRA) C Guidelines 2023 Directive 4.14, Rule 1.3
[14] Standards Mapping - Motor Industry Software Reliability Association (MISRA) C++ Guidelines 2008 Rule 0-3-1
[15] Standards Mapping - Motor Industry Software Reliability Association (MISRA) C++ Guidelines 2023 Rule 4.1.3
[16] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 CM-5 Access Restrictions for Change (P1), SI-10 Information Input Validation (P1)
[17] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 CM-5 Access Restrictions for Change, SI-10 Information Input Validation
[18] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 5.2.2 Sanitization and Sandboxing Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 12.3.1 File Execution Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 12.3.2 File Execution Requirements (L1 L2 L3)
[19] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M8 Security Decisions Via Untrusted Inputs
[20] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M4 Insufficient Input/Output Validation
[21] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CODE-4, MASVS-PLATFORM-1
[22] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A1 Unvalidated Input
[23] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A4 Insecure Direct Object Reference
[24] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A4 Insecure Direct Object References
[25] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A4 Insecure Direct Object References
[26] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A5 Broken Access Control
[27] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A01 Broken Access Control
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[29] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.1, Requirement 6.5.4
[30] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.5.8
[31] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.8
[32] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.8
[33] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.8
[34] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.8
[35] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[36] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
[37] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control
[38] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation
[39] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective C.2.3 - Web Software Access Controls, Control Objective C.3.2 - Web Software Attack Mitigation
[40] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2009 Risky Resource Management - CWE ID 426
[41] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2010 Risky Resource Management - CWE ID 022
[42] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2011 Risky Resource Management - CWE ID 022
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[53] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[54] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[55] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[56] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[57] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[58] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[59] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[60] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[61] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[62] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[63] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I, APSC-DV-002960 CAT II
[64] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I, APSC-DV-002960 CAT II
[65] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Path Traversal (WASC-33)
[66] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium 24 + 2 Path Traversal
desc.dataflow.cobol.path_manipulation
Abstract
Si se permite que una entrada de usuario controle las rutas de acceso que se usan en operaciones del sistema de archivos, un atacante podría acceder a recursos del sistema protegidos o modificarlos de algún modo.
Explanation
Se producen errores de manipulación de la ruta de acceso cuando se cumplen las dos condiciones siguientes:

1. Un atacante puede especificar una ruta de acceso que se utiliza en una operación en el sistema de archivos.

2. Al especificar el recurso, el usuario malintencionado consigue una capacidad que de otro modo no estaría permitida.

Por ejemplo, el programa puede otorgar al atacante la capacidad de sobrescribir el archivo especificado o ejecutar una configuración controlada por el atacante.
Ejemplo 1: el siguiente código utiliza los datos introducidos desde un formulario web para crear un nombre de archivo. El programador no ha considerado la posibilidad de que un usuario malintencionado pueda proporcionar un nombre de archivo como "..\\..\\Windows\\System32\\krnl386.exe", lo que hará que la aplicación elimine un archivo importante del sistema de Windows.


<cffile action = "delete"
file = "C:\\users\\reports\\#Form.reportName#">
References
[1] G. Hoglund, G. McGraw Exploiting Software Addison-Wesley
[2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 22, CWE ID 73
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2019 [10] CWE ID 022
[4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2020 [12] CWE ID 022
[5] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2021 [8] CWE ID 022
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2022 [8] CWE ID 022
[7] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2023 [8] CWE ID 022
[8] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [5] CWE ID 022, [12] CWE ID 020
[9] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-000345, CCI-002754
[10] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 SI
[11] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Access Violation
[12] Standards Mapping - Motor Industry Software Reliability Association (MISRA) C Guidelines 2012 Rule 1.3
[13] Standards Mapping - Motor Industry Software Reliability Association (MISRA) C Guidelines 2023 Directive 4.14, Rule 1.3
[14] Standards Mapping - Motor Industry Software Reliability Association (MISRA) C++ Guidelines 2008 Rule 0-3-1
[15] Standards Mapping - Motor Industry Software Reliability Association (MISRA) C++ Guidelines 2023 Rule 4.1.3
[16] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 CM-5 Access Restrictions for Change (P1), SI-10 Information Input Validation (P1)
[17] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 CM-5 Access Restrictions for Change, SI-10 Information Input Validation
[18] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 5.2.2 Sanitization and Sandboxing Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 12.3.1 File Execution Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 12.3.2 File Execution Requirements (L1 L2 L3)
[19] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M8 Security Decisions Via Untrusted Inputs
[20] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M4 Insufficient Input/Output Validation
[21] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CODE-4, MASVS-PLATFORM-1
[22] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A1 Unvalidated Input
[23] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A4 Insecure Direct Object Reference
[24] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A4 Insecure Direct Object References
[25] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A4 Insecure Direct Object References
[26] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A5 Broken Access Control
[27] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A01 Broken Access Control
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[29] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.1, Requirement 6.5.4
[30] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.5.8
[31] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.8
[32] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.8
[33] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.8
[34] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.8
[35] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[36] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
[37] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control
[38] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation
[39] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective C.2.3 - Web Software Access Controls, Control Objective C.3.2 - Web Software Attack Mitigation
[40] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2009 Risky Resource Management - CWE ID 426
[41] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2010 Risky Resource Management - CWE ID 022
[42] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2011 Risky Resource Management - CWE ID 022
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[53] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[54] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[55] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[56] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[57] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[58] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[59] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[60] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[61] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[62] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[63] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I, APSC-DV-002960 CAT II
[64] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I, APSC-DV-002960 CAT II
[65] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Path Traversal (WASC-33)
[66] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium 24 + 2 Path Traversal
desc.dataflow.cfml.path_manipulation
Abstract
Si se permite que una entrada de usuario controle las rutas de acceso que se usan en las operaciones del sistema de archivos, un atacante podría sobrescribir archivos arbitrariamente en el sistema.
Explanation
Ejemplo 1: El siguiente ejemplo elimina archivos de forma insegura.


final server = await HttpServer.bind('localhost', 18081);
server.listen((request) async {
final headers = request.headers;
final path = headers.value('path');
File(path!).delete();
}


En el Example 1, no se valida headers.value('path') antes de llevar a cabo las funciones de eliminación en archivos.
References
[1] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 22, CWE ID 73
[2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2019 [10] CWE ID 022
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2020 [12] CWE ID 022
[4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2021 [8] CWE ID 022
[5] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2022 [8] CWE ID 022
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2023 [8] CWE ID 022
[7] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [5] CWE ID 022, [12] CWE ID 020
[8] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-000345, CCI-002754
[9] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 SI
[10] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Access Violation
[11] Standards Mapping - Motor Industry Software Reliability Association (MISRA) C Guidelines 2012 Rule 1.3
[12] Standards Mapping - Motor Industry Software Reliability Association (MISRA) C Guidelines 2023 Directive 4.14, Rule 1.3
[13] Standards Mapping - Motor Industry Software Reliability Association (MISRA) C++ Guidelines 2008 Rule 0-3-1
[14] Standards Mapping - Motor Industry Software Reliability Association (MISRA) C++ Guidelines 2023 Rule 4.1.3
[15] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 CM-5 Access Restrictions for Change (P1), SI-10 Information Input Validation (P1)
[16] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 CM-5 Access Restrictions for Change, SI-10 Information Input Validation
[17] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 5.2.2 Sanitization and Sandboxing Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 12.3.1 File Execution Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 12.3.2 File Execution Requirements (L1 L2 L3)
[18] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M8 Security Decisions Via Untrusted Inputs
[19] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M4 Insufficient Input/Output Validation
[20] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CODE-4, MASVS-PLATFORM-1
[21] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A1 Unvalidated Input
[22] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A4 Insecure Direct Object Reference
[23] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A4 Insecure Direct Object References
[24] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A4 Insecure Direct Object References
[25] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A5 Broken Access Control
[26] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A01 Broken Access Control
[27] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.1, Requirement 6.5.4
[29] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.5.8
[30] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.8
[31] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.8
[32] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.8
[33] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.8
[34] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[35] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
[36] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control
[37] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation
[38] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective C.2.3 - Web Software Access Controls, Control Objective C.3.2 - Web Software Attack Mitigation
[39] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2009 Risky Resource Management - CWE ID 426
[40] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2010 Risky Resource Management - CWE ID 022
[41] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2011 Risky Resource Management - CWE ID 022
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[53] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[54] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[55] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[56] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[57] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[58] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[59] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[60] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[61] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[62] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I, APSC-DV-002960 CAT II
[63] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I, APSC-DV-002960 CAT II
[64] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Path Traversal (WASC-33)
[65] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium 24 + 2 Path Traversal
desc.dataflow.dart.path_manipulation
Abstract
Si se permite que una entrada de usuario controle las rutas de acceso que se usan en operaciones del sistema de archivos, un atacante podría acceder a recursos del sistema protegidos o modificarlos de algún modo.
Explanation
Se producen errores de manipulación de la ruta de acceso cuando se cumplen las dos condiciones siguientes:

1. Un atacante puede especificar una ruta de acceso que se utiliza en una operación en el sistema de archivos.

2. Al especificar el recurso, el usuario malintencionado consigue una capacidad que de otro modo no estaría permitida.

Por ejemplo, el programa puede otorgar al atacante la capacidad de sobrescribir el archivo especificado o ejecutar una configuración controlada por el atacante.
Ejemplo 1: El código siguiente utiliza la entrada de una solicitud HTTP para crear un nombre de archivo. El programador no ha considerado la posibilidad de que un usuario malintencionado pudiese proporcionar un nombre de archivo como "../../tomcat/conf/server.xml", lo que podría causar que la aplicación eliminase uno de sus propios archivos de configuración.


rName := "/usr/local/apfr/reports/" + req.FormValue("fName")

rFile, err := os.OpenFile(rName, os.O_RDWR|os.O_CREATE, 0755)

defer os.Remove(rName);
defer rFile.Close()
...

Ejemplo 2: El siguiente código utiliza una entrada de un archivo de configuración para determinar el archivo que se debe abrir y devolver al usuario. Si el programa se ejecuta con los privilegios adecuados y los usuarios malintencionados pueden cambiar el archivo de configuración, estos pueden utilizar el programa para leer cualquier archivo del sistema que termine con la extensión .txt.


...
config := ReadConfigFile()

filename := config.fName + ".txt";
data, err := ioutil.ReadFile(filename)

...

fmt.Println(string(data))
References
[1] G. Hoglund, G. McGraw Exploiting Software Addison-Wesley
[2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 22, CWE ID 73
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2019 [10] CWE ID 022
[4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2020 [12] CWE ID 022
[5] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2021 [8] CWE ID 022
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2022 [8] CWE ID 022
[7] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2023 [8] CWE ID 022
[8] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [5] CWE ID 022, [12] CWE ID 020
[9] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-000345, CCI-002754
[10] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 SI
[11] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Access Violation
[12] Standards Mapping - Motor Industry Software Reliability Association (MISRA) C Guidelines 2012 Rule 1.3
[13] Standards Mapping - Motor Industry Software Reliability Association (MISRA) C Guidelines 2023 Directive 4.14, Rule 1.3
[14] Standards Mapping - Motor Industry Software Reliability Association (MISRA) C++ Guidelines 2008 Rule 0-3-1
[15] Standards Mapping - Motor Industry Software Reliability Association (MISRA) C++ Guidelines 2023 Rule 4.1.3
[16] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 CM-5 Access Restrictions for Change (P1), SI-10 Information Input Validation (P1)
[17] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 CM-5 Access Restrictions for Change, SI-10 Information Input Validation
[18] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 5.2.2 Sanitization and Sandboxing Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 12.3.1 File Execution Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 12.3.2 File Execution Requirements (L1 L2 L3)
[19] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M8 Security Decisions Via Untrusted Inputs
[20] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M4 Insufficient Input/Output Validation
[21] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CODE-4, MASVS-PLATFORM-1
[22] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A1 Unvalidated Input
[23] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A4 Insecure Direct Object Reference
[24] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A4 Insecure Direct Object References
[25] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A4 Insecure Direct Object References
[26] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A5 Broken Access Control
[27] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A01 Broken Access Control
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[29] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.1, Requirement 6.5.4
[30] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.5.8
[31] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.8
[32] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.8
[33] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.8
[34] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.8
[35] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[36] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
[37] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control
[38] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation
[39] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective C.2.3 - Web Software Access Controls, Control Objective C.3.2 - Web Software Attack Mitigation
[40] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2009 Risky Resource Management - CWE ID 426
[41] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2010 Risky Resource Management - CWE ID 022
[42] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2011 Risky Resource Management - CWE ID 022
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[53] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[54] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[55] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[56] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[57] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[58] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[59] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[60] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[61] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[62] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[63] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I, APSC-DV-002960 CAT II
[64] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I, APSC-DV-002960 CAT II
[65] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Path Traversal (WASC-33)
[66] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium 24 + 2 Path Traversal
desc.dataflow.golang.path_manipulation
Abstract
Si se permite que una entrada de usuario controle las rutas de acceso que se usan en operaciones del sistema de archivos, un atacante podría acceder a recursos del sistema protegidos o modificarlos de algún modo.
Explanation
Se producen errores de manipulación de la ruta de acceso cuando se cumplen las dos condiciones siguientes:

1. Un atacante puede especificar una ruta de acceso que se utiliza en una operación en el sistema de archivos.

2. Al especificar el recurso, el usuario malintencionado consigue una capacidad que de otro modo no estaría permitida.

Por ejemplo, el programa puede otorgar al atacante la capacidad de sobrescribir el archivo especificado o ejecutar una configuración controlada por el atacante.
Ejemplo 1: el código siguiente utiliza la entrada de una solicitud HTTP para crear un nombre de archivo. El programador no ha considerado la posibilidad de que un usuario malintencionado pudiese proporcionar un nombre de archivo como "../../tomcat/conf/server.xml", lo que podría causar que la aplicación eliminase uno de sus propios archivos de configuración.


String rName = request.getParameter("reportName");
File rFile = new File("/usr/local/apfr/reports/" + rName);
...
rFile.delete();
Ejemplo 2: el siguiente código utiliza una entrada de un archivo de configuración para determinar el archivo que se debe abrir y reenviar al usuario. Si el programa se ejecuta con los privilegios adecuados y los usuarios malintencionados pueden cambiar el archivo de configuración, estos podrán utilizar el programa para leer cualquier archivo del sistema que termine con la extensión .txt.


fis = new FileInputStream(cfg.getProperty("sub")+".txt");
amt = fis.read(arr);
out.println(arr);


Algunos piensan que en los entornos móviles las vulnerabilidades clásicas como la manipulación de rutas de acceso no tienen ningún sentido: ¿por qué se atacaría a sí mismo un usuario? Sin embargo, tenga en cuenta que la esencia de las plataformas móviles consiste en aplicaciones que se descargan desde varias fuentes y se ejecutan junto con otras en el mismo dispositivo. La probabilidad de ejecutar un malware junto a una aplicación de banca es bastante alta, de modo que se necesita expandir la superficie expuesta a ataques de las aplicaciones móviles para que incluyan las comunicaciones entre procesos.

Ejemplo 3: el siguiente código adapta el Example 1 a la plataforma Android.


...
String rName = this.getIntent().getExtras().getString("reportName");
File rFile = getBaseContext().getFileStreamPath(rName);
...
rFile.delete();
...
References
[1] G. Hoglund, G. McGraw Exploiting Software Addison-Wesley
[2] FIO00-J. Do not operate on files in shared directories CERT
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 22, CWE ID 73
[4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2019 [10] CWE ID 022
[5] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2020 [12] CWE ID 022
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2021 [8] CWE ID 022
[7] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2022 [8] CWE ID 022
[8] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2023 [8] CWE ID 022
[9] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [5] CWE ID 022, [12] CWE ID 020
[10] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-000345, CCI-002754
[11] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 SI
[12] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Access Violation
[13] Standards Mapping - Motor Industry Software Reliability Association (MISRA) C Guidelines 2012 Rule 1.3
[14] Standards Mapping - Motor Industry Software Reliability Association (MISRA) C Guidelines 2023 Directive 4.14, Rule 1.3
[15] Standards Mapping - Motor Industry Software Reliability Association (MISRA) C++ Guidelines 2008 Rule 0-3-1
[16] Standards Mapping - Motor Industry Software Reliability Association (MISRA) C++ Guidelines 2023 Rule 4.1.3
[17] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 CM-5 Access Restrictions for Change (P1), SI-10 Information Input Validation (P1)
[18] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 CM-5 Access Restrictions for Change, SI-10 Information Input Validation
[19] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 5.2.2 Sanitization and Sandboxing Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 12.3.1 File Execution Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 12.3.2 File Execution Requirements (L1 L2 L3)
[20] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M8 Security Decisions Via Untrusted Inputs
[21] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M4 Insufficient Input/Output Validation
[22] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CODE-4, MASVS-PLATFORM-1
[23] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A1 Unvalidated Input
[24] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A4 Insecure Direct Object Reference
[25] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A4 Insecure Direct Object References
[26] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A4 Insecure Direct Object References
[27] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A5 Broken Access Control
[28] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A01 Broken Access Control
[29] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[30] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.1, Requirement 6.5.4
[31] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.5.8
[32] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.8
[33] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.8
[34] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.8
[35] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.8
[36] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[37] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
[38] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control
[39] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation
[40] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective C.2.3 - Web Software Access Controls, Control Objective C.3.2 - Web Software Attack Mitigation
[41] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2009 Risky Resource Management - CWE ID 426
[42] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2010 Risky Resource Management - CWE ID 022
[43] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2011 Risky Resource Management - CWE ID 022
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[53] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[54] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[55] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[56] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[57] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[58] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[59] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[60] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[61] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[62] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[63] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[64] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I, APSC-DV-002960 CAT II
[65] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I, APSC-DV-002960 CAT II
[66] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Path Traversal (WASC-33)
[67] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium 24 + 2 Path Traversal
desc.dataflow.java.path_manipulation
Abstract
Si se permite que una entrada de usuario controle las rutas de acceso que se usan en operaciones del sistema de archivos, un atacante podría acceder a recursos del sistema protegidos o modificarlos de algún modo.
Explanation
Se producen errores de manipulación de la ruta de acceso cuando se cumplen las dos condiciones siguientes:

1. Un atacante puede especificar una ruta de acceso que se utiliza en una operación en el sistema de archivos.

2. Al especificar el recurso, el usuario malintencionado consigue una capacidad que de otro modo no estaría permitida.

Por ejemplo, el programa puede otorgar al atacante la capacidad de sobrescribir el archivo especificado o ejecutar una configuración controlada por el atacante.
Ejemplo 1: el código siguiente utiliza la entrada de una solicitud HTTP para crear un nombre de archivo. El programador no ha considerado la posibilidad de que un usuario malintencionado pudiese proporcionar un nombre de archivo como "../../tomcat/conf/server.xml", lo que podría causar que la aplicación eliminase uno de sus propios archivos de configuración.


...
var reportNameParam = "reportName=";
var reportIndex = document.indexOf(reportNameParam);
if (reportIndex < 0) return;
var rName = document.URL.substring(reportIndex+reportNameParam.length);
window.requestFileSystem(window.TEMPORARY, 1024*1024, function(fs) {
fs.root.getFile('/usr/local/apfr/reports/' + rName, {create: false}, function(fileEntry) {
fileEntry.remove(function() {
console.log('File removed.');
}, errorHandler);

}, errorHandler);
}, errorHandler);
Ejemplo 2: el código siguiente utiliza entrada del almacenamiento local para determinar qué archivo abrir y devolver al usuario. Si los usuarios maliciosos pueden cambiar el contenido del almacenamiento local, pueden utilizar el programa para leer cualquier archivo del sistema que termine con la extensión .txt.


...
var filename = localStorage.sub + '.txt';
function oninit(fs) {
fs.root.getFile(filename, {}, function(fileEntry) {
fileEntry.file(function(file) {
var reader = new FileReader();
reader.onloadend = function(e) {
var txtArea = document.createElement('textarea');
txtArea.value = this.result;
document.body.appendChild(txtArea);
};
reader.readAsText(file);
}, errorHandler);
}, errorHandler);
}

window.requestFileSystem(window.TEMPORARY, 1024*1024, oninit, errorHandler);
...
References
[1] G. Hoglund, G. McGraw Exploiting Software Addison-Wesley
[2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 22, CWE ID 73
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2019 [10] CWE ID 022
[4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2020 [12] CWE ID 022
[5] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2021 [8] CWE ID 022
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2022 [8] CWE ID 022
[7] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2023 [8] CWE ID 022
[8] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [5] CWE ID 022, [12] CWE ID 020
[9] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-000345, CCI-002754
[10] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 SI
[11] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Access Violation
[12] Standards Mapping - Motor Industry Software Reliability Association (MISRA) C Guidelines 2012 Rule 1.3
[13] Standards Mapping - Motor Industry Software Reliability Association (MISRA) C Guidelines 2023 Directive 4.14, Rule 1.3
[14] Standards Mapping - Motor Industry Software Reliability Association (MISRA) C++ Guidelines 2008 Rule 0-3-1
[15] Standards Mapping - Motor Industry Software Reliability Association (MISRA) C++ Guidelines 2023 Rule 4.1.3
[16] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 CM-5 Access Restrictions for Change (P1), SI-10 Information Input Validation (P1)
[17] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 CM-5 Access Restrictions for Change, SI-10 Information Input Validation
[18] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 5.2.2 Sanitization and Sandboxing Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 12.3.1 File Execution Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 12.3.2 File Execution Requirements (L1 L2 L3)
[19] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M8 Security Decisions Via Untrusted Inputs
[20] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M4 Insufficient Input/Output Validation
[21] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CODE-4, MASVS-PLATFORM-1
[22] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A1 Unvalidated Input
[23] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A4 Insecure Direct Object Reference
[24] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A4 Insecure Direct Object References
[25] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A4 Insecure Direct Object References
[26] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A5 Broken Access Control
[27] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A01 Broken Access Control
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[29] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.1, Requirement 6.5.4
[30] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.5.8
[31] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.8
[32] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.8
[33] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.8
[34] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.8
[35] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[36] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
[37] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control
[38] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation
[39] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective C.2.3 - Web Software Access Controls, Control Objective C.3.2 - Web Software Attack Mitigation
[40] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2009 Risky Resource Management - CWE ID 426
[41] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2010 Risky Resource Management - CWE ID 022
[42] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2011 Risky Resource Management - CWE ID 022
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[53] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[54] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[55] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[56] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[57] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[58] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[59] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[60] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[61] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[62] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[63] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I, APSC-DV-002960 CAT II
[64] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I, APSC-DV-002960 CAT II
[65] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Path Traversal (WASC-33)
[66] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium 24 + 2 Path Traversal
desc.dataflow.javascript.path_manipulation
Abstract
Si se permite que una entrada de usuario controle las rutas de acceso que se usan en operaciones del sistema de archivos, un atacante podría acceder a recursos del sistema protegidos o modificarlos de algún modo.
Explanation
Se producen errores de manipulación de la ruta de acceso cuando se cumplen las dos condiciones siguientes:

1. Un atacante puede especificar una ruta de acceso que se utiliza en una operación en el sistema de archivos.

2. Al especificar el recurso, el usuario malintencionado consigue una capacidad que de otro modo no estaría permitida.

Por ejemplo, el programa puede otorgar al atacante la capacidad de sobrescribir el archivo especificado o ejecutar una configuración controlada por el atacante.
Ejemplo 1: El código siguiente utiliza la entrada de una solicitud HTTP para crear un nombre de archivo. El programador no ha considerado la posibilidad de que un usuario malintencionado pudiese proporcionar un nombre de archivo como "../../tomcat/conf/server.xml", lo que podría causar que la aplicación eliminase uno de sus propios archivos de configuración.


val rName: String = request.getParameter("reportName")
val rFile = File("/usr/local/apfr/reports/$rName")
...
rFile.delete()
Ejemplo 2: El siguiente código utiliza una entrada de un archivo de configuración para determinar el archivo que se debe abrir y devolver al usuario. Si el programa se ejecuta con los privilegios adecuados y los usuarios malintencionados pueden cambiar el archivo de configuración, estos pueden utilizar el programa para leer cualquier archivo del sistema que termine con la extensión .txt.


fis = FileInputStream(cfg.getProperty("sub").toString() + ".txt")
amt = fis.read(arr)
out.println(arr)


Algunos piensan que en los entornos móviles las vulnerabilidades clásicas como la manipulación de rutas de acceso no tienen ningún sentido: ¿por qué se atacaría a sí mismo un usuario? Sin embargo, tenga en cuenta que la esencia de las plataformas móviles consiste en aplicaciones que se descargan desde varias fuentes y se ejecutan junto con otras en el mismo dispositivo. La probabilidad de ejecutar un malware junto a una aplicación de banca es bastante alta, de modo que se necesita expandir la superficie expuesta a ataques de las aplicaciones móviles para que incluyan las comunicaciones entre procesos.

Ejemplo 3: el siguiente código adapta el Example 1 a la plataforma Android.


...
val rName: String = getIntent().getExtras().getString("reportName")
val rFile: File = getBaseContext().getFileStreamPath(rName)
...
rFile.delete()
...
References
[1] G. Hoglund, G. McGraw Exploiting Software Addison-Wesley
[2] FIO00-J. Do not operate on files in shared directories CERT
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 22, CWE ID 73
[4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2019 [10] CWE ID 022
[5] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2020 [12] CWE ID 022
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2021 [8] CWE ID 022
[7] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2022 [8] CWE ID 022
[8] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2023 [8] CWE ID 022
[9] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [5] CWE ID 022, [12] CWE ID 020
[10] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-000345, CCI-002754
[11] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 SI
[12] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Access Violation
[13] Standards Mapping - Motor Industry Software Reliability Association (MISRA) C Guidelines 2012 Rule 1.3
[14] Standards Mapping - Motor Industry Software Reliability Association (MISRA) C Guidelines 2023 Directive 4.14, Rule 1.3
[15] Standards Mapping - Motor Industry Software Reliability Association (MISRA) C++ Guidelines 2008 Rule 0-3-1
[16] Standards Mapping - Motor Industry Software Reliability Association (MISRA) C++ Guidelines 2023 Rule 4.1.3
[17] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 CM-5 Access Restrictions for Change (P1), SI-10 Information Input Validation (P1)
[18] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 CM-5 Access Restrictions for Change, SI-10 Information Input Validation
[19] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 5.2.2 Sanitization and Sandboxing Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 12.3.1 File Execution Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 12.3.2 File Execution Requirements (L1 L2 L3)
[20] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M8 Security Decisions Via Untrusted Inputs
[21] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M4 Insufficient Input/Output Validation
[22] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CODE-4, MASVS-PLATFORM-1
[23] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A1 Unvalidated Input
[24] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A4 Insecure Direct Object Reference
[25] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A4 Insecure Direct Object References
[26] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A4 Insecure Direct Object References
[27] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A5 Broken Access Control
[28] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A01 Broken Access Control
[29] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[30] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.1, Requirement 6.5.4
[31] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.5.8
[32] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.8
[33] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.8
[34] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.8
[35] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.8
[36] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[37] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
[38] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control
[39] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation
[40] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective C.2.3 - Web Software Access Controls, Control Objective C.3.2 - Web Software Attack Mitigation
[41] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2009 Risky Resource Management - CWE ID 426
[42] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2010 Risky Resource Management - CWE ID 022
[43] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2011 Risky Resource Management - CWE ID 022
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[53] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[54] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[55] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[56] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[57] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[58] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[59] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[60] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[61] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[62] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[63] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[64] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I, APSC-DV-002960 CAT II
[65] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I, APSC-DV-002960 CAT II
[66] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Path Traversal (WASC-33)
[67] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium 24 + 2 Path Traversal
desc.dataflow.kotlin.path_manipulation
Abstract
Los atacantes pueden controlar el argumento de la ruta de acceso del sistema de archivos que les permite tener acceso o modificar los archivos protegidos en caso contrario.
Explanation
Se producen errores de manipulación de la ruta de acceso cuando se cumplen las dos condiciones siguientes:

1. Un atacante puede especificar una ruta de acceso que se utiliza en una operación en el sistema de archivos.

2. Al especificar el recurso, el usuario malintencionado consigue una capacidad que de otro modo no estaría permitida.

Por ejemplo, el programa puede otorgar al atacante la capacidad de sobrescribir el archivo especificado o ejecutar una configuración controlada por el atacante.
Ejemplo 1: el código siguiente utiliza los datos que el usuario introduce para crear una ruta de archivo. El programador no ha considerado la posibilidad de que un atacante pudiese proporcionar otro nombre de archivo, lo que podría hacer que la aplicación eliminase un archivo de configuración que no debía.


- (NSData*) testFileManager {

NSString *rootfolder = @"/Documents/";
NSString *filePath = [rootfolder stringByAppendingString:[fileName text]];

NSFileManager *fm = [NSFileManager defaultManager];
return [fm contentsAtPath:filePath];
}
References
[1] G. Hoglund, G. McGraw Exploiting Software Addison-Wesley
[2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 22, CWE ID 73
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2019 [10] CWE ID 022
[4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2020 [12] CWE ID 022
[5] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2021 [8] CWE ID 022
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2022 [8] CWE ID 022
[7] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2023 [8] CWE ID 022
[8] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [5] CWE ID 022, [12] CWE ID 020
[9] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-000345, CCI-002754
[10] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 SI
[11] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Access Violation
[12] Standards Mapping - Motor Industry Software Reliability Association (MISRA) C Guidelines 2012 Rule 1.3
[13] Standards Mapping - Motor Industry Software Reliability Association (MISRA) C Guidelines 2023 Directive 4.14, Rule 1.3
[14] Standards Mapping - Motor Industry Software Reliability Association (MISRA) C++ Guidelines 2008 Rule 0-3-1
[15] Standards Mapping - Motor Industry Software Reliability Association (MISRA) C++ Guidelines 2023 Rule 4.1.3
[16] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 CM-5 Access Restrictions for Change (P1), SI-10 Information Input Validation (P1)
[17] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 CM-5 Access Restrictions for Change, SI-10 Information Input Validation
[18] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 5.2.2 Sanitization and Sandboxing Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 12.3.1 File Execution Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 12.3.2 File Execution Requirements (L1 L2 L3)
[19] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M8 Security Decisions Via Untrusted Inputs
[20] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M4 Insufficient Input/Output Validation
[21] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CODE-4, MASVS-PLATFORM-1
[22] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A1 Unvalidated Input
[23] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A4 Insecure Direct Object Reference
[24] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A4 Insecure Direct Object References
[25] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A4 Insecure Direct Object References
[26] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A5 Broken Access Control
[27] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A01 Broken Access Control
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[29] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.1, Requirement 6.5.4
[30] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.5.8
[31] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.8
[32] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.8
[33] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.8
[34] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.8
[35] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[36] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
[37] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control
[38] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation
[39] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective C.2.3 - Web Software Access Controls, Control Objective C.3.2 - Web Software Attack Mitigation
[40] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2009 Risky Resource Management - CWE ID 426
[41] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2010 Risky Resource Management - CWE ID 022
[42] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2011 Risky Resource Management - CWE ID 022
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[53] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[54] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[55] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[56] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[57] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[58] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[59] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[60] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[61] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[62] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[63] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I, APSC-DV-002960 CAT II
[64] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I, APSC-DV-002960 CAT II
[65] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Path Traversal (WASC-33)
[66] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium 24 + 2 Path Traversal
desc.dataflow.objc.path_manipulation
Abstract
Si se permite que una entrada de usuario controle las rutas de acceso que se usan en operaciones del sistema de archivos, un atacante podría acceder a recursos del sistema protegidos o modificarlos de algún modo.
Explanation
Se producen errores de manipulación de la ruta de acceso cuando se cumplen las dos condiciones siguientes:

1. Un atacante puede especificar una ruta de acceso que se utiliza en una operación en el sistema de archivos.

2. Al especificar el recurso, el usuario malintencionado consigue una capacidad que de otro modo no estaría permitida.

Por ejemplo, el programa puede otorgar al atacante la capacidad de sobrescribir el archivo especificado o ejecutar una configuración controlada por el atacante.
Ejemplo 1: el código siguiente utiliza la entrada de una solicitud HTTP para crear un nombre de archivo. El programador no ha considerado la posibilidad de que un usuario malintencionado pudiese proporcionar un nombre de archivo como "../../tomcat/conf/server.xml", lo que podría causar que la aplicación eliminase uno de sus propios archivos de configuración.


$rName = $_GET['reportName'];
$rFile = fopen("/usr/local/apfr/reports/" . rName,"a+");
...
unlink($rFile);
Ejemplo 2: el siguiente código utiliza una entrada de un archivo de configuración para determinar el archivo que se debe abrir y reenviar al usuario. Si el programa se ejecuta con los privilegios adecuados y los usuarios malintencionados pueden cambiar el archivo de configuración, estos podrán utilizar el programa para leer cualquier archivo del sistema que termine con la extensión .txt.


...
$filename = $CONFIG_TXT['sub'] . ".txt";
$handle = fopen($filename,"r");
$amt = fread($handle, filesize($filename));
echo $amt;
...
References
[1] G. Hoglund, G. McGraw Exploiting Software Addison-Wesley
[2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 22, CWE ID 73
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2019 [10] CWE ID 022
[4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2020 [12] CWE ID 022
[5] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2021 [8] CWE ID 022
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2022 [8] CWE ID 022
[7] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2023 [8] CWE ID 022
[8] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [5] CWE ID 022, [12] CWE ID 020
[9] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-000345, CCI-002754
[10] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 SI
[11] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Access Violation
[12] Standards Mapping - Motor Industry Software Reliability Association (MISRA) C Guidelines 2012 Rule 1.3
[13] Standards Mapping - Motor Industry Software Reliability Association (MISRA) C Guidelines 2023 Directive 4.14, Rule 1.3
[14] Standards Mapping - Motor Industry Software Reliability Association (MISRA) C++ Guidelines 2008 Rule 0-3-1
[15] Standards Mapping - Motor Industry Software Reliability Association (MISRA) C++ Guidelines 2023 Rule 4.1.3
[16] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 CM-5 Access Restrictions for Change (P1), SI-10 Information Input Validation (P1)
[17] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 CM-5 Access Restrictions for Change, SI-10 Information Input Validation
[18] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 5.2.2 Sanitization and Sandboxing Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 12.3.1 File Execution Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 12.3.2 File Execution Requirements (L1 L2 L3)
[19] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M8 Security Decisions Via Untrusted Inputs
[20] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M4 Insufficient Input/Output Validation
[21] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CODE-4, MASVS-PLATFORM-1
[22] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A1 Unvalidated Input
[23] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A4 Insecure Direct Object Reference
[24] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A4 Insecure Direct Object References
[25] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A4 Insecure Direct Object References
[26] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A5 Broken Access Control
[27] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A01 Broken Access Control
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[29] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.1, Requirement 6.5.4
[30] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.5.8
[31] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.8
[32] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.8
[33] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.8
[34] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.8
[35] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[36] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
[37] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control
[38] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation
[39] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective C.2.3 - Web Software Access Controls, Control Objective C.3.2 - Web Software Attack Mitigation
[40] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2009 Risky Resource Management - CWE ID 426
[41] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2010 Risky Resource Management - CWE ID 022
[42] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2011 Risky Resource Management - CWE ID 022
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[53] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[54] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[55] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[56] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[57] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[58] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[59] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[60] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[61] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[62] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[63] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I, APSC-DV-002960 CAT II
[64] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I, APSC-DV-002960 CAT II
[65] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Path Traversal (WASC-33)
[66] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium 24 + 2 Path Traversal
desc.dataflow.php.path_manipulation
Abstract
Si se permite que una entrada de usuario controle las rutas de acceso que se usan en operaciones del sistema de archivos, un atacante podría acceder a recursos del sistema protegidos o modificarlos de algún modo.
Explanation
Se producen errores de manipulación de la ruta de acceso cuando se cumplen las dos condiciones siguientes:

1. Un atacante puede especificar una ruta de acceso que se utiliza en una operación en el sistema de archivos.

2. Al especificar el recurso, el usuario malintencionado consigue una capacidad que de otro modo no estaría permitida.

Por ejemplo, el programa puede otorgar al atacante la capacidad de sobrescribir el archivo especificado o ejecutar una configuración controlada por el atacante.
Ejemplo 1: el código siguiente utiliza la entrada de una solicitud HTTP para crear un nombre de archivo. El programador no ha considerado la posibilidad de que un usuario malintencionado pudiese proporcionar un nombre de archivo como "../../tomcat/conf/server.xml", lo que podría causar que la aplicación eliminase uno de sus propios archivos de configuración.


rName = req.field('reportName')
rFile = os.open("/usr/local/apfr/reports/" + rName)
...
os.unlink(rFile);
Ejemplo 2: el siguiente código utiliza una entrada de un archivo de configuración para determinar el archivo que se debe abrir y reenviar al usuario. Si el programa se ejecuta con los privilegios adecuados y los usuarios malintencionados pueden cambiar el archivo de configuración, estos podrán utilizar el programa para leer cualquier archivo del sistema que termine con la extensión .txt.


...
filename = CONFIG_TXT['sub'] + ".txt";
handle = os.open(filename)
print handle
...
References
[1] G. Hoglund, G. McGraw Exploiting Software Addison-Wesley
[2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 22, CWE ID 73
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2019 [10] CWE ID 022
[4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2020 [12] CWE ID 022
[5] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2021 [8] CWE ID 022
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2022 [8] CWE ID 022
[7] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2023 [8] CWE ID 022
[8] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [5] CWE ID 022, [12] CWE ID 020
[9] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-000345, CCI-002754
[10] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 SI
[11] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Access Violation
[12] Standards Mapping - Motor Industry Software Reliability Association (MISRA) C Guidelines 2012 Rule 1.3
[13] Standards Mapping - Motor Industry Software Reliability Association (MISRA) C Guidelines 2023 Directive 4.14, Rule 1.3
[14] Standards Mapping - Motor Industry Software Reliability Association (MISRA) C++ Guidelines 2008 Rule 0-3-1
[15] Standards Mapping - Motor Industry Software Reliability Association (MISRA) C++ Guidelines 2023 Rule 4.1.3
[16] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 CM-5 Access Restrictions for Change (P1), SI-10 Information Input Validation (P1)
[17] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 CM-5 Access Restrictions for Change, SI-10 Information Input Validation
[18] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 5.2.2 Sanitization and Sandboxing Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 12.3.1 File Execution Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 12.3.2 File Execution Requirements (L1 L2 L3)
[19] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M8 Security Decisions Via Untrusted Inputs
[20] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M4 Insufficient Input/Output Validation
[21] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CODE-4, MASVS-PLATFORM-1
[22] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A1 Unvalidated Input
[23] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A4 Insecure Direct Object Reference
[24] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A4 Insecure Direct Object References
[25] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A4 Insecure Direct Object References
[26] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A5 Broken Access Control
[27] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A01 Broken Access Control
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[29] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.1, Requirement 6.5.4
[30] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.5.8
[31] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.8
[32] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.8
[33] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.8
[34] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.8
[35] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[36] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
[37] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control
[38] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation
[39] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective C.2.3 - Web Software Access Controls, Control Objective C.3.2 - Web Software Attack Mitigation
[40] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2009 Risky Resource Management - CWE ID 426
[41] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2010 Risky Resource Management - CWE ID 022
[42] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2011 Risky Resource Management - CWE ID 022
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[53] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[54] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[55] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[56] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[57] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[58] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[59] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[60] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[61] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[62] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[63] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I, APSC-DV-002960 CAT II
[64] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I, APSC-DV-002960 CAT II
[65] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Path Traversal (WASC-33)
[66] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium 24 + 2 Path Traversal
desc.dataflow.python.path_manipulation
Abstract
Si se permite que una entrada de usuario controle las rutas de acceso que se usan en operaciones del sistema de archivos, un atacante podría acceder a recursos del sistema protegidos o modificarlos de algún modo.
Explanation
Se producen errores de manipulación de la ruta de acceso cuando se cumplen las dos condiciones siguientes:

1. Un atacante puede especificar una ruta de acceso que se utiliza en una operación en el sistema de archivos.

2. Al especificar el recurso, el usuario malintencionado consigue una capacidad que de otro modo no estaría permitida.

Por ejemplo, el programa puede otorgar al atacante la capacidad de sobrescribir el archivo especificado o ejecutar una configuración controlada por el atacante.
Ejemplo 1: El código siguiente utiliza la entrada de una solicitud HTTP para crear un nombre de archivo. El programador no ha considerado la posibilidad de que un usuario malintencionado pudiese proporcionar un nombre de archivo como "../../tomcat/conf/server.xml", lo que podría causar que la aplicación eliminase uno de sus propios archivos de configuración.


rName = req['reportName']
File.delete("/usr/local/apfr/reports/#{rName}")
Ejemplo 2: el siguiente código utiliza una entrada de un archivo de configuración para determinar el archivo que se debe abrir y reenviar al usuario. Si el programa se ejecuta con los privilegios adecuados y los usuarios malintencionados pueden cambiar el archivo de configuración, estos podrán utilizar el programa para leer cualquier archivo del sistema que termine con la extensión .txt.


...
fis = File.new("#{cfg.getProperty("sub")}.txt")
amt = fis.read
puts amt
References
[1] G. Hoglund, G. McGraw Exploiting Software Addison-Wesley
[2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 22, CWE ID 73
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2019 [10] CWE ID 022
[4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2020 [12] CWE ID 022
[5] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2021 [8] CWE ID 022
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2022 [8] CWE ID 022
[7] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2023 [8] CWE ID 022
[8] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [5] CWE ID 022, [12] CWE ID 020
[9] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-000345, CCI-002754
[10] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 SI
[11] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Access Violation
[12] Standards Mapping - Motor Industry Software Reliability Association (MISRA) C Guidelines 2012 Rule 1.3
[13] Standards Mapping - Motor Industry Software Reliability Association (MISRA) C Guidelines 2023 Directive 4.14, Rule 1.3
[14] Standards Mapping - Motor Industry Software Reliability Association (MISRA) C++ Guidelines 2008 Rule 0-3-1
[15] Standards Mapping - Motor Industry Software Reliability Association (MISRA) C++ Guidelines 2023 Rule 4.1.3
[16] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 CM-5 Access Restrictions for Change (P1), SI-10 Information Input Validation (P1)
[17] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 CM-5 Access Restrictions for Change, SI-10 Information Input Validation
[18] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 5.2.2 Sanitization and Sandboxing Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 12.3.1 File Execution Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 12.3.2 File Execution Requirements (L1 L2 L3)
[19] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M8 Security Decisions Via Untrusted Inputs
[20] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M4 Insufficient Input/Output Validation
[21] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CODE-4, MASVS-PLATFORM-1
[22] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A1 Unvalidated Input
[23] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A4 Insecure Direct Object Reference
[24] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A4 Insecure Direct Object References
[25] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A4 Insecure Direct Object References
[26] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A5 Broken Access Control
[27] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A01 Broken Access Control
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[29] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.1, Requirement 6.5.4
[30] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.5.8
[31] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.8
[32] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.8
[33] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.8
[34] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.8
[35] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[36] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
[37] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control
[38] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation
[39] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective C.2.3 - Web Software Access Controls, Control Objective C.3.2 - Web Software Attack Mitigation
[40] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2009 Risky Resource Management - CWE ID 426
[41] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2010 Risky Resource Management - CWE ID 022
[42] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2011 Risky Resource Management - CWE ID 022
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[53] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[54] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[55] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[56] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[57] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[58] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[59] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[60] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[61] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[62] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[63] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I, APSC-DV-002960 CAT II
[64] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I, APSC-DV-002960 CAT II
[65] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Path Traversal (WASC-33)
[66] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium 24 + 2 Path Traversal
desc.dataflow.ruby.path_manipulation
Abstract
Si se permite que una entrada de usuario controle las rutas de acceso que se usan en operaciones del sistema de archivos, un atacante podría acceder a recursos del sistema protegidos o modificarlos de algún modo.
Explanation
Se producen errores de manipulación de la ruta de acceso cuando se cumplen las dos condiciones siguientes:

1. Un atacante puede especificar una ruta de acceso que se utiliza en una operación en el sistema de archivos.

2. Al especificar el recurso, el usuario malintencionado consigue una capacidad que de otro modo no estaría permitida.

Por ejemplo, el programa puede otorgar al atacante la capacidad de sobrescribir el archivo especificado o ejecutar una configuración controlada por el atacante.
Ejemplo 1: El código siguiente utiliza la entrada de una solicitud HTTP para crear un nombre de archivo. El programador no ha considerado la posibilidad de que un usuario malintencionado pudiese proporcionar un nombre de archivo como "../../tomcat/conf/server.xml", lo que podría causar que la aplicación eliminase uno de sus propios archivos de configuración.


def readFile(reportName: String) = Action { request =>
val rFile = new File("/usr/local/apfr/reports/" + reportName)
...
rFile.delete()
}
Ejemplo 2: el siguiente código utiliza una entrada de un archivo de configuración para determinar el archivo que se debe abrir y reenviar al usuario. Si el programa se ejecuta con los privilegios adecuados y los usuarios malintencionados pueden cambiar el archivo de configuración, estos podrán utilizar el programa para leer cualquier archivo del sistema que termine con la extensión .txt.


val fis = new FileInputStream(cfg.getProperty("sub")+".txt")
val amt = fis.read(arr)
out.println(arr)
References
[1] G. Hoglund, G. McGraw Exploiting Software Addison-Wesley
[2] FIO00-J. Do not operate on files in shared directories CERT
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 22, CWE ID 73
[4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2019 [10] CWE ID 022
[5] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2020 [12] CWE ID 022
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2021 [8] CWE ID 022
[7] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2022 [8] CWE ID 022
[8] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2023 [8] CWE ID 022
[9] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [5] CWE ID 022, [12] CWE ID 020
[10] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-000345, CCI-002754
[11] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 SI
[12] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Access Violation
[13] Standards Mapping - Motor Industry Software Reliability Association (MISRA) C Guidelines 2012 Rule 1.3
[14] Standards Mapping - Motor Industry Software Reliability Association (MISRA) C Guidelines 2023 Directive 4.14, Rule 1.3
[15] Standards Mapping - Motor Industry Software Reliability Association (MISRA) C++ Guidelines 2008 Rule 0-3-1
[16] Standards Mapping - Motor Industry Software Reliability Association (MISRA) C++ Guidelines 2023 Rule 4.1.3
[17] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 CM-5 Access Restrictions for Change (P1), SI-10 Information Input Validation (P1)
[18] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 CM-5 Access Restrictions for Change, SI-10 Information Input Validation
[19] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 5.2.2 Sanitization and Sandboxing Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 12.3.1 File Execution Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 12.3.2 File Execution Requirements (L1 L2 L3)
[20] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M8 Security Decisions Via Untrusted Inputs
[21] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M4 Insufficient Input/Output Validation
[22] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CODE-4, MASVS-PLATFORM-1
[23] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A1 Unvalidated Input
[24] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A4 Insecure Direct Object Reference
[25] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A4 Insecure Direct Object References
[26] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A4 Insecure Direct Object References
[27] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A5 Broken Access Control
[28] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A01 Broken Access Control
[29] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[30] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.1, Requirement 6.5.4
[31] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.5.8
[32] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.8
[33] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.8
[34] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.8
[35] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.8
[36] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[37] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
[38] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control
[39] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation
[40] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective C.2.3 - Web Software Access Controls, Control Objective C.3.2 - Web Software Attack Mitigation
[41] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2009 Risky Resource Management - CWE ID 426
[42] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2010 Risky Resource Management - CWE ID 022
[43] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2011 Risky Resource Management - CWE ID 022
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[53] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[54] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[55] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[56] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[57] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[58] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[59] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[60] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[61] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[62] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[63] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[64] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I, APSC-DV-002960 CAT II
[65] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I, APSC-DV-002960 CAT II
[66] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Path Traversal (WASC-33)
[67] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium 24 + 2 Path Traversal
desc.dataflow.scala.path_manipulation
Abstract
Los atacantes pueden controlar el argumento de la ruta de acceso del sistema de archivos que les permite tener acceso o modificar los archivos protegidos en caso contrario.
Explanation
Se producen errores de manipulación de la ruta de acceso cuando se cumplen las dos condiciones siguientes:

1. Un atacante puede especificar una ruta de acceso que se utiliza en una operación en el sistema de archivos.

2. Al especificar el recurso, el usuario malintencionado consigue una capacidad que de otro modo no estaría permitida.

Por ejemplo, el programa puede otorgar al atacante la capacidad de sobrescribir el archivo especificado o ejecutar una configuración controlada por el atacante.
Ejemplo 1: el código siguiente utiliza los datos que el usuario introduce para crear una ruta de archivo. El programador no ha considerado la posibilidad de que un atacante pudiese proporcionar otro nombre de archivo, lo que podría hacer que la aplicación eliminase un archivo de configuración que no debía.


func testFileManager() -> NSData {
let filePath : String = "/Documents/\(fileName.text)"
let fm : NSFileManager = NSFileManager.defaultManager()
return fm.contentsAtPath(filePath)
}
References
[1] G. Hoglund, G. McGraw Exploiting Software Addison-Wesley
[2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 22, CWE ID 73
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2019 [10] CWE ID 022
[4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2020 [12] CWE ID 022
[5] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2021 [8] CWE ID 022
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2022 [8] CWE ID 022
[7] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2023 [8] CWE ID 022
[8] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [5] CWE ID 022, [12] CWE ID 020
[9] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-000345, CCI-002754
[10] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 SI
[11] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Access Violation
[12] Standards Mapping - Motor Industry Software Reliability Association (MISRA) C Guidelines 2012 Rule 1.3
[13] Standards Mapping - Motor Industry Software Reliability Association (MISRA) C Guidelines 2023 Directive 4.14, Rule 1.3
[14] Standards Mapping - Motor Industry Software Reliability Association (MISRA) C++ Guidelines 2008 Rule 0-3-1
[15] Standards Mapping - Motor Industry Software Reliability Association (MISRA) C++ Guidelines 2023 Rule 4.1.3
[16] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 CM-5 Access Restrictions for Change (P1), SI-10 Information Input Validation (P1)
[17] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 CM-5 Access Restrictions for Change, SI-10 Information Input Validation
[18] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 5.2.2 Sanitization and Sandboxing Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 12.3.1 File Execution Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 12.3.2 File Execution Requirements (L1 L2 L3)
[19] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M8 Security Decisions Via Untrusted Inputs
[20] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M4 Insufficient Input/Output Validation
[21] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CODE-4, MASVS-PLATFORM-1
[22] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A1 Unvalidated Input
[23] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A4 Insecure Direct Object Reference
[24] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A4 Insecure Direct Object References
[25] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A4 Insecure Direct Object References
[26] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A5 Broken Access Control
[27] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A01 Broken Access Control
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[29] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.1, Requirement 6.5.4
[30] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.5.8
[31] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.8
[32] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.8
[33] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.8
[34] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.8
[35] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[36] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
[37] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control
[38] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation
[39] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective C.2.3 - Web Software Access Controls, Control Objective C.3.2 - Web Software Attack Mitigation
[40] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2009 Risky Resource Management - CWE ID 426
[41] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2010 Risky Resource Management - CWE ID 022
[42] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2011 Risky Resource Management - CWE ID 022
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[53] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[54] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[55] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[56] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[57] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[58] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[59] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[60] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[61] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[62] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[63] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I, APSC-DV-002960 CAT II
[64] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I, APSC-DV-002960 CAT II
[65] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Path Traversal (WASC-33)
[66] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium 24 + 2 Path Traversal
desc.dataflow.swift.path_manipulation
Abstract
Si se permite que una entrada de usuario controle las rutas de acceso que se usan en operaciones del sistema de archivos, un atacante podría acceder a recursos del sistema protegidos o modificarlos de algún modo.
Explanation
Se producen errores de manipulación de la ruta de acceso cuando se cumplen las dos condiciones siguientes:

1. Un atacante puede especificar una ruta de acceso que se utiliza en una operación en el sistema de archivos.

2. Al especificar el recurso, el usuario malintencionado consigue una capacidad que de otro modo no estaría permitida.

Por ejemplo, el programa puede otorgar al atacante la capacidad de sobrescribir el archivo especificado o ejecutar una configuración controlada por el atacante.
Ejemplo 1: el código siguiente utiliza la entrada de una solicitud HTTP para crear un nombre de archivo. El programador no ha considerado la posibilidad de que un usuario malintencionado pudiese proporcionar un nombre de archivo como "..\conf\server.xml", lo que podría causar que la aplicación eliminase uno de sus propios archivos de configuración.


Dim rName As String
Dim fso As New FileSystemObject
Dim rFile as File
Set rName = Request.Form("reportName")
Set rFile = fso.GetFile("C:\reports\" & rName)
...
fso.DeleteFile("C:\reports\" & rName)
...
Ejemplo 2: el siguiente código utiliza una entrada de un archivo de configuración para determinar el archivo que se debe abrir y reenviar al usuario. Si el programa se ejecuta con los privilegios adecuados y los usuarios malintencionados pueden cambiar el archivo de configuración, estos podrán utilizar el programa para leer cualquier archivo del sistema que termine con la extensión .txt.


Dim fileName As String
Dim tsContent As String
Dim ts As TextStream
Dim fso As New FileSystemObject

fileName = GetPrivateProfileString("MyApp", "sub", _
"", value, Len(value), _
App.Path & "\" & "Config.ini")
...
Set ts = fso.OpenTextFile(fileName,1)
tsContent = ts.ReadAll
Response.Write tsContent
...
References
[1] G. Hoglund, G. McGraw Exploiting Software Addison-Wesley
[2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 22, CWE ID 73
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2019 [10] CWE ID 022
[4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2020 [12] CWE ID 022
[5] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2021 [8] CWE ID 022
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2022 [8] CWE ID 022
[7] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2023 [8] CWE ID 022
[8] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [5] CWE ID 022, [12] CWE ID 020
[9] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-000345, CCI-002754
[10] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 SI
[11] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Access Violation
[12] Standards Mapping - Motor Industry Software Reliability Association (MISRA) C Guidelines 2012 Rule 1.3
[13] Standards Mapping - Motor Industry Software Reliability Association (MISRA) C Guidelines 2023 Directive 4.14, Rule 1.3
[14] Standards Mapping - Motor Industry Software Reliability Association (MISRA) C++ Guidelines 2008 Rule 0-3-1
[15] Standards Mapping - Motor Industry Software Reliability Association (MISRA) C++ Guidelines 2023 Rule 4.1.3
[16] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 CM-5 Access Restrictions for Change (P1), SI-10 Information Input Validation (P1)
[17] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 CM-5 Access Restrictions for Change, SI-10 Information Input Validation
[18] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 5.2.2 Sanitization and Sandboxing Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 12.3.1 File Execution Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 12.3.2 File Execution Requirements (L1 L2 L3)
[19] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M8 Security Decisions Via Untrusted Inputs
[20] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M4 Insufficient Input/Output Validation
[21] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CODE-4, MASVS-PLATFORM-1
[22] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A1 Unvalidated Input
[23] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A4 Insecure Direct Object Reference
[24] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A4 Insecure Direct Object References
[25] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A4 Insecure Direct Object References
[26] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A5 Broken Access Control
[27] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A01 Broken Access Control
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[29] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.1, Requirement 6.5.4
[30] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.5.8
[31] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.8
[32] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.8
[33] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.8
[34] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.8
[35] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[36] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
[37] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control
[38] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation
[39] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective C.2.3 - Web Software Access Controls, Control Objective C.3.2 - Web Software Attack Mitigation
[40] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2009 Risky Resource Management - CWE ID 426
[41] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2010 Risky Resource Management - CWE ID 022
[42] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2011 Risky Resource Management - CWE ID 022
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[53] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[54] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[55] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[56] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[57] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[58] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[59] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[60] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[61] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[62] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[63] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I, APSC-DV-002960 CAT II
[64] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I, APSC-DV-002960 CAT II
[65] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Path Traversal (WASC-33)
[66] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium 24 + 2 Path Traversal
desc.dataflow.vb.path_manipulation
Abstract
Permitir que una entrada de usuario controle las rutas de acceso que se usan en operaciones del sistema de archivos, permitiría a un atacante acceder a recursos del sistema protegidos o modificarlos de otro modo.
Explanation
Path.Combine utiliza varias rutas de archivos como argumentos. Las concatena para obtener la ruta completa, lo cual habitualmente viene seguido de una llamada a read() o write() para ese archivo. La documentación describe varios escenarios distintos según si el primer parámetro o los restantes son rutas absolutas. Si se proporciona una ruta absoluta para el segundo parámetro o los restantes, Path.Combine() devolverá esa ruta absoluta. Los parámetros anteriores se ignorarán. Las implicaciones en este caso son significativas para aplicaciones que tienen código similar al ejemplo siguiente.


Ejemplo 1:El código siguiente carga un archivo de forma insegura con elementos de ruta controlados por el usuario:


// Called with user-controlled data
public static bytes[] getFile(String filename)
{
String imageDir = "\\FILESHARE\images\";
filepath = Path.Combine(imageDir, filename);
return File.ReadAllBytes(filepath);
}


Al proporcionar una ruta absoluta (p. ej., C:\\inetpub\wwwroot\web.config), un atacante puede controlar qué archivo devuelve la aplicación.
References
[1] Editorial Team Path.Combine Security Issues in ASP.NET Applications
[2] Microsoft Path.Combine Method
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 22, CWE ID 73
[4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2019 [10] CWE ID 022
[5] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2020 [12] CWE ID 022
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2021 [8] CWE ID 022
[7] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2022 [8] CWE ID 022
[8] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2023 [8] CWE ID 022
[9] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [5] CWE ID 022, [12] CWE ID 020
[10] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-000345, CCI-002754
[11] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 SI
[12] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Access Violation
[13] Standards Mapping - Motor Industry Software Reliability Association (MISRA) C Guidelines 2012 Rule 1.3
[14] Standards Mapping - Motor Industry Software Reliability Association (MISRA) C++ Guidelines 2008 Rule 0-3-1
[15] Standards Mapping - Motor Industry Software Reliability Association (MISRA) C++ Guidelines 2023 Rule 4.1.3
[16] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 CM-5 Access Restrictions for Change (P1), SI-10 Information Input Validation (P1)
[17] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 CM-5 Access Restrictions for Change, SI-10 Information Input Validation
[18] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 12.3.1 File Execution Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 12.3.2 File Execution Requirements (L1 L2 L3)
[19] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M8 Security Decisions Via Untrusted Inputs
[20] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M4 Insufficient Input/Output Validation
[21] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CODE-4
[22] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A1 Unvalidated Input
[23] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A4 Insecure Direct Object Reference
[24] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A4 Insecure Direct Object References
[25] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A4 Insecure Direct Object References
[26] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A5 Broken Access Control
[27] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A01 Broken Access Control
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[29] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.1, Requirement 6.5.4
[30] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.5.8
[31] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.8
[32] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.8
[33] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.8
[34] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.8
[35] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[36] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
[37] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control
[38] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation
[39] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective C.2.3 - Web Software Access Controls, Control Objective C.3.2 - Web Software Attack Mitigation
[40] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2009 Risky Resource Management - CWE ID 426
[41] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2010 Risky Resource Management - CWE ID 022
[42] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2011 Risky Resource Management - CWE ID 022
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[53] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[54] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[55] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[56] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[57] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[58] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[59] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[60] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[61] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[62] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[63] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I, APSC-DV-002960 CAT II
[64] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I, APSC-DV-002960 CAT II
[65] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Path Traversal (WASC-33)
[66] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium 24 + 2 Path Traversal
desc.dataflow.dotnet.path_manipulation_base_path_overwriting
Abstract
Si se permite que una entrada de usuario controle las rutas de acceso que se usan en las operaciones del sistema de archivos, un atacante podría sobrescribir archivos arbitrariamente en el sistema.
Explanation
Se producen errores Path Manipulation: Los errores Zip Entry Overwrite se producen cuando un archivo ZIP se abre y se expande sin comprobar la ruta de acceso de archivo de la entrada ZIP.

Ejemplo 1: El siguiente ejemplo extrae archivos de un archivo zip y los escribe en el disco de forma insegura.


...

" Add Binary File to
CALL METHOD lr_abap_zip->add
EXPORTING
name = p_ifile
content = lv_bufferx.

" Read Binary File to
CALL METHOD lr_abap_zip->get
EXPORTING
name = p_ifile
IMPORTING
content = lv_bufferx2.

...


En el Example 1, no se valida p_ifile antes de llevar a cabo las funciones de lectura/escritura en los datos de la entrada. Si el archivo ZIP se encontró originalmente en el directorio "/tmp/" de un equipo basado en Unix, una entrada ZIP era "../etc/hosts" y la aplicación se ejecutó con los permisos necesarios, se sobrescribe el archivo hosts del sistema. A su vez, esto permite que el tráfico del equipo vaya donde el usuario malintencionado desea, por ejemplo, a su propio equipo.
References
[1] Protecting ABAP code against Directory Traversal Attacks SAP
[2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 22, CWE ID 73
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2019 [10] CWE ID 022
[4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2020 [12] CWE ID 022
[5] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2021 [8] CWE ID 022
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2022 [8] CWE ID 022
[7] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2023 [8] CWE ID 022
[8] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [5] CWE ID 022, [12] CWE ID 020
[9] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-000345, CCI-002754
[10] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 SI
[11] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Access Violation
[12] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 CM-5 Access Restrictions for Change (P1), SI-10 Information Input Validation (P1)
[13] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 CM-5 Access Restrictions for Change, SI-10 Information Input Validation
[14] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 12.3.1 File Execution Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 12.3.2 File Execution Requirements (L1 L2 L3)
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M8 Security Decisions Via Untrusted Inputs
[16] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M4 Insufficient Input/Output Validation
[17] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CODE-4, MASVS-PLATFORM-1
[18] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A1 Unvalidated Input
[19] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A4 Insecure Direct Object Reference
[20] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A4 Insecure Direct Object References
[21] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A4 Insecure Direct Object References
[22] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A5 Broken Access Control
[23] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A01 Broken Access Control
[24] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.1, Requirement 6.5.4
[26] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.5.8
[27] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.8
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.8
[29] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.8
[30] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.8
[31] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[32] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
[33] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control
[34] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation
[35] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective C.2.3 - Web Software Access Controls, Control Objective C.3.2 - Web Software Attack Mitigation
[36] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2009 Risky Resource Management - CWE ID 426
[37] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2010 Risky Resource Management - CWE ID 022
[38] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2011 Risky Resource Management - CWE ID 022
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[53] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[54] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[55] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[56] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[57] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[58] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[59] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I, APSC-DV-002960 CAT II
[60] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I, APSC-DV-002960 CAT II
[61] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Path Traversal (WASC-33)
[62] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium 24 + 2 Path Traversal
desc.dataflow.abap.path_manipulation_zip_entry_overwrite
Abstract
Permitir que una entrada de usuario controle las rutas de acceso que se usan en las operaciones del sistema de archivos dejaría que un atacante sobrescribiera archivos arbitrariamente en el sistema.
Explanation
Se producen errores Path Manipulation: Los errores Zip Entry Overwrite se producen cuando un archivo zip se abre y se expande sin comprobar la ruta de acceso de archivo de la entrada zip.

Ejemplo 1: El siguiente ejemplo extrae archivos de un archivo zip y los escribe en el disco de forma insegura.


public static void UnzipFile(ZipArchive archive, string destDirectory)
{
foreach (var entry in archive.Entries)
{
string file = entry.FullName;
if (!string.IsNullOrEmpty(file))
{
string destFileName = Path.Combine(destDirectory, file);
entry.ExtractToFile(destFileName, true);

}
}
}


En el Example 1, no se valida entry.FullName antes de llevar a cabo las operaciones de lectura/escritura en los datos de la entrada. Si el archivo zip se colocase originalmente en el directorio "C:\TEMP", un nombre de entrada de zip incluyera "segmentos ..\" y la aplicación se ejecutase con los permisos necesarios, dicho archivo podría sobrescribir de forma arbitraria algunos archivos de sistema.
References
[1] How to: Compress and extract files Microsoft
[2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 22, CWE ID 73
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2019 [10] CWE ID 022
[4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2020 [12] CWE ID 022
[5] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2021 [8] CWE ID 022
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2022 [8] CWE ID 022
[7] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2023 [8] CWE ID 022
[8] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [5] CWE ID 022, [12] CWE ID 020
[9] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-000345, CCI-002754
[10] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 SI
[11] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Access Violation
[12] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 CM-5 Access Restrictions for Change (P1), SI-10 Information Input Validation (P1)
[13] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 CM-5 Access Restrictions for Change, SI-10 Information Input Validation
[14] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 12.3.1 File Execution Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 12.3.2 File Execution Requirements (L1 L2 L3)
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M8 Security Decisions Via Untrusted Inputs
[16] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M4 Insufficient Input/Output Validation
[17] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CODE-4, MASVS-PLATFORM-1
[18] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A1 Unvalidated Input
[19] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A4 Insecure Direct Object Reference
[20] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A4 Insecure Direct Object References
[21] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A4 Insecure Direct Object References
[22] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A5 Broken Access Control
[23] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A01 Broken Access Control
[24] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.1, Requirement 6.5.4
[26] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.5.8
[27] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.8
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.8
[29] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.8
[30] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.8
[31] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[32] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
[33] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control
[34] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation
[35] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective C.2.3 - Web Software Access Controls, Control Objective C.3.2 - Web Software Attack Mitigation
[36] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2009 Risky Resource Management - CWE ID 426
[37] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2010 Risky Resource Management - CWE ID 022
[38] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2011 Risky Resource Management - CWE ID 022
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[53] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[54] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[55] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[56] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[57] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[58] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[59] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I, APSC-DV-002960 CAT II
[60] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I, APSC-DV-002960 CAT II
[61] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Path Traversal (WASC-33)
[62] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium 24 + 2 Path Traversal
desc.dataflow.dotnet.path_manipulation_zip_entry_overwrite
Abstract
Si se permite que una entrada de usuario controle las rutas de acceso que se usan en las operaciones del sistema de archivos, un atacante podría sobrescribir archivos arbitrariamente en el sistema.
Explanation
Se producen errores Path Manipulation: Los errores Zip Entry Overwrite se producen cuando un archivo zip se abre y se expande sin comprobar la ruta de acceso de archivo de la entrada zip.

Ejemplo 1: El siguiente ejemplo extrae archivos de un archivo zip y los escribe en el disco de forma insegura.


func Unzip(src string, dest string) ([]string, error) {
var filenames []string
r, err := zip.OpenReader(src)
if err != nil {
return filenames, err
}
defer r.Close()

for _, f := range r.File {
// Store filename/path for returning and using later on
fpath := filepath.Join(dest, f.Name)

filenames = append(filenames, fpath)

if f.FileInfo().IsDir() {
// Make Folder
os.MkdirAll(fpath, os.ModePerm)
continue
}

// Make File
if err = os.MkdirAll(filepath.Dir(fpath), os.ModePerm); err != nil {
return filenames, err
}

outFile, err := os.OpenFile(fpath, os.O_WRONLY|os.O_CREATE|os.O_TRUNC, f.Mode())
if err != nil {
return filenames, err
}

rc, err := f.Open()
if err != nil {
return filenames, err
}

_, err = io.Copy(outFile, rc)

// Close the file without defer to close before next iteration of loop
outFile.Close()
rc.Close()

if err != nil {
return filenames, err
}
}
return filenames, nil
}


En el Example 1, no se valida f.Name antes de llevar a cabo las funciones de lectura/escritura en los datos de la entrada. Si el archivo zip se encontrase originalmente en el directorio "/tmp/" de un equipo basado en Unix, una entrada zip fuese "../etc/hosts" y la aplicación se ejecutase con los permisos necesarios, se sobrescribiría el archivo hosts del sistema. A su vez, esto permitiría que el tráfico del equipo fuese donde el usuario malintencionado desease, por ejemplo, a su propio equipo.
References
[1] Unzip Files in Go
[2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 22, CWE ID 73
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2019 [10] CWE ID 022
[4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2020 [12] CWE ID 022
[5] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2021 [8] CWE ID 022
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2022 [8] CWE ID 022
[7] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2023 [8] CWE ID 022
[8] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [5] CWE ID 022, [12] CWE ID 020
[9] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-000345, CCI-002754
[10] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 SI
[11] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Access Violation
[12] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 CM-5 Access Restrictions for Change (P1), SI-10 Information Input Validation (P1)
[13] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 CM-5 Access Restrictions for Change, SI-10 Information Input Validation
[14] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 12.3.1 File Execution Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 12.3.2 File Execution Requirements (L1 L2 L3)
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M8 Security Decisions Via Untrusted Inputs
[16] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M4 Insufficient Input/Output Validation
[17] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CODE-4, MASVS-PLATFORM-1
[18] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A1 Unvalidated Input
[19] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A4 Insecure Direct Object Reference
[20] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A4 Insecure Direct Object References
[21] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A4 Insecure Direct Object References
[22] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A5 Broken Access Control
[23] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A01 Broken Access Control
[24] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.1, Requirement 6.5.4
[26] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.5.8
[27] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.8
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.8
[29] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.8
[30] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.8
[31] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[32] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
[33] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control
[34] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation
[35] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective C.2.3 - Web Software Access Controls, Control Objective C.3.2 - Web Software Attack Mitigation
[36] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2009 Risky Resource Management - CWE ID 426
[37] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2010 Risky Resource Management - CWE ID 022
[38] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2011 Risky Resource Management - CWE ID 022
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[53] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[54] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[55] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[56] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[57] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[58] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[59] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I, APSC-DV-002960 CAT II
[60] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I, APSC-DV-002960 CAT II
[61] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Path Traversal (WASC-33)
[62] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium 24 + 2 Path Traversal
desc.dataflow.golang.path_manipulation_zip_entry_overwrite
Abstract
Permitir que una entrada de usuario controle las rutas de acceso que se usan en las operaciones del sistema de archivos permitiría a un atacante sobrescribir archivos arbitrariamente en el sistema.
Explanation
Se producen errores Path Manipulation: Los errores Zip Entry Overwrite se producen cuando un archivo zip se abre y se expande sin comprobar la ruta de acceso de archivo de la entrada zip.

Ejemplo 1: El siguiente ejemplo extrae archivos de un archivo zip y los escribe en el disco de forma insegura.


private static final int BUFSIZE = 512;
private static final int TOOBIG = 0x640000;
...
public final void unzip(String filename) throws IOException {
FileInputStream fis = new FileInputStream(filename);
ZipInputStream zis = new ZipInputStream(new BufferedInputStream(fis));
ZipEntry zipEntry = null;

int numOfEntries = 0;
long total = 0;

try {
while ((zipEntry = zis.getNextEntry()) != null) {
byte data[] = new byte[BUFSIZE];
int count = 0;
String outFileName = zipEntry.getName();
if (zipEntry.isDirectory()){
new File(outFileName).mkdir(); //create the new directory
continue;
}
FileOutputStream outFile = new FileOutputStream(outFileName);
BufferedOutputStream dest = new BufferedOutputStream(outFile, BUFSIZE);
//read data from Zip, but do not read huge entries
while (total + BUFSIZE <= TOOBIG && (count = zis.read(data, 0, BUFSIZE)) != -1) {
dest.write(data, 0, count);
total += count;
}
...
}
} finally{
zis.close();
}
}
...


En el Example 1, no se valida zipEntry.getName() antes de llevar a cabo las funciones de lectura/escritura en los datos de la entrada. Si el archivo zip se encontrase originalmente en el directorio "/tmp/" de un equipo basado en Unix, una entrada zip fuese "../etc/hosts" y la aplicación se ejecutase con los permisos necesarios, se sobrescribiría el archivo hosts del sistema. A su vez, esto permitiría que el tráfico del equipo fuese donde el usuario malintencionado desease, por ejemplo, a su propio equipo.
References
[1] IDS04-J. Safely extract files from ZipInputStream CERT
[2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 22, CWE ID 73
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2019 [10] CWE ID 022
[4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2020 [12] CWE ID 022
[5] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2021 [8] CWE ID 022
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2022 [8] CWE ID 022
[7] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2023 [8] CWE ID 022
[8] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [5] CWE ID 022, [12] CWE ID 020
[9] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-000345, CCI-002754
[10] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 SI
[11] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Access Violation
[12] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 CM-5 Access Restrictions for Change (P1), SI-10 Information Input Validation (P1)
[13] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 CM-5 Access Restrictions for Change, SI-10 Information Input Validation
[14] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 12.3.1 File Execution Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 12.3.2 File Execution Requirements (L1 L2 L3)
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M8 Security Decisions Via Untrusted Inputs
[16] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M4 Insufficient Input/Output Validation
[17] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CODE-4, MASVS-PLATFORM-1
[18] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A1 Unvalidated Input
[19] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A4 Insecure Direct Object Reference
[20] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A4 Insecure Direct Object References
[21] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A4 Insecure Direct Object References
[22] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A5 Broken Access Control
[23] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A01 Broken Access Control
[24] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.1, Requirement 6.5.4
[26] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.5.8
[27] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.8
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.8
[29] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.8
[30] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.8
[31] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[32] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
[33] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control
[34] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation
[35] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective C.2.3 - Web Software Access Controls, Control Objective C.3.2 - Web Software Attack Mitigation
[36] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2009 Risky Resource Management - CWE ID 426
[37] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2010 Risky Resource Management - CWE ID 022
[38] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2011 Risky Resource Management - CWE ID 022
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[53] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[54] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[55] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[56] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[57] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[58] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[59] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I, APSC-DV-002960 CAT II
[60] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I, APSC-DV-002960 CAT II
[61] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Path Traversal (WASC-33)
[62] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium 24 + 2 Path Traversal
desc.dataflow.java.path_manipulation_zip_entry_overwrite
Abstract
Permitir que una entrada de usuario controle las rutas de acceso que se usan en las operaciones del sistema de archivos dejaría que un atacante sobrescribiera archivos arbitrariamente en el sistema.
Explanation
Se producen errores Path Manipulation: Los errores Zip Entry Overwrite se producen cuando un archivo zip se abre y se expande sin comprobar la ruta de acceso de archivo de la entrada zip.

Ejemplo 1: El siguiente ejemplo extrae archivos de un archivo zip y los escribe en el disco de forma insegura.


var unzipper = require('unzipper');
var fs = require('fs');

var untrusted_zip = getZipFromRequest();
fs.createReadStream(zipPath).pipe(unzipper.Extract({ path: 'out' }));
References
[1] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 22, CWE ID 73
[2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2019 [10] CWE ID 022
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2020 [12] CWE ID 022
[4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2021 [8] CWE ID 022
[5] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2022 [8] CWE ID 022
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2023 [8] CWE ID 022
[7] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [5] CWE ID 022, [12] CWE ID 020
[8] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-000345, CCI-002754
[9] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 SI
[10] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Access Violation
[11] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 CM-5 Access Restrictions for Change (P1), SI-10 Information Input Validation (P1)
[12] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 CM-5 Access Restrictions for Change, SI-10 Information Input Validation
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 12.3.1 File Execution Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 12.3.2 File Execution Requirements (L1 L2 L3)
[14] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M8 Security Decisions Via Untrusted Inputs
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M4 Insufficient Input/Output Validation
[16] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CODE-4, MASVS-PLATFORM-1
[17] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A1 Unvalidated Input
[18] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A4 Insecure Direct Object Reference
[19] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A4 Insecure Direct Object References
[20] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A4 Insecure Direct Object References
[21] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A5 Broken Access Control
[22] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A01 Broken Access Control
[23] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[24] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.1, Requirement 6.5.4
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.5.8
[26] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.8
[27] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.8
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.8
[29] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.8
[30] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[31] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
[32] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control
[33] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation
[34] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective C.2.3 - Web Software Access Controls, Control Objective C.3.2 - Web Software Attack Mitigation
[35] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2009 Risky Resource Management - CWE ID 426
[36] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2010 Risky Resource Management - CWE ID 022
[37] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2011 Risky Resource Management - CWE ID 022
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[53] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[54] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[55] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[56] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[57] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[58] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I, APSC-DV-002960 CAT II
[59] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I, APSC-DV-002960 CAT II
[60] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Path Traversal (WASC-33)
[61] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium 24 + 2 Path Traversal
desc.structural.javascript.path_manipulation_zip_entry_overwrite
Abstract
Permitir que una entrada de usuario controle las rutas de acceso que se usan en las operaciones del sistema de archivos dejaría que un atacante sobrescribiera archivos arbitrariamente en el sistema.
Explanation
Se producen errores Path Manipulation: Los errores Zip Entry Overwrite se producen cuando un archivo zip se abre y se expande sin comprobar la ruta de acceso de archivo de la entrada zip.

Ejemplo 1: El siguiente ejemplo extrae archivos de un archivo zip y los escribe en el disco de forma insegura.


ZZArchive* archive = [ZZArchive archiveWithURL:[NSURL fileURLWithPath: zipPath] error:&error];
for (ZZArchiveEntry* entry in archive.entries) {
NSString *fullPath = [NSString stringWithFormat: @"%@/%@", destPath, [entry fileName]];
[[entry newDataWithError:nil] writeToFile:newFullPath atomically:YES];
}


En el Example 1, no se valida entry.fileName antes de llevar a cabo las funciones de lectura/escritura en los datos de la entrada. Si el archivo zip se encontrase originalmente en el directorio "Documents/hot_patches" de una aplicación iOS, y una entrada ZIP fuese "../js/page.js", dicho archivo podría sobrescribir el archivo page.js. Esto, a su vez, permitiría al atacante inyectar código malicioso que podría dar lugar a la ejecución de código.
References
[1] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 22, CWE ID 73
[2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2019 [10] CWE ID 022
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2020 [12] CWE ID 022
[4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2021 [8] CWE ID 022
[5] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2022 [8] CWE ID 022
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2023 [8] CWE ID 022
[7] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [5] CWE ID 022, [12] CWE ID 020
[8] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-000345, CCI-002754
[9] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 SI
[10] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Access Violation
[11] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 CM-5 Access Restrictions for Change (P1), SI-10 Information Input Validation (P1)
[12] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 CM-5 Access Restrictions for Change, SI-10 Information Input Validation
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 12.3.1 File Execution Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 12.3.2 File Execution Requirements (L1 L2 L3)
[14] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M8 Security Decisions Via Untrusted Inputs
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M4 Insufficient Input/Output Validation
[16] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CODE-4, MASVS-PLATFORM-1
[17] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A1 Unvalidated Input
[18] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A4 Insecure Direct Object Reference
[19] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A4 Insecure Direct Object References
[20] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A4 Insecure Direct Object References
[21] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A5 Broken Access Control
[22] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A01 Broken Access Control
[23] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[24] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.1, Requirement 6.5.4
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.5.8
[26] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.8
[27] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.8
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.8
[29] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.8
[30] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[31] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
[32] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control
[33] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation
[34] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective C.2.3 - Web Software Access Controls, Control Objective C.3.2 - Web Software Attack Mitigation
[35] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2009 Risky Resource Management - CWE ID 426
[36] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2010 Risky Resource Management - CWE ID 022
[37] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2011 Risky Resource Management - CWE ID 022
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[53] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[54] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[55] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[56] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[57] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[58] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I, APSC-DV-002960 CAT II
[59] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I, APSC-DV-002960 CAT II
[60] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Path Traversal (WASC-33)
[61] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium 24 + 2 Path Traversal
desc.dataflow.objc.path_manipulation_zip_entry_overwrite
Abstract
Si se permite que una entrada de usuario controle las rutas de acceso en las operaciones del sistema de archivos, un atacante podría sobrescribir archivos arbitrariamente en el sistema.
Explanation
Se producen errores Path Manipulation: Los errores Zip Entry Overwrite se producen cuando un archivo zip se abre y los archivos se extraen sin comprobar la ruta de acceso de archivo de la entrada zip.

Ejemplo 1: El siguiente ejemplo extrae archivos de un archivo zip y los escribe en el disco de forma insegura.


...
$zip = new ZipArchive();
$zip->open("userdefined.zip", ZipArchive::RDONLY);
$zpm = $zip->getNameIndex(0);
$zip->extractTo($zpm);
...


En el Example 1, no se valida f.Name antes de llevar a cabo las funciones de lectura/escritura en los datos de la entrada. Si el archivo zip se encuentra en el directorio "/tmp/" de un equipo basado en Unix, una entrada ZIP es "../etc/hosts" y la aplicación se ejecuta con los permisos necesarios, se sobrescribirá el archivo hosts del sistema. Esto permite que el tráfico del equipo vaya donde el usuario malintencionado desea, por ejemplo, a su propio equipo.
References
[1] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 22, CWE ID 73
[2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2019 [10] CWE ID 022
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2020 [12] CWE ID 022
[4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2021 [8] CWE ID 022
[5] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2022 [8] CWE ID 022
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2023 [8] CWE ID 022
[7] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [5] CWE ID 022, [12] CWE ID 020
[8] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-000345, CCI-002754
[9] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 SI
[10] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Access Violation
[11] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 CM-5 Access Restrictions for Change (P1), SI-10 Information Input Validation (P1)
[12] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 CM-5 Access Restrictions for Change, SI-10 Information Input Validation
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 12.3.1 File Execution Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 12.3.2 File Execution Requirements (L1 L2 L3)
[14] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M8 Security Decisions Via Untrusted Inputs
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M4 Insufficient Input/Output Validation
[16] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CODE-4, MASVS-PLATFORM-1
[17] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A1 Unvalidated Input
[18] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A4 Insecure Direct Object Reference
[19] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A4 Insecure Direct Object References
[20] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A4 Insecure Direct Object References
[21] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A5 Broken Access Control
[22] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A01 Broken Access Control
[23] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[24] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.1, Requirement 6.5.4
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.5.8
[26] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.8
[27] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.8
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.8
[29] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.8
[30] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[31] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
[32] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control
[33] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation
[34] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective C.2.3 - Web Software Access Controls, Control Objective C.3.2 - Web Software Attack Mitigation
[35] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2009 Risky Resource Management - CWE ID 426
[36] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2010 Risky Resource Management - CWE ID 022
[37] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2011 Risky Resource Management - CWE ID 022
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[53] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[54] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[55] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[56] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[57] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[58] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I, APSC-DV-002960 CAT II
[59] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I, APSC-DV-002960 CAT II
[60] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Path Traversal (WASC-33)
[61] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium 24 + 2 Path Traversal
desc.dataflow.php.path_manipulation_zip_entry_overwrite
Abstract
Permitir que una entrada de usuario controle las rutas de acceso que se usan en las operaciones del sistema de archivos dejaría que un atacante sobrescribiera archivos arbitrariamente en el sistema.
Explanation
Se producen errores Path Manipulation: Los errores Zip Entry Overwrite se producen cuando un archivo zip se abre y se expande sin comprobar la ruta de acceso de archivo de la entrada zip.

Ejemplo 1: El siguiente ejemplo extrae archivos de un archivo zip y los escribe en el disco de forma insegura.


import zipfile
import tarfile

def unzip(archive_name):
zf = zipfile.ZipFile(archive_name)
zf.extractall(".")
zf.close()

def untar(archive_name):
tf = tarfile.TarFile(archive_name)
tf.extractall(".")
tf.close()
References
[1] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 22, CWE ID 73
[2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2019 [10] CWE ID 022
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2020 [12] CWE ID 022
[4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2021 [8] CWE ID 022
[5] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2022 [8] CWE ID 022
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2023 [8] CWE ID 022
[7] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [5] CWE ID 022, [12] CWE ID 020
[8] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-000345, CCI-002754
[9] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 SI
[10] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Access Violation
[11] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 CM-5 Access Restrictions for Change (P1), SI-10 Information Input Validation (P1)
[12] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 CM-5 Access Restrictions for Change, SI-10 Information Input Validation
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 12.3.1 File Execution Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 12.3.2 File Execution Requirements (L1 L2 L3)
[14] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M8 Security Decisions Via Untrusted Inputs
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M4 Insufficient Input/Output Validation
[16] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CODE-4, MASVS-PLATFORM-1
[17] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A1 Unvalidated Input
[18] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A4 Insecure Direct Object Reference
[19] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A4 Insecure Direct Object References
[20] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A4 Insecure Direct Object References
[21] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A5 Broken Access Control
[22] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A01 Broken Access Control
[23] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[24] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.1, Requirement 6.5.4
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.5.8
[26] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.8
[27] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.8
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.8
[29] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.8
[30] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[31] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
[32] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control
[33] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation
[34] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective C.2.3 - Web Software Access Controls, Control Objective C.3.2 - Web Software Attack Mitigation
[35] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2009 Risky Resource Management - CWE ID 426
[36] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2010 Risky Resource Management - CWE ID 022
[37] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2011 Risky Resource Management - CWE ID 022
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[53] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[54] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[55] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[56] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[57] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[58] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I, APSC-DV-002960 CAT II
[59] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I, APSC-DV-002960 CAT II
[60] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Path Traversal (WASC-33)
[61] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium 24 + 2 Path Traversal
desc.dataflow.python.path_manipulation_zip_entry_overwrite
Abstract
Permitir que una entrada de usuario controle las rutas de acceso que se usan en las operaciones del sistema de archivos dejaría que un atacante sobrescribiera archivos arbitrariamente en el sistema.
Explanation
Se producen errores Path Manipulation: Los errores Zip Entry Overwrite se producen cuando un archivo zip se abre y se expande sin comprobar la ruta de acceso de archivo de la entrada zip.

Ejemplo 1: El siguiente ejemplo extrae archivos de un archivo zip y los escribe en el disco de forma insegura.


import better.files._

...

val zipPath: File = getUntrustedZip()
val destinationPath = file"out/dest"
zipPath.unzipTo(destination = destinationPath)
Ejemplo 2: El siguiente ejemplo extrae archivos de un archivo zip y los escribe en el disco de forma insegura.


import better.files._

...

val zipPath: File = getUntrustedZip()
val destinationPath = file"out/dest"
zipPath.newZipInputStream.mapEntries( (entry : ZipEntry) => {
entry.extractTo(destinationPath, new FileInputStream(entry.getName))
})


En el Example 2, no se valida entry.getName antes de llevar a cabo las funciones de lectura/escritura en los datos de la entrada. Si el archivo zip se encontrase originalmente en el directorio "/tmp/" de un equipo basado en Unix, una entrada zip fuese "../etc/hosts" y la aplicación se ejecutase con los permisos necesarios, se sobrescribiría el archivo hosts del sistema. A su vez, esto permitiría que el tráfico del equipo fuese donde el usuario malintencionado desease, por ejemplo, a su propio equipo.
References
[1] IDS04-J. Safely extract files from ZipInputStream CERT
[2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 22, CWE ID 73
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2019 [10] CWE ID 022
[4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2020 [12] CWE ID 022
[5] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2021 [8] CWE ID 022
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2022 [8] CWE ID 022
[7] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2023 [8] CWE ID 022
[8] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [5] CWE ID 022, [12] CWE ID 020
[9] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-000345, CCI-002754
[10] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 SI
[11] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Access Violation
[12] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 CM-5 Access Restrictions for Change (P1), SI-10 Information Input Validation (P1)
[13] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 CM-5 Access Restrictions for Change, SI-10 Information Input Validation
[14] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 12.3.1 File Execution Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 12.3.2 File Execution Requirements (L1 L2 L3)
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M8 Security Decisions Via Untrusted Inputs
[16] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M4 Insufficient Input/Output Validation
[17] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CODE-4, MASVS-PLATFORM-1
[18] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A1 Unvalidated Input
[19] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A4 Insecure Direct Object Reference
[20] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A4 Insecure Direct Object References
[21] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A4 Insecure Direct Object References
[22] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A5 Broken Access Control
[23] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A01 Broken Access Control
[24] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.1, Requirement 6.5.4
[26] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.5.8
[27] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.8
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.8
[29] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.8
[30] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.8
[31] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[32] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
[33] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control
[34] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation
[35] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective C.2.3 - Web Software Access Controls, Control Objective C.3.2 - Web Software Attack Mitigation
[36] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2009 Risky Resource Management - CWE ID 426
[37] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2010 Risky Resource Management - CWE ID 022
[38] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2011 Risky Resource Management - CWE ID 022
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[53] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[54] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[55] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[56] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[57] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[58] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[59] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I, APSC-DV-002960 CAT II
[60] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I, APSC-DV-002960 CAT II
[61] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Path Traversal (WASC-33)
[62] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium 24 + 2 Path Traversal
desc.dataflow.scala.path_manipulation_zip_entry_overwrite
Abstract
Permitir que una entrada de usuario controle las rutas de acceso que se usan en las operaciones del sistema de archivos dejaría que un atacante sobrescribiera archivos arbitrariamente en el sistema.
Explanation
Se producen errores Path Manipulation: Los errores Zip Entry Overwrite se producen cuando un archivo zip se abre y se expande sin comprobar la ruta de acceso de archivo de la entrada zip.

Ejemplo 1: El siguiente ejemplo extrae archivos de un archivo zip y los escribe en el disco de forma insegura.


let archive = try ZZArchive.init(url: URL(fileURLWithPath: zipPath))

for entry in archive.entries {
let fullPath = URL(fileURLWithPath: destPath + "/" + entry.fileName)
try entry.newData().write(to: fullPath)
}


En el Example 1, no se valida entry.fileName antes de llevar a cabo las funciones de lectura/escritura en los datos de la entrada. Si el archivo zip se encontrase originalmente en el directorio "Documents/hot_patches" de una aplicación iOS, y una entrada ZIP fuese "../js/page.js", dicho archivo podría sobrescribir el archivo page.js. Esto, a su vez, permitiría al atacante inyectar código malicioso que podría dar lugar a la ejecución de código.
References
[1] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 22, CWE ID 73
[2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2019 [10] CWE ID 022
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2020 [12] CWE ID 022
[4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2021 [8] CWE ID 022
[5] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2022 [8] CWE ID 022
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2023 [8] CWE ID 022
[7] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [5] CWE ID 022, [12] CWE ID 020
[8] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-000345, CCI-002754
[9] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 SI
[10] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Access Violation
[11] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 CM-5 Access Restrictions for Change (P1), SI-10 Information Input Validation (P1)
[12] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 CM-5 Access Restrictions for Change, SI-10 Information Input Validation
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 12.3.1 File Execution Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 12.3.2 File Execution Requirements (L1 L2 L3)
[14] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M8 Security Decisions Via Untrusted Inputs
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M4 Insufficient Input/Output Validation
[16] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CODE-4, MASVS-PLATFORM-1
[17] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A1 Unvalidated Input
[18] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A4 Insecure Direct Object Reference
[19] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A4 Insecure Direct Object References
[20] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A4 Insecure Direct Object References
[21] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A5 Broken Access Control
[22] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A01 Broken Access Control
[23] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[24] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.1, Requirement 6.5.4
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.5.8
[26] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.8
[27] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.8
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.8
[29] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.8
[30] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[31] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
[32] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control
[33] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation
[34] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective C.2.3 - Web Software Access Controls, Control Objective C.3.2 - Web Software Attack Mitigation
[35] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2009 Risky Resource Management - CWE ID 426
[36] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2010 Risky Resource Management - CWE ID 022
[37] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2011 Risky Resource Management - CWE ID 022
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[53] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[54] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[55] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[56] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[57] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[58] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I, APSC-DV-002960 CAT II
[59] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I, APSC-DV-002960 CAT II
[60] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Path Traversal (WASC-33)
[61] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium 24 + 2 Path Traversal
desc.dataflow.swift.path_manipulation_zip_entry_overwrite
Abstract
El programa invoca una función que puede sobrescribir las variables y podría dar vía libre a los usuarios malintencionados.
Explanation
Las funciones que pueden sobrescribir las variables que ya se han inicializado pueden permitir a un usuario malintencionado influir en la ejecución de código que se basa en las variables que se sobrescriben.
puede sobrescribir variables.

Ejemplo 1: si un atacante facilita un valor malintencionado para varName en el siguiente segmento de código ColdFusion, la llamada a SetVariable() podría sobrescribir cualquier variable arbitraria, incluida #first#. En este caso, si un valor malintencionado que contenga JavaScript sobrescribe #first#, el programa es vulnerable a los Cross-Site Scripting.


<cfset first = "User">
<cfscript>
SetVariable(url.varName, url.varValue);
</cfscript>
<cfoutput>
#first#
</cfoutput>
References
[1] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 473
[2] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-001310
[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 Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CODE-4
[7] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.6
[8] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.6
[9] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.6
[10] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.6
[11] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[12] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
[13] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection
[14] 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
[15] 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
[16] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II
[17] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II
desc.dataflow.cfml.possible_variable_overwrite
Abstract
El programa invoca una función que puede sobrescribir las variables en el ámbito actual, lo que podría dar vía libre a los usuarios malintencionados.
Explanation
Las funciones que pueden sobrescribir las variables que ya se han iniciado en el ámbito actual pueden permitir a un usuario malintencionado influir en la ejecución de código que se basa en las variables que se sobrescriben.
Ejemplo 1: si un atacante facilita un valor malintencionado para str en el siguiente segmento de código PHP, la llamada a parse_str() podría sobrescribir cualquier variable arbitraria, incluida first. En este caso, si un valor malintencionado que contenga JavaScript sobrescribe first, el programa es vulnerable a los Cross-Site Scripting.


<?php
$first="User";
...
$str = $_SERVER['QUERY_STRING'];
parse_str($str);
echo $first;
?>
References
[1] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 473
[2] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-001310
[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 - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.6
[7] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.6
[8] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.6
[9] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.6
[10] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[11] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
[12] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection
[13] 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
[14] 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
[15] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II
[16] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II
desc.dataflow.php.possible_variable_overwrite_current_scope
Abstract
El programa invoca una función que puede sobrescribir las variables globales, lo que puede dar vía libre a los usuarios malintencionados.
Explanation
Las funciones que pueden sobrescribir variables globales que ya se han iniciado pueden permitir a un usuario malintencionado influir en la ejecución de código que se basa en las variables que se sobrescriben.
Ejemplo 1: si un atacante facilita un valor malintencionado para str en el siguiente segmento de código PHP, la llamada a mb_parse_str() podría sobrescribir cualquier variable arbitraria, incluida first. En este caso, si un valor malintencionado que contenga JavaScript sobrescribe first, el programa es vulnerable a los Cross-Site Scripting.


<?php
$first="User";
...
$str = $_SERVER['QUERY_STRING'];
mb_parse_str($str);
echo $first;
?>
References
[1] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 473
[2] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-001310
[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 - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.6
[7] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.6
[8] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.6
[9] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.6
[10] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[11] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
[12] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection
[13] 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
[14] 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
[15] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II
[16] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II
desc.dataflow.php.possible_variable_overwrite_global
Abstract
Si se elabora un NSPredicate dinámico con una entrada de un origen que no es de confianza, un usuario malintencionado podría modificar el significado de la instrucción.
Explanation
Las instancias de NSPredicate especifican cómo debe obtenerse o filtrarse una colección de orígenes como CoreData del sistema de almacenamiento complejo, una matriz y un diccionario. El lenguaje de consulta proporciona un lenguaje expresivo similar a SQL para definir condiciones lógicas en las que se debe buscar la colección.

Un atacante que puede influir en el predicado también puede ser capaz de modificar su significado para, por ejemplo, filtrar datos, eludir controles de seguridad o suplantar a otros usuarios.

Ejemplo 1: En el ejemplo siguiente se muestra cómo se utiliza un NSPredicate como factor de autenticación para acceder a algunos datos almacenados por la aplicación. Dado que los usuarios pueden proporcionar valores PIN arbitrarios, podrán utilizar un carácter comodín (*) para eludir la protección PIN.


NSString *pin = [self getPinFromUser];
NSPredicate *predicate = [NSPredicate predicateWithFormat:@"pin LIKE %@", pin];
References
[1] Swift Core Data Format String Injection nVisium
[2] David Thiel iOS Application Security: The Definitive Guide for Hackers and Developers No Starch Press
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 566
[4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2023 [24] CWE ID 863
[5] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [18] CWE ID 863
[6] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-000213, CCI-001084, CCI-001310, CCI-002165
[7] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 AC
[8] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Indirect Access to Sensitive Data
[9] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 AC-3 Access Enforcement (P1), SC-3 Security Function Isolation (P1), SI-10 Information Input Validation (P1)
[10] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 AC-3 Access Enforcement, SC-3 Security Function Isolation, SI-10 Information Input Validation
[11] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 4.1.2 General Access Control Design (L1 L2 L3), 4.1.3 General Access Control Design (L1 L2 L3), 4.1.5 General Access Control Design (L1 L2 L3), 4.2.1 Operation Level Access Control (L1 L2 L3)
[12] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M5 Poor Authorization and Authentication
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M4 Insufficient Input/Output Validation
[14] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-AUTH-1, MASVS-CODE-4
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A2 Broken Access Control
[16] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A4 Insecure Direct Object Reference
[17] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A4 Insecure Direct Object References
[18] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A4 Insecure Direct Object References
[19] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A5 Broken Access Control
[20] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A03 Injection
[21] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.2
[22] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.5.4
[23] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.5.8
[24] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.8
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.8
[26] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.8
[27] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.8
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[29] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
[30] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection
[31] 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
[32] 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
[33] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2011 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 863
[34] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3480.1 CAT II
[35] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3480.1 CAT I
[36] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3480.1 CAT I
[37] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3480.1 CAT I
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3480.1 CAT I
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3480.1 CAT I
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3480.1 CAT I
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II, APSC-DV-002360 CAT II
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II, APSC-DV-002360 CAT II
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II, APSC-DV-002360 CAT II
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II, APSC-DV-002360 CAT II
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II, APSC-DV-002360 CAT II
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II, APSC-DV-002360 CAT II
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II, APSC-DV-002360 CAT II
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II, APSC-DV-002360 CAT II
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II, APSC-DV-002360 CAT II
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II, APSC-DV-002360 CAT II
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II, APSC-DV-002360 CAT II
[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II, APSC-DV-002360 CAT II
[53] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II, APSC-DV-002360 CAT II
[54] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II, APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002530 CAT II
[55] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II, APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002530 CAT II
[56] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Insufficient Authorization (WASC-02)
[57] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium 24 + 2 Insufficient Authorization
desc.dataflow.objc.predicate_injection
Abstract
Si se elabora un NSPredicate dinámico con una entrada de un origen que no es de confianza, un usuario malintencionado podría modificar el significado de la instrucción.
Explanation
Las instancias de NSPredicate especifican cómo debe obtenerse o filtrarse una colección de orígenes como CoreData del sistema de almacenamiento complejo, una matriz y un diccionario. El lenguaje de consulta proporciona un lenguaje expresivo similar a SQL para definir condiciones lógicas en las que se debe buscar la colección.

Un atacante que puede influir en el predicado también puede ser capaz de modificar su significado para, por ejemplo, filtrar datos, eludir controles de seguridad o suplantar a otros usuarios.

Ejemplo 1: En el ejemplo siguiente se muestra cómo se utiliza un NSPredicate como factor de autenticación para acceder a algunos datos almacenados por la aplicación. Dado que los usuarios pueden proporcionar valores PIN arbitrarios, podrán utilizar un carácter comodín (*) para eludir la protección PIN.


let pin = getPinFromUser();
let predicate = NSPredicate(format: "pin LIKE '\(pin)'", argumentArray: nil)
References
[1] Swift Core Data Format String Injection nVisium
[2] David Thiel iOS Application Security: The Definitive Guide for Hackers and Developers No Starch Press
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 566
[4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2023 [24] CWE ID 863
[5] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [18] CWE ID 863
[6] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-000213, CCI-001084, CCI-001310, CCI-002165
[7] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 AC
[8] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Indirect Access to Sensitive Data
[9] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 AC-3 Access Enforcement (P1), SC-3 Security Function Isolation (P1), SI-10 Information Input Validation (P1)
[10] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 AC-3 Access Enforcement, SC-3 Security Function Isolation, SI-10 Information Input Validation
[11] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 4.1.2 General Access Control Design (L1 L2 L3), 4.1.3 General Access Control Design (L1 L2 L3), 4.1.5 General Access Control Design (L1 L2 L3), 4.2.1 Operation Level Access Control (L1 L2 L3)
[12] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M5 Poor Authorization and Authentication
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M4 Insufficient Input/Output Validation
[14] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-AUTH-1, MASVS-CODE-4
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A2 Broken Access Control
[16] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A4 Insecure Direct Object Reference
[17] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A4 Insecure Direct Object References
[18] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A4 Insecure Direct Object References
[19] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A5 Broken Access Control
[20] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A03 Injection
[21] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.2
[22] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.5.4
[23] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.5.8
[24] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.8
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.8
[26] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.8
[27] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.8
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[29] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
[30] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection
[31] 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
[32] 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
[33] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2011 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 863
[34] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3480.1 CAT II
[35] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3480.1 CAT I
[36] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3480.1 CAT I
[37] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3480.1 CAT I
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3480.1 CAT I
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3480.1 CAT I
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3480.1 CAT I
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II, APSC-DV-002360 CAT II
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II, APSC-DV-002360 CAT II
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II, APSC-DV-002360 CAT II
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II, APSC-DV-002360 CAT II
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II, APSC-DV-002360 CAT II
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II, APSC-DV-002360 CAT II
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II, APSC-DV-002360 CAT II
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II, APSC-DV-002360 CAT II
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II, APSC-DV-002360 CAT II
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II, APSC-DV-002360 CAT II
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II, APSC-DV-002360 CAT II
[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II, APSC-DV-002360 CAT II
[53] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II, APSC-DV-002360 CAT II
[54] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II, APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002530 CAT II
[55] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II, APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002530 CAT II
[56] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Insufficient Authorization (WASC-02)
[57] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium 24 + 2 Insufficient Authorization
desc.dataflow.swift.predicate_injection
Abstract
La transferencia del control del programa a un programa o una transacción no confiables, o a un entorno que no es de confianza puede hacer que una aplicación ejecute comandos malintencionados en nombre de un usuario malintencionado.
Explanation
Las vulnerabilidades de control del proceso presentan dos formas:

- Un usuario malintencionado puede cambiar el nombre del programa o el código de la transacción que se invoca: el usuario malintencionado controla explícitamente el código de transacción o el nombre del programa.

- Un atacante puede cambiar el entorno en el que se invoca al programa o a la transacción: el usuario malintencionado controla implícitamente un área de comunicación que se pone a disposición de la transacción o el programa invocados.

En este caso, nos ocupamos principalmente del primer escenario, la posibilidad de que un usuario malintencionado pueda controlar el nombre del programa o el código de la transacción que se invoca. Las vulnerabilidades de control del proceso de este tipo se producen cuando:

1. Los datos entran en la aplicación desde una fuente no confiable.



2. Los datos se utilizan como una cadena o como parte de una cadena que representa un nombre de programa o código de transacción que se invoca.



3. Mediante la ejecución de código desde la transacción o el programa invocados, la aplicación otorga al usuario malintencionado un privilegio o una capacidad que no tendría de otro modo.

Ejemplo 1: El siguiente fragmento de código de una utilidad del sistema con privilegios lee un valor de una solicitud HTTP para determinar el código de la transacción al que llamar.


...
tid = request->get_form_field( 'tid' ).

CALL TRANSACTION tid USING bdcdata MODE 'N'
MESSAGES INTO messtab.
...


Este fragmento de código permite a un usuario malintencionado llamar a cualquier transacción y ejecutar potencialmente código arbitrario con los privilegios elevados de la aplicación. Dado que el programa no valida el valor leído desde la solicitud HTTP, si un usuario malintencionado puede controlar este valor, podrá engañar a la aplicación para que ejecute código malintencionado y tome el control del sistema.
References
[1] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 114, CWE ID 494
[2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2019 [3] CWE ID 020
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2020 [3] CWE ID 020
[4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2021 [4] CWE ID 020
[5] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2022 [4] CWE ID 020
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2023 [6] CWE ID 020
[7] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [12] CWE ID 020
[8] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-001764, CCI-001774, CCI-002754
[9] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 SI
[10] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Indirect Access to Sensitive Data
[11] Standards Mapping - Motor Industry Software Reliability Association (MISRA) C Guidelines 2012 Rule 1.3
[12] Standards Mapping - Motor Industry Software Reliability Association (MISRA) C Guidelines 2023 Directive 4.14, Rule 1.3
[13] Standards Mapping - Motor Industry Software Reliability Association (MISRA) C++ Guidelines 2008 Rule 0-3-1
[14] Standards Mapping - Motor Industry Software Reliability Association (MISRA) C++ Guidelines 2023 Rule 4.1.3
[15] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 CM-7 Least Functionality (P1), SI-10 Information Input Validation (P1)
[16] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 CM-7 Least Functionality, SI-10 Information Input Validation
[17] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 1.14.2 Configuration Architectural Requirements (L2 L3), 5.1.3 Input Validation Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 5.1.4 Input Validation Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 10.2.3 Malicious Code Search (L3), 10.3.2 Deployed Application Integrity Controls (L1 L2 L3), 12.3.3 File Execution Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 14.2.3 Dependency (L1 L2 L3)
[18] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M7 Client Side Injection
[19] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M4 Insufficient Input/Output Validation
[20] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CODE-4
[21] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A1 Unvalidated Input
[22] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A4 Insecure Direct Object Reference
[23] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A4 Insecure Direct Object References
[24] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A4 Insecure Direct Object References
[25] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A5 Broken Access Control
[26] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A01 Broken Access Control
[27] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.1, Requirement 6.5.4
[29] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.5.8
[30] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.8
[31] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.8
[32] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.8
[33] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.8
[34] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[35] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
[36] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control
[37] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation
[38] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective C.2.3 - Web Software Access Controls, Control Objective C.3.2 - Web Software Attack Mitigation
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3510 CAT I, APP3570 CAT I
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3510 CAT I, APP3570 CAT I
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3510 CAT I, APP3570 CAT I
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3510 CAT I, APP3570 CAT I
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3510 CAT I, APP3570 CAT I
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3510 CAT I, APP3570 CAT I
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3510 CAT I, APP3570 CAT I
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[53] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[54] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[55] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[56] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[57] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[58] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[59] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[60] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[61] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Improper Input Handling (WASC-20), Improper Filesystem Permissions (WASC-17)
desc.dataflow.abap.process_control
Abstract
La carga de bibliotecas o de ejecutables desde un origen o un entorno que no son de confianza puede ocasionar que una aplicación ejecute comandos malintencionados en nombre de un atacante.
Explanation
Las vulnerabilidades de control del proceso presentan dos formas:

- Un atacante podría cambiar el nombre de la biblioteca o del ejecutable que carga el programa: el atacante controla de manera explícita cuál es el nombre de la biblioteca o del ejecutable.

- Un atacante podría cambiar el entorno en el que se carga la biblioteca o el ejecutable: el atacante controla de manera implícita lo que significa el nombre de la biblioteca o el ejecutable.

En este caso, nos preocupa principalmente el primer escenario, la posibilidad de que un usuario malintencionado pueda controlar el nombre de la biblioteca que se ha cargado. Las vulnerabilidades de control del proceso de este tipo se producen cuando:

1. Los datos entran en la aplicación desde una fuente no confiable.



2. Los datos se utilizan como una cadena o como parte de una cadena, la cual representa una biblioteca o un ejecutable que la aplicación carga.



3. Al ejecutar el código desde la biblioteca o el ejecutable, la aplicación concede al atacante un privilegio o una capacidad que no tendría de otro modo.

Ejemplo 1: el siguiente código de una utilidad de sistema con privilegios utiliza la propiedad de configuración de aplicación APPHOME y, a continuación, carga una biblioteca nativa en función de una ruta de acceso relativa desde el directorio especificado.


...
string lib = ConfigurationManager.AppSettings["APPHOME"];
Environment.ExitCode = AppDomain.CurrentDomain.ExecuteAssembly(lib);
...


Este código permite a un atacante cargar una biblioteca o un ejecutable y posiblemente ejecutar código arbitrario con el privilegio elevado de la aplicación mediante la modificación de la propiedad APPHOME de la aplicación, con el objetivo de que apunte a una ruta diferente que contenga una versión malintencionada de LIBNAME. Como el programa no valida el valor leído en el entorno, si el atacante puede controlar el valor de la propiedad del sistema APPHOME, puede engañar a la aplicación para que ejecute código malintencionado y asumir el control del sistema.
References
[1] Dotnet 4.6 API Documentation Microsoft
[2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 114, CWE ID 494
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2019 [3] CWE ID 020
[4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2020 [3] CWE ID 020
[5] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2021 [4] CWE ID 020
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2022 [4] CWE ID 020
[7] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2023 [6] CWE ID 020
[8] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [12] CWE ID 020
[9] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-001764, CCI-001774, CCI-002754
[10] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 SI
[11] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Indirect Access to Sensitive Data
[12] Standards Mapping - Motor Industry Software Reliability Association (MISRA) C Guidelines 2012 Rule 1.3
[13] Standards Mapping - Motor Industry Software Reliability Association (MISRA) C Guidelines 2023 Directive 4.14, Rule 1.3
[14] Standards Mapping - Motor Industry Software Reliability Association (MISRA) C++ Guidelines 2008 Rule 0-3-1
[15] Standards Mapping - Motor Industry Software Reliability Association (MISRA) C++ Guidelines 2023 Rule 4.1.3
[16] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 CM-7 Least Functionality (P1), SI-10 Information Input Validation (P1)
[17] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 CM-7 Least Functionality, SI-10 Information Input Validation
[18] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 1.14.2 Configuration Architectural Requirements (L2 L3), 5.1.3 Input Validation Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 5.1.4 Input Validation Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 10.2.3 Malicious Code Search (L3), 10.3.2 Deployed Application Integrity Controls (L1 L2 L3), 12.3.3 File Execution Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 14.2.3 Dependency (L1 L2 L3)
[19] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M7 Client Side Injection
[20] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M4 Insufficient Input/Output Validation
[21] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CODE-4
[22] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A1 Unvalidated Input
[23] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A4 Insecure Direct Object Reference
[24] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A4 Insecure Direct Object References
[25] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A4 Insecure Direct Object References
[26] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A5 Broken Access Control
[27] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A01 Broken Access Control
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[29] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.1, Requirement 6.5.4
[30] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.5.8
[31] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.8
[32] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.8
[33] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.8
[34] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.8
[35] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[36] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
[37] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control
[38] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation
[39] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective C.2.3 - Web Software Access Controls, Control Objective C.3.2 - Web Software Attack Mitigation
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3510 CAT I, APP3570 CAT I
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3510 CAT I, APP3570 CAT I
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3510 CAT I, APP3570 CAT I
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3510 CAT I, APP3570 CAT I
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3510 CAT I, APP3570 CAT I
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3510 CAT I, APP3570 CAT I
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3510 CAT I, APP3570 CAT I
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[53] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[54] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[55] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[56] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[57] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[58] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[59] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[60] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[61] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[62] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Improper Input Handling (WASC-20), Improper Filesystem Permissions (WASC-17)
desc.dataflow.dotnet.process_control
Abstract
La carga de bibliotecas desde una fuente que no es de confianza o un entorno no confiable puede provocar que una aplicación ejecute código malicioso en nombre de un usuario malintencionado.
Explanation
Las vulnerabilidades de control del proceso presentan dos formas:

- Un atacante puede cambiar la biblioteca que el programa ejecuta: el atacante controla explícitamente cuál es la biblioteca.

- Un usuario malintencionado puede modificar el entorno en el que se carga la biblioteca: este controla de forma implícita lo que significa el nombre de la biblioteca.

En este caso, nos preocupa principalmente el primer escenario, la posibilidad de que un usuario malintencionado pueda controlar el nombre de la biblioteca que se ha cargado. Las vulnerabilidades de control del proceso de este tipo se producen cuando:

1. Los datos entran en la aplicación desde una fuente no confiable.

2. Los datos se utilizan como parte de una cadena que representa un nombre de biblioteca cargada por la aplicación.

3. Al ejecutar el código desde la biblioteca, la aplicación concede al usuario malintencionado un privilegio o capacidad que, de lo contrario, no tendría.

Ejemplo 1: el siguiente código de una aplicación con privilegios utiliza una entrada del Registro para determinar el directorio en el que se ha instalado y carga un archivo de biblioteca en función de una ruta relativa desde el directorio especificado.


...
RegQueryValueEx(hkey, "APPHOME",
0, 0, (BYTE*)home, &size);
char* lib=(char*)malloc(strlen(home)+strlen(INITLIB));
if (lib) {
strcpy(lib,home);
strcat(lib,INITCMD);
LoadLibrary(lib);
}
...


El código de este ejemplo permite a un usuario malintencionado cargar una biblioteca arbitraria desde la que se ejecutará el código con el privilegio elevado de la aplicación, modificando una clave del Registro para especificar una ruta diferente que contenga una versión maliciosa de INITLIB. Como el programa no valida el valor leído del entorno, si un usuario malintencionado puede controlar el valor de APPHOME, este puede engañar a la aplicación para que ejecute código malicioso.

Ejemplo 2: el siguiente código procede de una utilidad de administración basada en la Web que concede acceso a los usuarios a una interfaz mediante la que pueden actualizar su perfil en el sistema. La utilidad usa una biblioteca con el nombre liberty.dll, que se supone que se encuentra en un directorio del sistema estándar.


LoadLibrary("liberty.dll");


Sin embargo, el programa no especifica una ruta absoluta para liberty.dll. Si un usuario malintencionado traslada en el orden de búsqueda una biblioteca maliciosa con el nombre liberty.dll a una posición superior que el archivo previsto y consigue ejecutar el programa en su entorno en lugar de en el entorno del servidor web, la aplicación cargará la biblioteca maliciosa en lugar de la de confianza. Como este tipo de aplicación se ejecuta con privilegios elevados, el contenido del archivo liberty.dll del usuario malintencionado se ejecutará ahora también con este nivel de privilegios, lo que podría darle el control completo del sistema.

Este tipo de ataque es posible debido al orden de búsqueda usado por LoadLibrary() cuando no se especifica una ruta absoluta. Si se realiza una búsqueda en el directorio actual antes que en los directorios del sistema, como era el caso hasta las versiones más recientes de Windows, este tipo de ataque pasa a ser trivial si el atacante puede ejecutar de forma local el programa. El orden de búsqueda depende de la versión del sistema operativo y, en los sistemas operativos más recientes, se controla mediante el valor de esta clave del Registro:


HKLM\System\CurrentControlSet\Control\Session Manager\SafeDllSearchMode


La clave no está definida en los sistemas Windows 2000/NT ni Windows Me/98/95.

En los sistemas en los que existe la clave, LoadLibrary() presenta el siguiente comportamiento:
Si SafeDllSearchMode es 1, se utiliza el siguiente orden de búsqueda:
(Configuración predeterminada para Windows XP-SP1 y versiones posteriores, así como para Windows Server 2003.)
1. El directorio desde el que se cargó la aplicación.
2. El directorio del sistema.
3. El directorio del sistema de 16 bits, si existe.
4. El directorio de Windows.
5. El directorio actual.
6. Los directorios enumerados en la variable de entorno PATH.
Si SafeDllSearchMode es 0, se utiliza el siguiente orden de búsqueda:
1. El directorio desde el que se cargó la aplicación.
2. El directorio actual.
3. El directorio del sistema.
4. El directorio del sistema de 16 bits, si existe.
5. El directorio de Windows.
6. Los directorios enumerados en la variable de entorno PATH.
References
[1] LoadLibraryW function Microsoft
[2] M. Howard, D. LeBlanc Writing Secure Code, Second Edition Microsoft Press
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 114, CWE ID 494
[4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2019 [3] CWE ID 020
[5] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2020 [3] CWE ID 020
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2021 [4] CWE ID 020
[7] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2022 [4] CWE ID 020
[8] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2023 [6] CWE ID 020
[9] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [12] CWE ID 020
[10] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-001764, CCI-001774, CCI-002754
[11] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 SI
[12] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Indirect Access to Sensitive Data
[13] Standards Mapping - Motor Industry Software Reliability Association (MISRA) C Guidelines 2012 Rule 1.3
[14] Standards Mapping - Motor Industry Software Reliability Association (MISRA) C Guidelines 2023 Directive 4.14, Rule 1.3
[15] Standards Mapping - Motor Industry Software Reliability Association (MISRA) C++ Guidelines 2008 Rule 0-3-1
[16] Standards Mapping - Motor Industry Software Reliability Association (MISRA) C++ Guidelines 2023 Rule 4.1.3
[17] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 CM-7 Least Functionality (P1), SI-10 Information Input Validation (P1)
[18] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 CM-7 Least Functionality, SI-10 Information Input Validation
[19] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 1.14.2 Configuration Architectural Requirements (L2 L3), 5.1.3 Input Validation Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 5.1.4 Input Validation Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 10.2.3 Malicious Code Search (L3), 10.3.2 Deployed Application Integrity Controls (L1 L2 L3), 12.3.3 File Execution Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 14.2.3 Dependency (L1 L2 L3)
[20] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M7 Client Side Injection
[21] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M4 Insufficient Input/Output Validation
[22] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CODE-4
[23] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A1 Unvalidated Input
[24] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A4 Insecure Direct Object Reference
[25] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A4 Insecure Direct Object References
[26] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A4 Insecure Direct Object References
[27] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A5 Broken Access Control
[28] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A01 Broken Access Control
[29] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[30] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.1, Requirement 6.5.4
[31] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.5.8
[32] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.8
[33] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.8
[34] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.8
[35] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.8
[36] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[37] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
[38] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control
[39] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation
[40] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective C.2.3 - Web Software Access Controls, Control Objective C.3.2 - Web Software Attack Mitigation
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3510 CAT I, APP3570 CAT I
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3510 CAT I, APP3570 CAT I
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3510 CAT I, APP3570 CAT I
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3510 CAT I, APP3570 CAT I
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3510 CAT I, APP3570 CAT I
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3510 CAT I, APP3570 CAT I
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3510 CAT I, APP3570 CAT I
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[53] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[54] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[55] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[56] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[57] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[58] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[59] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[60] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[61] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[62] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[63] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Improper Input Handling (WASC-20), Improper Filesystem Permissions (WASC-17)
desc.dataflow.cpp.process_control
Abstract
La transferencia del control del programa a un programa de aplicación o a un entorno que no es de confianza puede provocar que la aplicación ejecute comandos malintencionados en nombre de un usuario malintencionado.
Explanation
Las vulnerabilidades de control del proceso presentan dos formas:

- Un usuario malintencionado puede cambiar el nombre del programa que se invoca: el usuario malintencionado controla explícitamente el nombre del programa de aplicación.

- Un usuario malintencionado puede cambiar el entorno en el que se invoca el programa: el usuario malintencionado controla implícitamente un área de comunicación que pasa a estar disponible para el programa invocado.

En este caso, nos preocupa principalmente el primer escenario, la posibilidad de que un atacante pueda controlar el nombre del programa que se invoca. Las vulnerabilidades de control del proceso de este tipo se producen cuando:

1. Los datos entran en la aplicación desde una fuente no confiable.



2. Los datos se utilizan como parte o totalidad de una cadena que representa un programa que se invoca, o determina el grado de control sobre el entorno en el que se invoca el programa.



3. Mediante la ejecución de código desde el programa invocado, la aplicación brinda al usuario malintencionado un privilegio o capacidad que dicho usuario no tendría en caso contrario.

Ejemplo 1: El siguiente código de una utilidad de sistema con privilegios lee un valor desde el terminal para determinar el nombre del programa al que se transfiere el control.


...
ACCEPT PROGNAME.
EXEC CICS
LINK PROGRAM(PROGNAME)
COMMAREA(COMA)
LENGTH(LENA)
DATALENGTH(LENI)
SYSID('CONX')
END-EXEC.
...


Este código permite a un usuario malintencionado transferir el control a un programa y potencialmente ejecutar el código arbitrario con el privilegio elevado de la aplicación. Dado que el programa no valida el valor leído del terminal, si un usuario malintencionado controla este valor, entonces puede engañar a la aplicación para que ejecute código malintencionado y tomar el control del sistema.
References
[1] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 114, CWE ID 494
[2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2019 [3] CWE ID 020
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2020 [3] CWE ID 020
[4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2021 [4] CWE ID 020
[5] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2022 [4] CWE ID 020
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2023 [6] CWE ID 020
[7] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [12] CWE ID 020
[8] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-001764, CCI-001774, CCI-002754
[9] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 SI
[10] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Indirect Access to Sensitive Data
[11] Standards Mapping - Motor Industry Software Reliability Association (MISRA) C Guidelines 2012 Rule 1.3
[12] Standards Mapping - Motor Industry Software Reliability Association (MISRA) C Guidelines 2023 Directive 4.14, Rule 1.3
[13] Standards Mapping - Motor Industry Software Reliability Association (MISRA) C++ Guidelines 2008 Rule 0-3-1
[14] Standards Mapping - Motor Industry Software Reliability Association (MISRA) C++ Guidelines 2023 Rule 4.1.3
[15] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 CM-7 Least Functionality (P1), SI-10 Information Input Validation (P1)
[16] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 CM-7 Least Functionality, SI-10 Information Input Validation
[17] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 1.14.2 Configuration Architectural Requirements (L2 L3), 5.1.3 Input Validation Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 5.1.4 Input Validation Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 10.2.3 Malicious Code Search (L3), 10.3.2 Deployed Application Integrity Controls (L1 L2 L3), 12.3.3 File Execution Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 14.2.3 Dependency (L1 L2 L3)
[18] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M7 Client Side Injection
[19] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M4 Insufficient Input/Output Validation
[20] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CODE-4
[21] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A1 Unvalidated Input
[22] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A4 Insecure Direct Object Reference
[23] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A4 Insecure Direct Object References
[24] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A4 Insecure Direct Object References
[25] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A5 Broken Access Control
[26] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A01 Broken Access Control
[27] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.1, Requirement 6.5.4
[29] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.5.8
[30] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.8
[31] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.8
[32] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.8
[33] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.8
[34] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[35] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
[36] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control
[37] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation
[38] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective C.2.3 - Web Software Access Controls, Control Objective C.3.2 - Web Software Attack Mitigation
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3510 CAT I, APP3570 CAT I
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3510 CAT I, APP3570 CAT I
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3510 CAT I, APP3570 CAT I
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3510 CAT I, APP3570 CAT I
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3510 CAT I, APP3570 CAT I
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3510 CAT I, APP3570 CAT I
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3510 CAT I, APP3570 CAT I
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[53] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[54] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[55] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[56] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[57] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[58] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[59] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[60] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[61] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Improper Input Handling (WASC-20), Improper Filesystem Permissions (WASC-17)
desc.dataflow.cobol.process_control
Abstract
La carga de bibliotecas desde una fuente que no es de confianza o un entorno no confiable puede provocar que una aplicación ejecute comandos maliciosos en nombre de un usuario malintencionado.
Explanation
Las vulnerabilidades de control del proceso presentan dos formas:

- Un usuario malintencionado puede cambiar el nombre de la biblioteca que carga el programa: este controla de forma explícita cuál es el nombre de la biblioteca.

- Un usuario malintencionado puede modificar el entorno en el que se carga la biblioteca: este controla de forma implícita lo que significa el nombre de la biblioteca.

En este caso, nos preocupa principalmente el primer escenario, la posibilidad de que un usuario malintencionado pueda controlar el nombre de la biblioteca que se ha cargado. Las vulnerabilidades de control del proceso de este tipo se producen cuando:

1. Los datos entran en la aplicación desde una fuente no confiable.



2. Los datos se utilizan como una cadena que representa una biblioteca cargada por la aplicación o como parte de esta.



3. Al ejecutar el código desde la biblioteca, la aplicación concede al usuario malintencionado un privilegio o capacidad que, de lo contrario, no tendría.

Ejemplo 1: el siguiente código de una aplicación con privilegios utiliza la propiedad del sistema APPHOME para determinar el directorio en el que se ha instalado y, a continuación, carga una biblioteca nativa en función de una ruta relativa desde el directorio especificado.


...
String home = System.getProperty("APPHOME");
String lib = home + LIBNAME;
java.lang.Runtime.getRuntime().load(lib);
...


Este código permite a un usuario malintencionado cargar una biblioteca y posiblemente ejecutar código arbitrario con el privilegio elevado de la aplicación mediante la modificación de la propiedad APPHOME para que señale a una ruta diferente que contiene una versión maliciosa de LIBNAME. Como el programa no valida el valor leído desde el entorno, si el usuario malintencionado puede controlar el valor de la propiedad del sistema APPHOME, pueden engañar a la aplicación para que ejecute código malintencionado y asuma el control del sistema.

Ejemplo 2: el siguiente código utiliza System.loadLibrary() para cargar código de una biblioteca nativa denominada library.dll, que normalmente se encuentra en un directorio del sistema estándar.


...
System.loadLibrary("library.dll");
...


El problema aquí es que System.loadLibrary() acepta un nombre de biblioteca y no una ruta para que se cargue la biblioteca. Según la documentación de la API de Java 1.4.2 API, esta función se comporta de la siguiente forma [1]:

Un archivo que contiene código nativo se carga desde el sistema de archivos local, desde una ubicación en la que se suelen obtener los archivos de biblioteca. Los detalles de este proceso dependen de la implementación. La asignación de un nombre de biblioteca a un nombre de archivo concreto se realiza de forma específica al sistema.

Si un usuario malintencionado es capaz de incluir en el orden de búsqueda una copia maliciosa de library.dll en una posición superior a la del archivo que pretende cargar la aplicación, esta cargará la copia malintencionada en lugar del archivo previsto. Dada la naturaleza de la aplicación, esta se ejecuta con privilegios elevados. Es decir, que el contenido de library.dll del usuario malintencionado se ejecutará con privilegios elevados, dándole la posibilidad de tener un control completo del sistema.
References
[1] Java 1.4.2 API Documentation Sun Microsystems
[2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 114, CWE ID 494
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2019 [3] CWE ID 020
[4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2020 [3] CWE ID 020
[5] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2021 [4] CWE ID 020
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2022 [4] CWE ID 020
[7] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2023 [6] CWE ID 020
[8] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [12] CWE ID 020
[9] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-001764, CCI-001774, CCI-002754
[10] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 SI
[11] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Indirect Access to Sensitive Data
[12] Standards Mapping - Motor Industry Software Reliability Association (MISRA) C Guidelines 2012 Rule 1.3
[13] Standards Mapping - Motor Industry Software Reliability Association (MISRA) C Guidelines 2023 Directive 4.14, Rule 1.3
[14] Standards Mapping - Motor Industry Software Reliability Association (MISRA) C++ Guidelines 2008 Rule 0-3-1
[15] Standards Mapping - Motor Industry Software Reliability Association (MISRA) C++ Guidelines 2023 Rule 4.1.3
[16] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 CM-7 Least Functionality (P1), SI-10 Information Input Validation (P1)
[17] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 CM-7 Least Functionality, SI-10 Information Input Validation
[18] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 1.14.2 Configuration Architectural Requirements (L2 L3), 5.1.3 Input Validation Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 5.1.4 Input Validation Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 10.2.3 Malicious Code Search (L3), 10.3.2 Deployed Application Integrity Controls (L1 L2 L3), 12.3.3 File Execution Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 14.2.3 Dependency (L1 L2 L3)
[19] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M7 Client Side Injection
[20] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M4 Insufficient Input/Output Validation
[21] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CODE-4
[22] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A1 Unvalidated Input
[23] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A4 Insecure Direct Object Reference
[24] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A4 Insecure Direct Object References
[25] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A4 Insecure Direct Object References
[26] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A5 Broken Access Control
[27] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A01 Broken Access Control
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[29] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.1, Requirement 6.5.4
[30] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.5.8
[31] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.8
[32] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.8
[33] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.8
[34] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.8
[35] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[36] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
[37] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control
[38] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation
[39] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective C.2.3 - Web Software Access Controls, Control Objective C.3.2 - Web Software Attack Mitigation
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3510 CAT I, APP3570 CAT I
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3510 CAT I, APP3570 CAT I
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3510 CAT I, APP3570 CAT I
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3510 CAT I, APP3570 CAT I
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3510 CAT I, APP3570 CAT I
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3510 CAT I, APP3570 CAT I
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3510 CAT I, APP3570 CAT I
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[53] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[54] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[55] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[56] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[57] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[58] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[59] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[60] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[61] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[62] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Improper Input Handling (WASC-20), Improper Filesystem Permissions (WASC-17)
desc.dataflow.java.process_control
Abstract
La carga de bibliotecas desde una fuente que no es de confianza o un entorno no confiable puede provocar que una aplicación ejecute comandos maliciosos en nombre de un usuario malintencionado.
Explanation
Las vulnerabilidades de control del proceso presentan dos formas:

- Un usuario malintencionado puede cambiar el nombre de la biblioteca que carga el programa: este controla de forma explícita cuál es el nombre de la biblioteca.

- Un usuario malintencionado puede modificar el entorno en el que se carga la biblioteca: este controla de forma implícita lo que significa el nombre de la biblioteca.

En este caso, nos preocupa principalmente el primer escenario, la posibilidad de que un usuario malintencionado pueda controlar el nombre de la biblioteca que se ha cargado. Las vulnerabilidades de control del proceso de este tipo se producen cuando:

1. Los datos entran en la aplicación desde una fuente no confiable.



2. Los datos se utilizan como una cadena que representa una biblioteca cargada por la aplicación o como parte de esta.



3. Al ejecutar el código desde la biblioteca, la aplicación concede al usuario malintencionado un privilegio o capacidad que, de lo contrario, no tendría.

Ejemplo 1: el código siguiente utiliza una "función" no documentada actualmente de Express para cargar un archivo de biblioteca de forma dinámica. Node.js seguirá buscando en la ruta de carga de biblioteca habitual un archivo o un directorio que contenga dicha biblioteca[1].


var express = require('express');
var app = express();

app.get('/', function(req, res, next) {
res.render('tutorial/' + req.params.page);
});


En Express, la página que se transfiere a Response.render() cargará una biblioteca de la extensión cuando no se conozca de antemano. Esto suele estar bien para las entradas como "foo.pug", ya que implica la carga de la biblioteca pug, un motor de creación de plantillas muy conocido. Sin embargo, si un atacante controlase la página, y por lo tanto la extensión, podría cargar cualquier biblioteca de las rutas de carga de módulos Node.js. Dado que el programa no valida la información recibida del parámetro de URL, un atacante podría engañar a la aplicación para que ejecutara código malintencionado y tomara el control del sistema.
References
[1] Node.js Modules Documentation Node.js
[2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 114, CWE ID 494
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2019 [3] CWE ID 020
[4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2020 [3] CWE ID 020
[5] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2021 [4] CWE ID 020
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2022 [4] CWE ID 020
[7] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2023 [6] CWE ID 020
[8] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [12] CWE ID 020
[9] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-001764, CCI-001774, CCI-002754
[10] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 SI
[11] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Indirect Access to Sensitive Data
[12] Standards Mapping - Motor Industry Software Reliability Association (MISRA) C Guidelines 2012 Rule 1.3
[13] Standards Mapping - Motor Industry Software Reliability Association (MISRA) C Guidelines 2023 Directive 4.14, Rule 1.3
[14] Standards Mapping - Motor Industry Software Reliability Association (MISRA) C++ Guidelines 2008 Rule 0-3-1
[15] Standards Mapping - Motor Industry Software Reliability Association (MISRA) C++ Guidelines 2023 Rule 4.1.3
[16] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 CM-7 Least Functionality (P1), SI-10 Information Input Validation (P1)
[17] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 CM-7 Least Functionality, SI-10 Information Input Validation
[18] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 1.14.2 Configuration Architectural Requirements (L2 L3), 5.1.3 Input Validation Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 5.1.4 Input Validation Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 10.2.3 Malicious Code Search (L3), 10.3.2 Deployed Application Integrity Controls (L1 L2 L3), 12.3.3 File Execution Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 14.2.3 Dependency (L1 L2 L3)
[19] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M7 Client Side Injection
[20] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M4 Insufficient Input/Output Validation
[21] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CODE-4
[22] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A1 Unvalidated Input
[23] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A4 Insecure Direct Object Reference
[24] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A4 Insecure Direct Object References
[25] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A4 Insecure Direct Object References
[26] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A5 Broken Access Control
[27] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A01 Broken Access Control
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[29] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.1, Requirement 6.5.4
[30] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.5.8
[31] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.8
[32] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.8
[33] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.8
[34] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.8
[35] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[36] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
[37] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control
[38] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation
[39] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective C.2.3 - Web Software Access Controls, Control Objective C.3.2 - Web Software Attack Mitigation
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3510 CAT I, APP3570 CAT I
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3510 CAT I, APP3570 CAT I
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3510 CAT I, APP3570 CAT I
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3510 CAT I, APP3570 CAT I
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3510 CAT I, APP3570 CAT I
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3510 CAT I, APP3570 CAT I
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3510 CAT I, APP3570 CAT I
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[53] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[54] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[55] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[56] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[57] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[58] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[59] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[60] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[61] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[62] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Improper Input Handling (WASC-20), Improper Filesystem Permissions (WASC-17)
desc.dataflow.javascript.process_control
Abstract
La carga de bibliotecas desde una fuente que no es de confianza o un entorno no confiable puede provocar que una aplicación ejecute comandos maliciosos en nombre de un usuario malintencionado.
Explanation
Las vulnerabilidades de control del proceso presentan dos formas:

- Un usuario malintencionado puede cambiar el nombre de la biblioteca que carga el programa: este controla de forma explícita cuál es el nombre de la biblioteca.

- Un usuario malintencionado puede modificar el entorno en el que se carga la biblioteca: este controla de forma implícita lo que significa el nombre de la biblioteca.

En este caso, nos preocupa principalmente el primer escenario, la posibilidad de que un usuario malintencionado pueda controlar el nombre de la biblioteca que se ha cargado. Las vulnerabilidades de control del proceso de este tipo se producen cuando:

1. Los datos entran en la aplicación desde una fuente no confiable.



2. Los datos se utilizan como una cadena que representa una biblioteca cargada por la aplicación o como parte de esta.



3. Al ejecutar el código desde la biblioteca, la aplicación concede al usuario malintencionado un privilegio o capacidad que, de lo contrario, no tendría.

Ejemplo 1: el siguiente código de una aplicación con privilegios utiliza la propiedad del sistema APPHOME para determinar el directorio en el que se ha instalado y, a continuación, carga una biblioteca nativa en función de una ruta relativa desde el directorio especificado.


...
$home = getenv("APPHOME");
$lib = $home + $LIBNAME;
dl($lib);
...


Este código permite a un usuario malintencionado cargar una biblioteca y posiblemente ejecutar código arbitrario con el privilegio elevado de la aplicación mediante la modificación de la propiedad APPHOME para que señale a una ruta diferente que contiene una versión maliciosa de LIBNAME. Como el programa no valida el valor leído desde el entorno, si el usuario malintencionado puede controlar el valor de la propiedad del sistema APPHOME, pueden engañar a la aplicación para que ejecute código malintencionado y asuma el control del sistema.

Ejemplo 2: el siguiente código utiliza dl() para cargar código de una biblioteca denominada sockets.dll, que puede cargarse desde varios ubicaciones, según la instalación y configuración.


...
dl("sockets");
...


El problema aquí es que dl() acepta un nombre de biblioteca y no una ruta para que se cargue la biblioteca.

Si un usuario malintencionado es capaz de incluir en el orden de búsqueda una copia maliciosa de sockets.dll en una posición superior a la del archivo que pretende cargar la aplicación, esta cargará la copia malintencionada en lugar del archivo previsto. Dada la naturaleza de la aplicación, esta se ejecuta con privilegios elevados. Es decir, que el contenido de sockets.dll del usuario malintencionado se ejecutará con privilegios elevados, dándole la posibilidad de tener un control completo del sistema.
References
[1] M. Achour et al. PHP Manual
[2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 114, CWE ID 494
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2019 [3] CWE ID 020
[4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2020 [3] CWE ID 020
[5] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2021 [4] CWE ID 020
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2022 [4] CWE ID 020
[7] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2023 [6] CWE ID 020
[8] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [12] CWE ID 020
[9] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-001764, CCI-001774, CCI-002754
[10] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 SI
[11] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Indirect Access to Sensitive Data
[12] Standards Mapping - Motor Industry Software Reliability Association (MISRA) C Guidelines 2012 Rule 1.3
[13] Standards Mapping - Motor Industry Software Reliability Association (MISRA) C Guidelines 2023 Directive 4.14, Rule 1.3
[14] Standards Mapping - Motor Industry Software Reliability Association (MISRA) C++ Guidelines 2008 Rule 0-3-1
[15] Standards Mapping - Motor Industry Software Reliability Association (MISRA) C++ Guidelines 2023 Rule 4.1.3
[16] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 CM-7 Least Functionality (P1), SI-10 Information Input Validation (P1)
[17] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 CM-7 Least Functionality, SI-10 Information Input Validation
[18] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 1.14.2 Configuration Architectural Requirements (L2 L3), 5.1.3 Input Validation Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 5.1.4 Input Validation Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 10.2.3 Malicious Code Search (L3), 10.3.2 Deployed Application Integrity Controls (L1 L2 L3), 12.3.3 File Execution Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 14.2.3 Dependency (L1 L2 L3)
[19] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M7 Client Side Injection
[20] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M4 Insufficient Input/Output Validation
[21] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CODE-4
[22] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A1 Unvalidated Input
[23] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A4 Insecure Direct Object Reference
[24] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A4 Insecure Direct Object References
[25] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A4 Insecure Direct Object References
[26] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A5 Broken Access Control
[27] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A01 Broken Access Control
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[29] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.1, Requirement 6.5.4
[30] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.5.8
[31] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.8
[32] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.8
[33] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.8
[34] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.8
[35] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[36] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
[37] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control
[38] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation
[39] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective C.2.3 - Web Software Access Controls, Control Objective C.3.2 - Web Software Attack Mitigation
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3510 CAT I, APP3570 CAT I
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3510 CAT I, APP3570 CAT I
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3510 CAT I, APP3570 CAT I
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3510 CAT I, APP3570 CAT I
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3510 CAT I, APP3570 CAT I
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3510 CAT I, APP3570 CAT I
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3510 CAT I, APP3570 CAT I
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[53] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[54] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[55] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[56] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[57] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[58] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[59] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[60] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[61] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[62] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Improper Input Handling (WASC-20), Improper Filesystem Permissions (WASC-17)
desc.dataflow.php.process_control
Abstract
La carga de bibliotecas desde una fuente que no es de confianza o un entorno no confiable puede provocar que una aplicación ejecute comandos maliciosos en nombre de un usuario malintencionado. Dentro de Ruby hay lugares comunes donde pueden producirse tanto ataques de control de procesos como ataques de inyección de comandos.
Explanation
Dentro de Ruby, el control de procesos puede producirse habitualmente cuando se ejecuta un comando, lo que habilita dos ataques:

1. Control de procesos
Las vulnerabilidades de control de procesos presentan dos formas:

- Un usuario malintencionado puede cambiar el nombre de la biblioteca que carga el programa: este controla de forma explícita cuál es el nombre de la biblioteca.

- Un usuario malintencionado puede modificar el entorno en el que se carga la biblioteca: este controla de forma implícita lo que significa el nombre de la biblioteca.

En este caso, nos interesa principalmente el segundo escenario, la posibilidad de que un atacante pueda ser capaz de controlar el entorno de forma que el programa cargue una versión malintencionada de la biblioteca nombrada.

1. Un atacante proporciona una biblioteca malintencionada a una aplicación.

2. La aplicación carga la biblioteca malintencionada porque no consigue especificar una ruta de acceso absoluta o verificar el archivo que se está cargando.

3. Al ejecutar el código desde la biblioteca, la aplicación concede al usuario malintencionado un privilegio o capacidad que, de lo contrario, no tendría.

Tenga en cuenta que el control de procesos puede ocurrir en plataformas Windows al ejecutar un programa externo, ya que el shell utilizado para ejecutar los comandos se elige mediante las variables de entorno RUBYSHELL o COMSPEC. Si un usuario malintencionado es capaz de modificar cualquiera de estas variables de entorno en el entorno actual, significa que el programa al que apuntan estas variables de entorno se ejecutará con el permiso o el programa de Ruby en ejecución.

2. Inyección de comandos
Las vulnerabilidades de inyección de comandos se presentan de dos formas:

- Un usuario malintencionado puede cambiar el comando que el programa ejecuta: el usuario malintencionado controla explícitamente cuál es el comando.

- Un usuario malintencionado puede cambiar el entorno en el que se ejecuta el comando: implícitamente, el usuario malintencionado controla el significado del comando.

En este caso, nos ocupamos principalmente del segundo escenario, la posibilidad de que un usuario malintencionado pueda cambiar el significado del comando cambiando una variable de entorno o colocando un ejecutable malintencionado al principio en la ruta de búsqueda. Las vulnerabilidades Command Injection de este tipo se producen cuando:

1. Un usuario malintencionado modifica el entorno de una aplicación.

2. La aplicación ejecuta un comando sin especificar una ruta de acceso absoluta o comprobar el archivo binario que se está ejecutando.

3. Al ejecutar el comando, la aplicación proporciona al usuario malintencionado un privilegio o la capacidad que el usuario malintencionado no tendría de otro modo.

Ejemplo 1: El siguiente código ejecuta Kernel.system() para ejecutar un ejecutable llamado program.exe, que normalmente se encuentra dentro de un directorio estándar del sistema.


...
system("program.exe")
...


Esto plantea un doble problema:
1. En las plataformas Windows, Kernel.system() ejecuta algo a través de un shell. Si un usuario malintencionado es capaz de manipular las variables de entorno RUBYSHELL o COMSPEC, es posible que apunten a un ejecutable malintencionado al que se llamará con el comando dado a Kernel.system(). Debido a la naturaleza de la aplicación, se ejecuta con los privilegios necesarios para realizar las operaciones del sistema, lo que significa que el comando program.exe del usuario malintencionado ahora se ejecutará con estos privilegios, posiblemente proporcionándole un control completo del sistema.
2. En todas las plataformas de este escenario, el problema es que el programa no especifica una ruta absoluta y no puede limpiar su entorno antes de ejecutar la llamada a Kernel.system(). Si un usuario malintencionado puede modificar la variable $PATH para que señale a un archivo binario malintencionado llamado program.exe y, a continuación, ejecutar la aplicación en su entorno, el archivo malintencionado binario se cargará en lugar del que se pretende. Debido a la naturaleza de la aplicación, se ejecuta con los privilegios necesarios para realizar las operaciones del sistema, lo que significa que el comando program.exe del usuario malintencionado ahora se ejecutará con estos privilegios, posiblemente proporcionándole un control completo del sistema.
References
[1] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 114, CWE ID 494
[2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2019 [3] CWE ID 020
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2020 [3] CWE ID 020
[4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2021 [4] CWE ID 020
[5] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2022 [4] CWE ID 020
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2023 [6] CWE ID 020
[7] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [12] CWE ID 020
[8] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-001764, CCI-001774, CCI-002754
[9] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 SI
[10] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Indirect Access to Sensitive Data
[11] Standards Mapping - Motor Industry Software Reliability Association (MISRA) C Guidelines 2012 Rule 1.3
[12] Standards Mapping - Motor Industry Software Reliability Association (MISRA) C Guidelines 2023 Directive 4.14, Rule 1.3
[13] Standards Mapping - Motor Industry Software Reliability Association (MISRA) C++ Guidelines 2008 Rule 0-3-1
[14] Standards Mapping - Motor Industry Software Reliability Association (MISRA) C++ Guidelines 2023 Rule 4.1.3
[15] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 CM-7 Least Functionality (P1), SI-10 Information Input Validation (P1)
[16] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 CM-7 Least Functionality, SI-10 Information Input Validation
[17] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 1.14.2 Configuration Architectural Requirements (L2 L3), 5.1.3 Input Validation Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 5.1.4 Input Validation Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 10.2.3 Malicious Code Search (L3), 10.3.2 Deployed Application Integrity Controls (L1 L2 L3), 12.3.3 File Execution Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 14.2.3 Dependency (L1 L2 L3)
[18] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M7 Client Side Injection
[19] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M4 Insufficient Input/Output Validation
[20] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CODE-4
[21] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A1 Unvalidated Input
[22] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A4 Insecure Direct Object Reference
[23] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A4 Insecure Direct Object References
[24] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A4 Insecure Direct Object References
[25] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A5 Broken Access Control
[26] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A01 Broken Access Control
[27] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.1, Requirement 6.5.4
[29] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.5.8
[30] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.8
[31] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.8
[32] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.8
[33] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.8
[34] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[35] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
[36] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control
[37] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation
[38] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective C.2.3 - Web Software Access Controls, Control Objective C.3.2 - Web Software Attack Mitigation
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3510 CAT I, APP3570 CAT I
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3510 CAT I, APP3570 CAT I
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3510 CAT I, APP3570 CAT I
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3510 CAT I, APP3570 CAT I
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3510 CAT I, APP3570 CAT I
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3510 CAT I, APP3570 CAT I
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3510 CAT I, APP3570 CAT I
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[53] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[54] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[55] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[56] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[57] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[58] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[59] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[60] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[61] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Improper Input Handling (WASC-20), Improper Filesystem Permissions (WASC-17)
desc.structural.ruby.process_control
Abstract
La clase InvokerServlet puede permitir a los usuarios malintencionados llamar a cualquier clase en el servidor.
Explanation
La clase InvokerServlet en desuso se puede utilizar para llamar a cualquier clase disponible en la máquina virtual del servidor. Al adivinar el nombre completo de una clase, un atacante no solo puede cargar las clases de servlet, sino también las clases de POJO o cualquier otra clase disponible en la JVM.
References
[1] Invocation is EVIL
[2] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-001310, CCI-001764, CCI-001774
[3] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Indirect Access to Sensitive Data
[4] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 CM-7 Least Functionality (P1), SI-10 Information Input Validation (P1)
[5] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 CM-7 Least Functionality, SI-10 Information Input Validation
[6] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.8
[7] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.8
[8] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.8
[9] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.8
[10] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[11] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
[12] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control
[13] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation
[14] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective C.2.3 - Web Software Access Controls, Control Objective C.3.2 - Web Software Attack Mitigation
[15] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II
[16] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II
[17] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II
[18] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II
[19] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II
[20] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II
[21] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II
[22] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II
[23] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II
[24] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II
[25] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II
[26] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II
[27] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II
[28] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002530 CAT II
[29] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002530 CAT II
desc.semantic.java.process_control_invoker_servlet
Abstract
Cuando envía datos no validados a solicitudes del sistema en modelos de IA, los atacantes pueden manipular los resultados o ejecutar acciones no autorizadas, lo que comprometería la integridad del sistema y la seguridad de los datos.
Explanation
En las aplicaciones de IA, las indicaciones del sistema proporcionan instrucciones de preprocesamiento o contexto que guía las respuestas de la IA. Los atacantes pueden crear entradas que, cuando se integran como indicaciones del sistema, alteran el comportamiento del modelo de IA para ejecutar operaciones no autorizadas o revelar información confidencial.

Ejemplo 1: El siguiente código ilustra una inyección de aviso del sistema a un cliente de chat de IA que utiliza Spring AI:

@GetMapping("/prompt_injection")
String generation(String userInput1, ...) {
return this.clientBuilder.build().prompt()
.system(userInput1)
.user(...)
.call()
.content();
}


En este ejemplo, el atacante manipula entradas no validadas en un mensaje del sistema, lo que puede provocar una violación de la seguridad.
References
[1] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 1427
[2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [13] CWE ID 077
desc.dataflow.java.prompt_injection
Abstract
Cuando envía datos no validados a solicitudes del sistema en modelos de IA, los atacantes pueden manipular los resultados o ejecutar acciones no autorizadas, lo que comprometería la integridad del sistema y la seguridad de los datos.
Explanation
En las aplicaciones de IA, las indicaciones del sistema proporcionan instrucciones de preprocesamiento o contexto que guía las respuestas de la IA. Los atacantes pueden crear entradas que, cuando se integran como indicaciones del sistema, alteran el comportamiento del modelo de IA para ejecutar operaciones no autorizadas o revelar información confidencial.

Ejemplo 1: El siguiente código ilustra una inyección de aviso del sistema en el modelo de IA de Anthropic:

client = new Anthropic();

# Simulated attacker's input attempting to inject a malicious system prompt
attacker_input = ...

response = client.messages.create(
model = "claude-3-5-sonnet-20240620",
max_tokens=2048,
system = attacker_input,
messages = [
{"role": "user", "content": "Analyze this dataset for anomalies: ..."}
]
);
...


En este ejemplo, el atacante manipula entradas no validadas en un mensaje del sistema, lo que puede provocar una violación de la seguridad.
References
[1] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 1427
[2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [13] CWE ID 077
desc.dataflow.javascript.prompt_injection
Abstract
Cuando envía datos no validados a solicitudes del sistema en modelos de IA, los atacantes pueden manipular los resultados o ejecutar acciones no autorizadas, lo que comprometería la integridad del sistema y la seguridad de los datos.
Explanation
En las aplicaciones de IA, las indicaciones del sistema proporcionan instrucciones de preprocesamiento o contexto que guía las respuestas de la IA. Los atacantes pueden crear entradas que, cuando se integran como indicaciones del sistema, alteran el comportamiento del modelo de IA para ejecutar operaciones no autorizadas o revelar información confidencial.

Ejemplo 1: El siguiente código Python ilustra una inyección de aviso del sistema en el modelo de IA de OpenAI:

client = OpenAI()

# Simulated attacker's input attempting to inject a malicious system prompt
attacker_input = ...

completion = client.chat.completions.create(
model="gpt-3.5-turbo",
messages=[
{"role": "system", "content": attacker_input},
{"role": "user", "content": "Compose a poem that explains the concept of recursion in programming."}
]
)


En este ejemplo, el atacante manipula entradas no validadas en un mensaje del sistema, lo que puede provocar una violación de la seguridad.
References
[1] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 1427
[2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [13] CWE ID 077
desc.dataflow.python.prompt_injection
Abstract
Cuando envía datos no validados a solicitudes del sistema en modelos de IA, los atacantes pueden manipular los resultados o ejecutar acciones no autorizadas, lo que comprometería la integridad del sistema y la seguridad de los datos.
Explanation
En las aplicaciones de IA, las indicaciones del sistema proporcionan instrucciones de preprocesamiento o contexto que guía las respuestas de la IA. Los atacantes pueden crear entradas que, cuando se integran como indicaciones del sistema, alteran el comportamiento del modelo de IA para ejecutar operaciones no autorizadas o revelar información confidencial. En el caso de una inyección rápida persistente, esta entrada no confiable generalmente proviene de una base de datos o de un almacén de datos de back-end, en lugar de una solicitud web.

Ejemplo 1: El siguiente código ilustra una inyección de aviso del sistema a un cliente de chat de IA que utiliza Spring AI:

@GetMapping("/prompt_injection_persistent")
String generation(String userInput1, ...) {
Statement stmt = conn.createStatement();
ResultSet rs = stmt.executeQuery("SELECT * FROM users WHERE ...");
String userName = "";

if (rs != null) {
rs.next();
userName = rs.getString("userName");
}

return this.clientBuilder.build().prompt()
.system("Assist the user " + userName)
.user(userInput1)
.call()
.content();
}


En este ejemplo, el atacante manipula entradas no validadas en un mensaje del sistema, lo que puede provocar una violación de la seguridad.
References
[1] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 1427
[2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [13] CWE ID 077
desc.dataflow.java.prompt_injection_persistent
Abstract
Cuando envía datos no validados a solicitudes del sistema en modelos de IA, los atacantes pueden manipular los resultados o ejecutar acciones no autorizadas, lo que comprometería la integridad del sistema y la seguridad de los datos.
Explanation
En las aplicaciones de IA, las indicaciones del sistema proporcionan instrucciones de preprocesamiento o contexto que guía las respuestas de la IA. Los atacantes pueden crear entradas que, cuando se integran como indicaciones del sistema, alteran el comportamiento del modelo de IA para ejecutar operaciones no autorizadas o revelar información confidencial. En el caso de una inyección rápida persistente, esta entrada no confiable generalmente proviene de una base de datos o de un almacén de datos de back-end, en lugar de una solicitud web.

Ejemplo 1: El siguiente código ilustra una inyección de aviso del sistema en el modelo de IA de Anthropic:

client = new Anthropic();

# Simulated attacker's input attempting to inject a malicious system prompt
attacker_query = ...;
attacker_name = db.qyery('SELECT name FROM user_profiles WHERE ...');

response = client.messages.create(
model = "claude-3-5-sonnet-20240620",
max_tokens=2048,
system = "Provide assistance to the user " + attacker_name,
messages = [
{"role": "user", "content": attacker_query}
]
);
...


En este ejemplo, el atacante manipula entradas no validadas en un mensaje del sistema, lo que puede provocar una violación de la seguridad.
References
[1] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 1427
[2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [13] CWE ID 077
desc.dataflow.javascript.prompt_injection_persistent
Abstract
Cuando envía datos no validados a solicitudes del sistema en modelos de IA, los atacantes pueden manipular los resultados o ejecutar acciones no autorizadas, lo que comprometería la integridad del sistema y la seguridad de los datos.
Explanation
En las aplicaciones de IA, las indicaciones del sistema proporcionan instrucciones de preprocesamiento o contexto que guía las respuestas de la IA. Los atacantes pueden crear entradas que, cuando se integran como indicaciones del sistema, alteran el comportamiento del modelo de IA para ejecutar operaciones no autorizadas o revelar información confidencial. En el caso de una inyección rápida persistente, esta entrada no confiable generalmente proviene de una base de datos o de un almacén de datos de back-end, en lugar de una solicitud web.

Ejemplo 1: El siguiente código Python ilustra una inyección de aviso del sistema en el modelo de IA de OpenAI:

client = OpenAI()

# Simulated attacker's input attempting to inject a malicious system prompt
attacker_name = cursor.fetchone()['name']
attacker_query = ...

completion = client.chat.completions.create(
model="gpt-3.5-turbo",
messages=[
{"role": "system", "content": "Provide assistance to the user " + attacker_name},
{"role": "user", "content": attacker_query}
]
)


En este ejemplo, el atacante manipula entradas no validadas en un mensaje del sistema, lo que puede provocar una violación de la seguridad.
References
[1] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 1427
[2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [13] CWE ID 077
desc.dataflow.python.prompt_injection_persistent
Abstract
La aplicación permite al usuario contaminar el prototipo.
Explanation
La contaminación de prototipos es un ataque que permite a un usuario malintencionado sobrescribir el prototipo de un objeto.
Para comprender la contaminación de prototipos, primero se debe comprender la herencia de los prototipos. Los prototipos y la cadena de prototipos se utilizan como búsqueda de propiedades y funciones en JavaScript, lo que proporciona la herencia. Al intentar acceder a una propiedad en un objeto determinado, se verifica la definición del objeto actual. Si el objeto actual no define la propiedad, se verifica la clase de prototipo. Los prototipos se verifican de forma recursiva hasta que se encuentra la propiedad o no hay más prototipos establecidos.

Debido a que la mayoría de los objetos en JavaScript tienen de forma predeterminada un prototipo que apunta a Object.prototype, si un atacante puede sobrescribir el prototipo de un objeto, normalmente puede sobrescribir la definición de Object.prototype, lo que afecta a todos los objetos dentro de la aplicación.

En el caso de que la aplicación (o cualquiera de sus dependencias) se base en el hecho de que las propiedades puedan ser undefined en lugar de establecerse siempre explícitamente, si el prototipo ha sido contaminado, la aplicación podría leer inadvertidamente el prototipo en lugar del objeto previsto.

La contaminación de prototipos puede ocurrir cuando:

1. Los datos se introducen en un programa desde un origen que no es de confianza.



2. Los datos pasan a una API que permite sobrescribir el prototipo.

Ejemplo 1: El siguiente código utiliza una versión vulnerable de lodash para contaminar el prototipo del objeto:


import * as lodash from 'lodash'
...
let clonedObject = lodash.merge({}, JSON.parse(untrustedInput));
...


En este punto, si la entrada que no es de confianza es {"__proto__": { "isAdmin": true}}, entonces Object.prototype habrá definido isAdmin = true.

Considere el siguiente código que existe más adelante en la aplicación.


...
let config = {}
if (isAuthorizedAsAdmin()){
config.isAdmin = true;
}
...
if (config.isAdmin) {
// do something as the admin
}
...


Aunque isAdmin solo debe establecerse en verdadero si isAuthorizedAdmin() devuelve verdadero, como la aplicación no establece config.isAdmin = false en la condición else, se basa en el hecho de que config.isAdmin === undefined === false.
Desafortunadamente, como el prototipo ha sido contaminado, el prototipo de config ahora se ha configurado en isAdmin === true, que permite eludir la autorización del administrador.
References
[1] Olivier Arteau Prototype pollution attack.
[2] Open Web Application Security Project (OWASP) Prototype Pollution Prevention Cheat Sheet
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 1321
[4] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-002754
[5] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Indirect Access to Sensitive Data
[6] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 SC-2 Application Partitioning (P1), SI-10 Information Input Validation (P1)
[7] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SC-2 Separation of System and User Functionality, SI-10 Information Input Validation
[8] Standards Mapping - OWASP API 2023 API3 Broken Object Property Level Authorization
[9] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 1.5.2 Input and Output Architectural Requirements (L2 L3), 5.1.2 Input Validation Requirements (L1 L2 L3)
[10] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M4 Insufficient Input/Output Validation
[11] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A5 Broken Access Control
[12] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A08 Software and Data Integrity Failures
[13] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.8
[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 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control
[17] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control
[18] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002150 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[19] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002150 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[20] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002150 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[21] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002150 CAT II, APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[22] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002150 CAT II, APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
desc.dataflow.javascript.prototype_pollution