Reino: API Abuse

Uma API é um contrato entre quem chama e o que se chama. As formas mais comuns de abuso de API ocorrem quando o responsável pela chamada não respeita sua parte do contrato. Por exemplo, se um programa não chama chdir() após chamar chroot(), ele viola o contrato que especifica como alterar o diretório raiz ativo de forma segura. Outro bom exemplo de abuso de biblioteca é esperar que o elemento chamado retorne informações confiáveis de DNS ao responsável pela chamada. Nesse caso, o responsável pela chamada abusa a API do elemento chamado ao fazer certas suposições sobre seu comportamento (isto é, que o valor de retorno pode ser usado para fins de autenticação). A outra parte também pode violar o contrato entre quem chama e o que se chama. Por exemplo, se um programador definir SecureRandom como subclasse e retornar um valor não aleatório, o contrato será violado.

83 itens encontrados
Vulnerabilidades
Abstract
A função _alloca() pode lançar uma exceção de estouro de pilha, possivelmente travando o programa.
Explanation
A função _alloca() aloca memória na pilha. Se uma solicitação de alocação for muito grande para o espaço de pilha disponível, _alloca() lançará uma exceção. Se essa exceção não for detectada, o programa travará, possivelmente permitindo um ataque de negação de serviço.

A função _alloca() tornou-se preterida a partir do Microsoft Visual Studio 2005(R). Ela foi substituída pela função _alloca_s() mais segura.
References
[1] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 248
[2] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-001094
[3] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Indirect Access to Sensitive Data
[4] Standards Mapping - Motor Industry Software Reliability Association (MISRA) C Guidelines 2012 Rule 1.3
[5] Standards Mapping - Motor Industry Software Reliability Association (MISRA) C Guidelines 2023 Rule 1.3
[6] Standards Mapping - Motor Industry Software Reliability Association (MISRA) C++ Guidelines 2023 Rule 4.1.3
[7] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 SC-5 Denial of Service Protection (P1)
[8] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SC-5 Denial of Service Protection
[9] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A7 Improper Error Handling
[10] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A6 Information Leakage and Improper Error Handling
[11] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.7
[12] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.2, Requirement 6.5.6
[13] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.5.5
[14] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.5
[15] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.5
[16] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.5
[17] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.5
[18] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[19] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
[20] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 3.6 - Sensitive Data Retention
[21] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 3.6 - Sensitive Data Retention, Control Objective B.3.2 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation
[22] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 3.6 - Sensitive Data Retention, Control Objective B.3.2 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation
[23] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3120 CAT II
[24] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3120 CAT II
[25] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3120 CAT II
[26] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3120 CAT II
[27] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3120 CAT II
[28] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3120 CAT II
[29] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3120 CAT II
[30] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[31] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[32] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[33] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[34] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[35] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[36] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[37] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002400 CAT II
desc.semantic.cpp.often_misused_exception_handling._alloca
Abstract
Transmitir um buffer de saída de tamanho inadequado para uma função de manipulação de caminho pode resultar em um buffer overflow.
Explanation
O Windows fornece um grande número de funções utilitárias que manipulam buffers contendo nomes de arquivo. Na maioria dos casos, o resultado é retornado em um buffer que é transmitido como entrada. (Em geral, o nome do arquivo é modificado no local.) A maioria das funções exige que o buffer tenha pelo menos MAX_PATH bytes de comprimento, mas você deve verificar a documentação para cada função individualmente. Se o buffer não for grande o suficiente para armazenar o resultado da manipulação, poderá ocorrer um buffer overflow.

Exemplo 1:

char *createOutputDirectory(char *name) {
char outputDirectoryName[128];
if (getCurrentDirectory(128, outputDirectoryName) == 0) {
return null;
}
if (!PathAppend(outputDirectoryName, "output")) {
return null;
}
if (!PathAppend(outputDirectoryName, name)) {
return null;
}
if (SHCreateDirectoryEx(NULL, outputDirectoryName, NULL)
!= ERROR_SUCCESS) {
return null;
}
return StrDup(outputDirectoryName);
}


Nesse exemplo, a função cria um diretório chamado "output\<name>" no diretório atual e retorna uma cópia de heap alocado do seu nome. Para a maioria dos valores do diretório atual e do parâmetro "name", essa função funcionará corretamente. No entanto, se o parâmetro name for particularmente longo, a segunda chamada para PathAppend() poderá causar um estouro do buffer de outputDirectoryName, que é menor que MAX_PATH bytes.
References
[1] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 249, CWE ID 560
[2] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Access Violation
[3] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A5 Buffer Overflow
[4] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.5
[5] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.1
[6] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.5.2
[7] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.2
[8] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.2
[9] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.2
[10] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.2
[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
[15] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection
[16] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3590.1 CAT I
[17] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3590.1 CAT I
[18] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3590.1 CAT I
[19] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3590.1 CAT I
[20] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3590.1 CAT I
[21] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3590.1 CAT I
[22] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3590.1 CAT I
desc.semantic.cpp.often_misused_file_system.windows
Abstract
A máscara especificada pelo argumento umask() é muitas vezes confundida com o argumento para chmod().
Explanation
A página man umask() começa com a instrução falsa:

"umask define a máscara do usuário como a máscara & 0777"

Embora esse comportamento possa condizer melhor com o uso de chmod(), no qual o argumento fornecido pelo usuário especifica os bits a serem habilitados no arquivo especificado, o comportamento de umask() é, na verdade, o oposto: umask() define umask como ~mask & 0777.

A página man umask() continua e descreve o uso correto de umask():

"Umask é usado por open() para definir as permissões de arquivo iniciais em um arquivo recém-criado. Especificamente, as permissões em umask estão desativadas no argumento de modo para open(2) (e portanto, por exemplo, o valor padrão comum de umask 022 faz com que novos arquivos sejam criados com permissões 0666 & ~022 = 0644 = rw-r--r-- no caso usual em que o modo é especificado como 0666)."
References
[1] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 249, CWE ID 560
[2] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Access Violation
[3] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A5 Buffer Overflow
[4] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.5
[5] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.1
[6] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.5.2
[7] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.2
[8] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.2
[9] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.2
[10] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.2
[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
[15] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection
[16] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3590.1 CAT I
[17] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3590.1 CAT I
[18] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3590.1 CAT I
[19] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3590.1 CAT I
[20] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3590.1 CAT I
[21] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3590.1 CAT I
[22] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3590.1 CAT I
desc.semantic.java.often_misused_file_system
Abstract
A chamada identificada usa métodos que seguem links simbólicos.
Explanation
Certas funções identificadas são conhecidas por seguir links simbólicos cegamente. Quando isso acontece, o aplicativo abre, lê ou grava dados no arquivo que o link simbólico aponta em vez da representação do link simbólico. Um invasor pode enganar o aplicativo para que ele grave em arquivos essenciais do sistema ou em arquivos alternativos, ou pode fornecer dados comprometidos ao aplicativo.

Exemplo 1: Este código utiliza as funções que seguem links simbólicos:


...
struct stat output;
int ret = stat(aFilePath, &output);
// error handling omitted for this example
struct timespec accessTime = output.st_atime;
...
References
[1] Apple Secure Coding Guide Apple
[2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 249, CWE ID 560
[3] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Access Violation
[4] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A5 Buffer Overflow
[5] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.5
[6] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.1
[7] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.5.2
[8] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.2
[9] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.2
[10] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.2
[11] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.2
[12] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[13] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
[14] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection
[15] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection
[16] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection
[17] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3590.1 CAT I
[18] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3590.1 CAT I
[19] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3590.1 CAT I
[20] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3590.1 CAT I
[21] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3590.1 CAT I
[22] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3590.1 CAT I
[23] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3590.1 CAT I
desc.semantic.objc.methods_follow_sym_links
Abstract
A máscara especificada pelo argumento umask() é muitas vezes confundida com o argumento para chmod().
Explanation
A página man umask() começa com a instrução falsa:

"umask define a máscara do usuário como a máscara & 0777"

Embora esse comportamento possa condizer melhor com o uso de chmod(), no qual o argumento fornecido pelo usuário especifica os bits a serem habilitados no arquivo especificado, o comportamento de umask() é, na verdade, o oposto: umask() define umask como ~mask & 0777.

A página man umask() continua e descreve o uso correto de umask():

"A umask é usada para definir as permissões de arquivo iniciais em um arquivo recém-criado. Especificamente, as permissões na umask são desativadas a partir do argumento de modo (assim, por exemplo, o valor umask padrão comum de 022 resulta em novos arquivos que estão sendo criados com permissões 0666 & ~022 = 0644 = rw-r-r-- no caso habitual em que o modo é especificado como 0666)".
References
[1] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 249, CWE ID 560
[2] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Access Violation
[3] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A5 Buffer Overflow
[4] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.5
[5] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.1
[6] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.5.2
[7] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.2
[8] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.2
[9] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.2
[10] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.2
[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
[15] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection
[16] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3590.1 CAT I
[17] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3590.1 CAT I
[18] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3590.1 CAT I
[19] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3590.1 CAT I
[20] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3590.1 CAT I
[21] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3590.1 CAT I
[22] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3590.1 CAT I
desc.semantic.python.often_misused_file_system.umask
Abstract
A chamada utiliza métodos que gravam em arquivos temporários antes de gravar no arquivo pretendido.
Explanation
Muitas APIs minimizarão o risco de perda de dados mediante a gravação completa em um arquivo temporário e, em seguida, a cópia do arquivo inteiro para o destino pretendido. Certifique-se de que o método identificado não funcione em arquivos ou caminhos em diretórios públicos ou temporários, pois um invasor pode substituir o arquivo temporário logo antes que ele seja gravado no arquivo pretendido. Isso permite que o invasor controle o conteúdo dos arquivos utilizados pelo aplicativo em diretórios públicos.

Exemplo 1: O seguinte código grava a transactionId ativa em um arquivo temporário no diretório Documentos de aplicativo usando um método vulnerável:


...
//get the documents directory:
let documentsPath = NSSearchPathForDirectoriesInDomains(.DocumentDirectory, .UserDomainMask, true)[0]
//make a file name to write the data to using the documents directory:
let fileName = NSString(format:"%@/tmp_activeTrans.txt", documentsPath)
// write data to the file
let transactionId = "TransactionId=12341234"
transactionId.writeToFile(fileName, atomically:true)
...
References
[1] Apple Secure Coding Guide Apple
[2] Apple NSString Class Reference Apple
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 249, CWE ID 560
[4] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Access Violation
[5] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A5 Buffer Overflow
[6] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.5
[7] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.1
[8] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.5.2
[9] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.2
[10] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.2
[11] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.2
[12] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.2
[13] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[14] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
[15] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection
[16] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection
[17] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection
[18] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3590.1 CAT I
[19] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3590.1 CAT I
[20] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3590.1 CAT I
[21] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3590.1 CAT I
[22] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3590.1 CAT I
[23] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3590.1 CAT I
[24] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3590.1 CAT I
desc.semantic.swift.methods_unsafe_on_public_or_tmp_directories
Abstract
Permitir que os usuários carreguem arquivos pode permitir que os invasores injetem conteúdo perigoso ou código mal-intencionado para execução no servidor.
Explanation
Independentemente da linguagem na qual um programa está escrito, os ataques mais devastadores muitas vezes envolvem a execução de código remoto, por meio da qual um invasor consegue executar código mal-intencionado com sucesso no contexto do programa. Se os invasores puderem carregar arquivos em um diretório acessível na Web e fazer com que esses arquivos sejam transmitidos ao interpretador de código (por exemplo, JSP/ASPX/PHP), eles poderão fazer com que o código mal-intencionado contido nesses arquivos seja executado no servidor.

O código a seguir recebe um arquivo carregado e o atribui ao objeto posted. FileUpload é do tipo System.Web.UI.HtmlControls.HtmlInputFile.
Exemplo 1:

HttpPostedFile posted = FileUpload.PostedFile;

Mesmo que um programa armazene arquivos carregados em um diretório não acessível na Web, os invasores ainda podem ser capazes de se aproveitar da capacidade de introduzir conteúdo mal-intencionado no ambiente do servidor para preparar outros ataques. Se o programa for suscetível a vulnerabilidades de manipulação de caminho, injeção de comando ou inclusão de arquivos perigosos, um invasor poderá carregar um arquivo com conteúdo mal-intencionado e fazer com que este seja lido ou executado pelo programa ao explorar outra vulnerabilidade.
References
[1] Alla Bezroutchko Secure file upload in PHP web applications
[2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 434
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2019 [16] CWE ID 434
[4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2020 [15] CWE ID 434
[5] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2021 [10] CWE ID 434
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2022 [10] CWE ID 434
[7] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2023 [10] CWE ID 434
[8] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [10] CWE ID 434
[9] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-001167
[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 SC-18 Mobile Code (P2)
[13] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SC-18 Mobile Code
[14] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 12.2.1 File Integrity Requirements (L2 L3), 12.5.2 File Download Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 13.1.5 Generic Web Service Security Verification Requirements (L2 L3)
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M7 Client Side Injection
[16] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A6 Injection Flaws
[17] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A3 Malicious File Execution
[18] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A1 Injection
[19] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A1 Injection
[20] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A1 Injection
[21] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A04 Insecure Design
[22] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.6
[23] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.1, Requirement 6.5.3
[24] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.5.1
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.1
[26] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[27] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.1
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[29] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[30] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
[31] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection
[32] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection
[33] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective C.3.4 - Web Software Attack Mitigation
[34] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2010 Insecure Interaction - CWE ID 434
[35] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2011 Insecure Interaction - CWE ID 434
[36] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3510 CAT I
[37] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3510 CAT I
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3510 CAT I
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3510 CAT I
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3510 CAT I
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3510 CAT I
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3510 CAT I
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[53] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[54] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[55] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[56] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[57] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[58] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Improper Input Handling (WASC-20)
desc.semantic.dotnet.often_misused_file_upload
Abstract
Permitir que os usuários carreguem arquivos pode permitir aos invasores injetar conteúdo perigoso ou códigos mal-intencionados para serem executados no servidor.
Explanation
Independentemente da linguagem na qual um programa está escrito, os ataques mais devastadores muitas vezes envolvem a execução de código remoto, por meio da qual um invasor consegue executar código mal-intencionado com sucesso no contexto do programa. Se os invasores puderem carregar arquivos em um diretório acessível na Web e fazer com que esses arquivos sejam transmitidos ao interpretador de código (por exemplo, JSP/ASPX/PHP), eles poderão fazer com que o código mal-intencionado contido nesses arquivos seja executado no servidor.

Exemplo 1: A seguinte classe de controlador Spring MVC tem um parâmetro que pode ser usado para manipular arquivos carregados.

@Controller
public class MyFormController {
...
@RequestMapping("/test")
public String uploadFile (org.springframework.web.multipart.MultipartFile file) {
...
} ...
}


Mesmo que um programa armazene arquivos carregados em um diretório não acessível na Web, os invasores ainda podem ser capazes de se aproveitar da capacidade de introduzir conteúdo mal-intencionado no ambiente do servidor para preparar outros ataques. Se o programa for suscetível a vulnerabilidades de manipulação de caminho, injeção de comando ou inclusão de arquivos perigosos, um invasor poderá carregar um arquivo com conteúdo mal-intencionado e fazer com que este seja lido ou executado pelo programa ao explorar outra vulnerabilidade.
References
[1] Alla Bezroutchko Secure file upload in PHP web applications
[2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 434
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2019 [16] CWE ID 434
[4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2020 [15] CWE ID 434
[5] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2021 [10] CWE ID 434
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2022 [10] CWE ID 434
[7] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2023 [10] CWE ID 434
[8] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [10] CWE ID 434
[9] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-001167
[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 SC-18 Mobile Code (P2)
[13] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SC-18 Mobile Code
[14] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 12.2.1 File Integrity Requirements (L2 L3), 12.5.2 File Download Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 13.1.5 Generic Web Service Security Verification Requirements (L2 L3)
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M7 Client Side Injection
[16] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A6 Injection Flaws
[17] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A3 Malicious File Execution
[18] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A1 Injection
[19] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A1 Injection
[20] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A1 Injection
[21] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A04 Insecure Design
[22] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.6
[23] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.1, Requirement 6.5.3
[24] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.5.1
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.1
[26] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[27] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.1
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[29] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[30] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
[31] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection
[32] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection
[33] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective C.3.4 - Web Software Attack Mitigation
[34] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2010 Insecure Interaction - CWE ID 434
[35] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2011 Insecure Interaction - CWE ID 434
[36] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3510 CAT I
[37] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3510 CAT I
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3510 CAT I
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3510 CAT I
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3510 CAT I
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3510 CAT I
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3510 CAT I
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[53] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[54] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[55] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[56] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[57] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[58] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Improper Input Handling (WASC-20)
desc.structural.java.often_misused_file_upload_spring
Abstract
Permitir que os usuários carreguem arquivos pode permitir que os invasores injetem conteúdo perigoso ou código mal-intencionado para execução no servidor.
Explanation
Independentemente da linguagem na qual um programa está escrito, os ataques mais devastadores muitas vezes envolvem a execução de código remoto, por meio da qual um invasor consegue executar código mal-intencionado com sucesso no contexto do programa. Se os invasores puderem carregar arquivos em um diretório acessível na Web e fazer com que esses arquivos sejam transmitidos ao interpretador PHP, eles poderão fazer com que o código mal-intencionado contido nesses arquivos sejam executados no servidor.

Exemplo 1: O código a seguir processa arquivos carregados e os move para um diretório na raiz da Web. Os invasores podem carregar arquivos de origem PHP mal-intencionados nesse programa e, posteriormente, solicitar esses arquivos ao servidor, o que fará com que eles sejam executados pelo intérprete PHP.


<?php
$udir = 'upload/'; // Relative path under Web root
$ufile = $udir . basename($_FILES['userfile']['name']);
if (move_uploaded_file($_FILES['userfile']['tmp_name'], $ufile)) {
echo "Valid upload received\n";
} else {
echo "Invalid upload rejected\n";
} ?>


Mesmo que um programa armazene arquivos carregados em um diretório não acessível na Web, os invasores ainda podem ser capazes de se aproveitar da capacidade de introduzir conteúdo mal-intencionado no ambiente do servidor para preparar outros ataques. Se o programa for suscetível a vulnerabilidades de manipulação de caminho, injeção de comando ou inclusão remota, um invasor poderá carregar um arquivo com conteúdo mal-intencionado e fazer com que este seja lido ou executado pelo programa ao explorar outra vulnerabilidade.
References
[1] M. Achour et al. PHP Manual
[2] Alla Bezroutchko Secure file upload in PHP web applications
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 434
[4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2019 [16] CWE ID 434
[5] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2020 [15] CWE ID 434
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2021 [10] CWE ID 434
[7] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2022 [10] CWE ID 434
[8] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2023 [10] CWE ID 434
[9] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [10] CWE ID 434
[10] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-001167
[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 SC-18 Mobile Code (P2)
[14] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SC-18 Mobile Code
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 12.2.1 File Integrity Requirements (L2 L3), 12.5.2 File Download Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 13.1.5 Generic Web Service Security Verification Requirements (L2 L3)
[16] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M7 Client Side Injection
[17] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A6 Injection Flaws
[18] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A3 Malicious File Execution
[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 A04 Insecure Design
[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 6.5.3
[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
[34] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective C.3.4 - Web Software Attack Mitigation
[35] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2010 Insecure Interaction - CWE ID 434
[36] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2011 Insecure Interaction - CWE ID 434
[37] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3510 CAT I
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3510 CAT I
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3510 CAT I
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3510 CAT I
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3510 CAT I
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3510 CAT I
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3510 CAT I
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[53] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[54] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[55] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[56] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[57] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[58] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[59] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Improper Input Handling (WASC-20)
desc.semantic.php.often_misused_file_upload
Abstract
Permitir que os usuários carreguem arquivos pode permitir que os invasores injetem conteúdo perigoso ou código mal-intencionado para execução no servidor.
Explanation
Independentemente da linguagem na qual um programa está escrito, os ataques mais devastadores muitas vezes envolvem a execução de código remoto, por meio da qual um invasor consegue executar código mal-intencionado com sucesso no contexto do programa. Caso os atacantes consigam fazer o upload de arquivos a um diretório acessível por meio da Web e fazer com que esses arquivos sejam passados ao interpretador Python, eles poderão fazer com que o código malicioso contido nestes arquivos seja executado no servidor.

Exemplo 1: O código a seguir processa arquivos carregados e os move para um diretório na raiz da Web. Os invasores podem fazer o upload de arquivos mal-intencionados para esse programa e depois solicitá-los do servidor.


from django.core.files.storage import default_storage
from django.core.files.base import File
...
def handle_upload(request):
files = request.FILES
for f in files.values():
path = default_storage.save('upload/', File(f))
...


Mesmo que um programa armazene arquivos carregados em um diretório não acessível na Web, os invasores ainda podem ser capazes de se aproveitar da capacidade de introduzir conteúdo mal-intencionado no ambiente do servidor para preparar outros ataques. Se o programa for suscetível a vulnerabilidades de manipulação de caminho, injeção de comando ou inclusão remota, um invasor poderá carregar um arquivo com conteúdo mal-intencionado e fazer com que este seja lido ou executado pelo programa ao explorar outra vulnerabilidade.
References
[1] Django Foundation File Uploads
[2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 434
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2019 [16] CWE ID 434
[4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2020 [15] CWE ID 434
[5] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2021 [10] CWE ID 434
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2022 [10] CWE ID 434
[7] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2023 [10] CWE ID 434
[8] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [10] CWE ID 434
[9] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-001167
[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 SC-18 Mobile Code (P2)
[13] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SC-18 Mobile Code
[14] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 12.2.1 File Integrity Requirements (L2 L3), 12.5.2 File Download Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 13.1.5 Generic Web Service Security Verification Requirements (L2 L3)
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M7 Client Side Injection
[16] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A6 Injection Flaws
[17] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A3 Malicious File Execution
[18] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A1 Injection
[19] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A1 Injection
[20] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A1 Injection
[21] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A04 Insecure Design
[22] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.6
[23] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.1, Requirement 6.5.3
[24] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.5.1
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.1
[26] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[27] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.1
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[29] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[30] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
[31] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection
[32] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection
[33] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective C.3.4 - Web Software Attack Mitigation
[34] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2010 Insecure Interaction - CWE ID 434
[35] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2011 Insecure Interaction - CWE ID 434
[36] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3510 CAT I
[37] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3510 CAT I
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3510 CAT I
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3510 CAT I
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3510 CAT I
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3510 CAT I
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3510 CAT I
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[53] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[54] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[55] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[56] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[57] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[58] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Improper Input Handling (WASC-20)
desc.structural.python.often_misused_file_upload
Abstract
Permitir que os usuários carreguem arquivos pode permitir que os invasores injetem conteúdo perigoso ou código mal-intencionado para execução no servidor.
Explanation
Independentemente da linguagem na qual um programa está escrito, os ataques mais devastadores muitas vezes envolvem a execução de código remoto, por meio da qual um invasor consegue executar código mal-intencionado com sucesso no contexto do programa. Se os invasores puderem carregar arquivos em um diretório publicamente executável, eles poderão fazer com que o código mal-intencionado contido nesses arquivos seja executado no servidor.

Mesmo que um programa armazene arquivos carregados em um diretório não acessível publicamente, os invasores ainda podem ser capazes de se aproveitar da capacidade de introduzir conteúdo mal-intencionado no ambiente do servidor para preparar outros ataques. Se o programa for suscetível a vulnerabilidades de manipulação de caminho, injeção de comando ou inclusão remota, um invasor poderá carregar um arquivo com conteúdo mal-intencionado e fazer com que este seja lido ou executado pelo programa ao explorar outra vulnerabilidade.
References
[1] Alla Bezroutchko Secure file upload in PHP web applications
[2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 434
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2019 [16] CWE ID 434
[4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2020 [15] CWE ID 434
[5] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2021 [10] CWE ID 434
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2022 [10] CWE ID 434
[7] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2023 [10] CWE ID 434
[8] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [10] CWE ID 434
[9] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-001167
[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 SC-18 Mobile Code (P2)
[13] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SC-18 Mobile Code
[14] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 12.2.1 File Integrity Requirements (L2 L3), 12.5.2 File Download Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 13.1.5 Generic Web Service Security Verification Requirements (L2 L3)
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M7 Client Side Injection
[16] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A6 Injection Flaws
[17] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A3 Malicious File Execution
[18] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A1 Injection
[19] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A1 Injection
[20] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A1 Injection
[21] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A04 Insecure Design
[22] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.6
[23] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.1, Requirement 6.5.3
[24] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.5.1
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.1
[26] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[27] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.1
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[29] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[30] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
[31] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection
[32] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection
[33] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective C.3.4 - Web Software Attack Mitigation
[34] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2010 Insecure Interaction - CWE ID 434
[35] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2011 Insecure Interaction - CWE ID 434
[36] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3510 CAT I
[37] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3510 CAT I
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3510 CAT I
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3510 CAT I
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3510 CAT I
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3510 CAT I
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3510 CAT I
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[53] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[54] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[55] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[56] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[57] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[58] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Improper Input Handling (WASC-20)
desc.structural.ruby.often_misused_file_upload
Abstract
Permitir que os usuários carreguem arquivos pode permitir que os invasores injetem conteúdo perigoso ou código mal-intencionado para execução no servidor.
Explanation
Independentemente da linguagem na qual um programa está escrito, os ataques mais devastadores muitas vezes envolvem a execução de código remoto, por meio da qual um invasor consegue executar código mal-intencionado com sucesso no contexto do programa. Se os invasores puderem carregar arquivos em um diretório acessível na Web e fazer com que esses arquivos sejam transmitidos ao interpretador de código (por exemplo, JSP/ASPX/PHP), eles poderão fazer com que o código mal-intencionado contido nesses arquivos seja executado no servidor.
Mesmo que um programa armazene arquivos carregados em um diretório não acessível na Web, os invasores ainda podem ser capazes de se aproveitar da capacidade de introduzir conteúdo mal-intencionado no ambiente do servidor para preparar outros ataques. Se o programa for suscetível a vulnerabilidades de manipulação de caminho, injeção de comando ou inclusão de arquivos perigosos, um invasor poderá carregar um arquivo com conteúdo mal-intencionado e fazer com que este seja lido ou executado pelo programa ao explorar outra vulnerabilidade.

Uma tag <input> do tipo file indica que o programa aceita uploads de arquivos.
Exemplo 1:

<input type="file">
References
[1] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 434
[2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2019 [16] CWE ID 434
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2020 [15] CWE ID 434
[4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2021 [10] CWE ID 434
[5] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2022 [10] CWE ID 434
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2023 [10] CWE ID 434
[7] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [10] CWE ID 434
[8] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-001167
[9] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 SI
[10] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Indirect Access to Sensitive Data
[11] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 SC-18 Mobile Code (P2)
[12] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SC-18 Mobile Code
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 12.2.1 File Integrity Requirements (L2 L3), 12.5.2 File Download Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 13.1.5 Generic Web Service Security Verification Requirements (L2 L3)
[14] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M7 Client Side Injection
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A6 Injection Flaws
[16] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A3 Malicious File Execution
[17] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A1 Injection
[18] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A1 Injection
[19] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A1 Injection
[20] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A04 Insecure Design
[21] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.6
[22] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.1, Requirement 6.5.3
[23] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.5.1
[24] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.1
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[26] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.1
[27] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[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
[32] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective C.3.4 - Web Software Attack Mitigation
[33] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2010 Insecure Interaction - CWE ID 434
[34] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2011 Insecure Interaction - CWE ID 434
[35] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3510 CAT I
[36] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3510 CAT I
[37] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3510 CAT I
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3510 CAT I
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3510 CAT I
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3510 CAT I
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3510 CAT I
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[53] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[54] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[55] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[56] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[57] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Improper Input Handling (WASC-20)
desc.content.html.often_misused_file_upload
Abstract
As linguagens de modelo não devem ser misturadas para evitar a necessidade de trabalhar com proteções de cross-site scripting.
Explanation
Quando você combina mecanismos de modelo, significa que as proteções que foram implementadas anteriormente para um deles podem ter deixado de funcionar ou ser válidas. Na versão mais benigna, isso pode fazer com que a funcionalidade não opere conforme esperado, mas também pode permitir que usuários mal-intencionados contornem as proteções no mecanismo, resultando em vulnerabilidades de execução de scripts entre sites.

Exemplo 1: No código a seguir, um módulo AngularJS está configurado para usar "[[" e "]]" para delimitadores de expressão no lugar do padrão.


myModule.config(function($interpolateProvider){
$interpolateProvider.startSymbol("[[");
$interpolateProvider.endSymbol("]]");
});


Isso pode fazer com que o outro mecanismo de modelo realize a validação para escapar as expressões, o que pode não ser compatível com expressões AngularJS, possivelmente permitindo que os usuários contornem a validação regular e executem seu próprio código no navegador.
References
[1] AngularJS $interpolateProvider documentation Google
[2] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Indirect Access to Sensitive Data
[3] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A05 Security Misconfiguration
desc.structural.javascript.often_misused_mixing_template_languages
Abstract
A não aderência ao princípio do menor privilégio amplia o risco apresentado por outras vulnerabilidades.
Explanation
Programas que são executados com privilégios root causaram inúmeras catástrofes de segurança no Unix. É imperativo que você analise programas privilegiados cuidadosamente em busca de todos os tipos de problemas de segurança, mas é igualmente importante que esses programas privilegiados retornem a estado sem privilégios o mais rápido possível, a fim de limitar a quantidade de danos que uma vulnerabilidade despercebida pode ser capaz de causar.


Funções de gerenciamento de privilégios podem comportar-se de maneiras menos do que óbvias e têm peculiaridades diferentes dependendo da plataforma. Essas inconsistências são particularmente evidentes quando você está fazendo a transição de um usuário não root para outro.

Manipuladores de sinais e processos gerados são executados no privilégio do processo proprietário e, portanto, se um processo estiver em execução como root quando um sinal for acionado ou um subprocesso for executado, o manipulador de sinais ou subprocesso operará com privilégios de root. Um invasor pode ser capaz de aproveitar esses privilégios elevados para causar ainda mais danos.
References
[1] H. Chen, D. Wagner, and D. Dean. Setuid Demystified. 11th USENIX Security Symposium
[2] B. Chess and J. West, Secure Programming with Static Analysis. Boston, MA: Addison-Wesley, 2007.
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 250
[4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2023 [22] CWE ID 269
[5] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [15] CWE ID 269
[6] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-000345, CCI-000381, CCI-002233, CCI-002235
[7] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Access Violation
[8] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 AC-6 Least Privilege (P1), CM-5 Access Restrictions for Change (P1), CM-7 Least Functionality (P1), IA-5 Authenticator Management (P1)
[9] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 AC-6 Least Privilege, CM-5 Access Restrictions for Change, CM-7 Least Functionality, IA-5 Authenticator Management
[10] Standards Mapping - OWASP API 2023 API1 Broken Object Level Authorization
[11] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 1.2.1 Authentication Architectural Requirements (L2 L3), 10.2.2 Malicious Code Search (L2 L3)
[12] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M5 Poor Authorization and Authentication
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M3 Insecure Authentication/Authorization
[14] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-AUTH-1
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A04 Insecure Design
[16] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 7.1.1
[17] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 7.1.1
[18] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 7.1.2
[19] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 7.1.2
[20] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 7.1.2
[21] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 7.1.2
[22] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 7.2.2
[23] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 7.2.2
[24] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control
[26] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control, Control Objective C.2.3 - Web Software Access Controls
[27] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2009 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 250
[28] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2011 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 250
[29] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3500 CAT II
[30] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3500 CAT II
[31] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3500 CAT II
[32] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3500 CAT II
[33] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3500 CAT II
[34] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3500 CAT II
[35] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3500 CAT II
[36] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-000500 CAT II, APSC-DV-000510 CAT I, APSC-DV-001500 CAT II
[37] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-000500 CAT II, APSC-DV-000510 CAT I, APSC-DV-001500 CAT II
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-000500 CAT II, APSC-DV-000510 CAT I, APSC-DV-001500 CAT II
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-000500 CAT II, APSC-DV-000510 CAT I, APSC-DV-001500 CAT II
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-000500 CAT II, APSC-DV-000510 CAT I, APSC-DV-001500 CAT II
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-000500 CAT II, APSC-DV-000510 CAT I, APSC-DV-001500 CAT II
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-000500 CAT II, APSC-DV-000510 CAT I, APSC-DV-001500 CAT II
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-000500 CAT II, APSC-DV-000510 CAT I, APSC-DV-001500 CAT II
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-000500 CAT II, APSC-DV-000510 CAT I, APSC-DV-001500 CAT II
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-000500 CAT II, APSC-DV-000510 CAT I, APSC-DV-001500 CAT II
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-000500 CAT II, APSC-DV-000510 CAT I, APSC-DV-001500 CAT II
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-000500 CAT II, APSC-DV-000510 CAT I, APSC-DV-001500 CAT II
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-000500 CAT II, APSC-DV-000510 CAT I, APSC-DV-001500 CAT II
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-000500 CAT II, APSC-DV-000510 CAT I, APSC-DV-001500 CAT II, APSC-DV-001795 CAT II, APSC-DV-002960 CAT II
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-000500 CAT II, APSC-DV-000510 CAT I, APSC-DV-001500 CAT II, APSC-DV-001795 CAT II, APSC-DV-002960 CAT II
[51] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Insufficient Authorization (WASC-02)
[52] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium 24 + 2 Insufficient Authorization
desc.semantic.cpp.often_misused_privilege_management.setuid
Abstract
Não respeitar o princípio de privilégio mínimo amplifica consideravelmente o risco relacionado com outras vulnerabilidades.
Explanation
Programas executados com privilégios de root causaram inúmeros desastres de segurança de Unix. É imperativo que você revise atentamente os programas com privilégios em relação a todos os tipos de problemas de segurança. É igualmente importante que os programas com privilégios retornem a um estado sem privilégios o mais rápido possível para limitar os danos que uma vulnerabilidade não remediada pode causar.


As funções de gestão de privilégios podem se comportar de formas pouco óbvias e possuem peculiaridades específicas em diferentes plataformas. Tais inconsistências são especialmente notáveis ao passar de um usuário não root a outro.

Manipuladores de sinais e processos gerados são executados de acordo com o privilégio do processo principal. Assim, se um processo estiver sendo executado como root quando um sinal for disparado ou quando um subprocesso for executado, o manipulador de sinais ou o subprocesso operará com privilégios de root. Um invasor pode aproveitar esses privilégios elevados para causar ainda mais danos.
References
[1] H. Chen, D. Wagner, and D. Dean. Setuid Demystified. 11th USENIX Security Symposium
[2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 250
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2023 [22] CWE ID 269
[4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [15] CWE ID 269
[5] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-000345, CCI-000381, CCI-002233, CCI-002235
[6] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Access Violation
[7] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 AC-6 Least Privilege (P1), CM-5 Access Restrictions for Change (P1), CM-7 Least Functionality (P1), IA-5 Authenticator Management (P1)
[8] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 AC-6 Least Privilege, CM-5 Access Restrictions for Change, CM-7 Least Functionality, IA-5 Authenticator Management
[9] Standards Mapping - OWASP API 2023 API1 Broken Object Level Authorization
[10] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 1.2.1 Authentication Architectural Requirements (L2 L3), 10.2.2 Malicious Code Search (L2 L3)
[11] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M5 Poor Authorization and Authentication
[12] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M3 Insecure Authentication/Authorization
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-AUTH-1
[14] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A04 Insecure Design
[15] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 7.1.1
[16] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 7.1.1
[17] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 7.1.2
[18] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 7.1.2
[19] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 7.1.2
[20] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 7.1.2
[21] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 7.2.2
[22] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 7.2.2
[23] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control
[24] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control, Control Objective C.2.3 - Web Software Access Controls
[26] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2009 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 250
[27] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2011 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 250
[28] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3500 CAT II
[29] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3500 CAT II
[30] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3500 CAT II
[31] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3500 CAT II
[32] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3500 CAT II
[33] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3500 CAT II
[34] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3500 CAT II
[35] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-000500 CAT II, APSC-DV-000510 CAT I, APSC-DV-001500 CAT II
[36] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-000500 CAT II, APSC-DV-000510 CAT I, APSC-DV-001500 CAT II
[37] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-000500 CAT II, APSC-DV-000510 CAT I, APSC-DV-001500 CAT II
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-000500 CAT II, APSC-DV-000510 CAT I, APSC-DV-001500 CAT II
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-000500 CAT II, APSC-DV-000510 CAT I, APSC-DV-001500 CAT II
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-000500 CAT II, APSC-DV-000510 CAT I, APSC-DV-001500 CAT II
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-000500 CAT II, APSC-DV-000510 CAT I, APSC-DV-001500 CAT II
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-000500 CAT II, APSC-DV-000510 CAT I, APSC-DV-001500 CAT II
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-000500 CAT II, APSC-DV-000510 CAT I, APSC-DV-001500 CAT II
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-000500 CAT II, APSC-DV-000510 CAT I, APSC-DV-001500 CAT II
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-000500 CAT II, APSC-DV-000510 CAT I, APSC-DV-001500 CAT II
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-000500 CAT II, APSC-DV-000510 CAT I, APSC-DV-001500 CAT II
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-000500 CAT II, APSC-DV-000510 CAT I, APSC-DV-001500 CAT II
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-000500 CAT II, APSC-DV-000510 CAT I, APSC-DV-001500 CAT II, APSC-DV-001795 CAT II, APSC-DV-002960 CAT II
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-000500 CAT II, APSC-DV-000510 CAT I, APSC-DV-001500 CAT II, APSC-DV-001795 CAT II, APSC-DV-002960 CAT II
[50] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Insufficient Authorization (WASC-02)
[51] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium 24 + 2 Insufficient Authorization
desc.semantic.golang.often_misused_privilege_management
Abstract
A não aderência ao princípio do menor privilégio amplia o risco apresentado por outras vulnerabilidades.
Explanation
Programas que são executados com privilégios root causaram inúmeras catástrofes de segurança no Unix. É imperativo que você analise programas privilegiados cuidadosamente em busca de todos os tipos de problemas de segurança, mas é igualmente importante que esses programas privilegiados retornem a estado sem privilégios o mais rápido possível, a fim de limitar a quantidade de danos que uma vulnerabilidade despercebida pode ser capaz de causar.


Funções de gerenciamento de privilégios podem comportar-se de maneiras menos do que óbvias e têm peculiaridades diferentes dependendo da plataforma. Essas inconsistências são particularmente evidentes quando você está fazendo a transição de um usuário não root para outro.

Manipuladores de sinais e processos gerados são executados no privilégio do processo proprietário e, portanto, se um processo estiver em execução como root quando um sinal for acionado ou um subprocesso for executado, o manipulador de sinais ou subprocesso operará com privilégios de root. Um invasor pode ser capaz de aproveitar esses privilégios elevados para causar ainda mais danos.
References
[1] H. Chen, D. Wagner, and D. Dean. Setuid Demystified. 11th USENIX Security Symposium
[2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 250
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2023 [22] CWE ID 269
[4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [15] CWE ID 269
[5] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-000345, CCI-000381, CCI-002233, CCI-002235
[6] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Access Violation
[7] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 AC-6 Least Privilege (P1), CM-5 Access Restrictions for Change (P1), CM-7 Least Functionality (P1), IA-5 Authenticator Management (P1)
[8] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 AC-6 Least Privilege, CM-5 Access Restrictions for Change, CM-7 Least Functionality, IA-5 Authenticator Management
[9] Standards Mapping - OWASP API 2023 API1 Broken Object Level Authorization
[10] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 1.2.1 Authentication Architectural Requirements (L2 L3), 10.2.2 Malicious Code Search (L2 L3)
[11] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M5 Poor Authorization and Authentication
[12] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M3 Insecure Authentication/Authorization
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-AUTH-1
[14] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A04 Insecure Design
[15] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 7.1.1
[16] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 7.1.1
[17] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 7.1.2
[18] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 7.1.2
[19] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 7.1.2
[20] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 7.1.2
[21] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 7.2.2
[22] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 7.2.2
[23] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control
[24] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control, Control Objective C.2.3 - Web Software Access Controls
[26] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2009 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 250
[27] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2011 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 250
[28] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3500 CAT II
[29] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3500 CAT II
[30] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3500 CAT II
[31] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3500 CAT II
[32] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3500 CAT II
[33] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3500 CAT II
[34] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3500 CAT II
[35] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-000500 CAT II, APSC-DV-000510 CAT I, APSC-DV-001500 CAT II
[36] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-000500 CAT II, APSC-DV-000510 CAT I, APSC-DV-001500 CAT II
[37] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-000500 CAT II, APSC-DV-000510 CAT I, APSC-DV-001500 CAT II
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-000500 CAT II, APSC-DV-000510 CAT I, APSC-DV-001500 CAT II
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-000500 CAT II, APSC-DV-000510 CAT I, APSC-DV-001500 CAT II
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-000500 CAT II, APSC-DV-000510 CAT I, APSC-DV-001500 CAT II
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-000500 CAT II, APSC-DV-000510 CAT I, APSC-DV-001500 CAT II
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-000500 CAT II, APSC-DV-000510 CAT I, APSC-DV-001500 CAT II
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-000500 CAT II, APSC-DV-000510 CAT I, APSC-DV-001500 CAT II
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-000500 CAT II, APSC-DV-000510 CAT I, APSC-DV-001500 CAT II
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-000500 CAT II, APSC-DV-000510 CAT I, APSC-DV-001500 CAT II
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-000500 CAT II, APSC-DV-000510 CAT I, APSC-DV-001500 CAT II
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-000500 CAT II, APSC-DV-000510 CAT I, APSC-DV-001500 CAT II
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-000500 CAT II, APSC-DV-000510 CAT I, APSC-DV-001500 CAT II, APSC-DV-001795 CAT II, APSC-DV-002960 CAT II
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-000500 CAT II, APSC-DV-000510 CAT I, APSC-DV-001500 CAT II, APSC-DV-001795 CAT II, APSC-DV-002960 CAT II
[50] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Insufficient Authorization (WASC-02)
[51] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium 24 + 2 Insufficient Authorization
desc.semantic.java.often_misused_privilege_management
Abstract
A não aderência ao princípio do menor privilégio amplia o risco apresentado por outras vulnerabilidades.
Explanation
Programas que são executados com privilégios root causaram inúmeras catástrofes de segurança no Unix. É imperativo que você analise programas privilegiados cuidadosamente em busca de todos os tipos de problemas de segurança, mas é igualmente importante que esses programas privilegiados retornem a estado sem privilégios o mais rápido possível, a fim de limitar a quantidade de danos que uma vulnerabilidade despercebida pode ser capaz de causar.


Funções de gerenciamento de privilégios podem comportar-se de maneiras menos do que óbvias e têm peculiaridades diferentes dependendo da plataforma. Essas inconsistências são particularmente evidentes quando você está fazendo a transição de um usuário não root para outro.

Manipuladores de sinais e processos gerados são executados no privilégio do processo proprietário e, portanto, se um processo estiver em execução como root quando um sinal for acionado ou um subprocesso for executado, o manipulador de sinais ou subprocesso operará com privilégios de root. Um invasor pode ser capaz de aproveitar esses privilégios elevados para causar ainda mais danos.
References
[1] H. Chen, D. Wagner, and D. Dean. Setuid Demystified. 11th USENIX Security Symposium
[2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 250
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2023 [22] CWE ID 269
[4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [15] CWE ID 269
[5] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-000345, CCI-000381, CCI-002233, CCI-002235
[6] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Access Violation
[7] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 AC-6 Least Privilege (P1), CM-5 Access Restrictions for Change (P1), CM-7 Least Functionality (P1), IA-5 Authenticator Management (P1)
[8] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 AC-6 Least Privilege, CM-5 Access Restrictions for Change, CM-7 Least Functionality, IA-5 Authenticator Management
[9] Standards Mapping - OWASP API 2023 API1 Broken Object Level Authorization
[10] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 1.2.1 Authentication Architectural Requirements (L2 L3), 10.2.2 Malicious Code Search (L2 L3)
[11] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M5 Poor Authorization and Authentication
[12] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M3 Insecure Authentication/Authorization
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-AUTH-1
[14] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A04 Insecure Design
[15] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 7.1.1
[16] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 7.1.1
[17] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 7.1.2
[18] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 7.1.2
[19] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 7.1.2
[20] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 7.1.2
[21] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 7.2.2
[22] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 7.2.2
[23] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control
[24] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control, Control Objective C.2.3 - Web Software Access Controls
[26] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2009 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 250
[27] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2011 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 250
[28] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3500 CAT II
[29] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3500 CAT II
[30] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3500 CAT II
[31] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3500 CAT II
[32] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3500 CAT II
[33] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3500 CAT II
[34] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3500 CAT II
[35] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-000500 CAT II, APSC-DV-000510 CAT I, APSC-DV-001500 CAT II
[36] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-000500 CAT II, APSC-DV-000510 CAT I, APSC-DV-001500 CAT II
[37] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-000500 CAT II, APSC-DV-000510 CAT I, APSC-DV-001500 CAT II
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-000500 CAT II, APSC-DV-000510 CAT I, APSC-DV-001500 CAT II
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-000500 CAT II, APSC-DV-000510 CAT I, APSC-DV-001500 CAT II
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-000500 CAT II, APSC-DV-000510 CAT I, APSC-DV-001500 CAT II
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-000500 CAT II, APSC-DV-000510 CAT I, APSC-DV-001500 CAT II
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-000500 CAT II, APSC-DV-000510 CAT I, APSC-DV-001500 CAT II
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-000500 CAT II, APSC-DV-000510 CAT I, APSC-DV-001500 CAT II
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-000500 CAT II, APSC-DV-000510 CAT I, APSC-DV-001500 CAT II
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-000500 CAT II, APSC-DV-000510 CAT I, APSC-DV-001500 CAT II
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-000500 CAT II, APSC-DV-000510 CAT I, APSC-DV-001500 CAT II
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-000500 CAT II, APSC-DV-000510 CAT I, APSC-DV-001500 CAT II
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-000500 CAT II, APSC-DV-000510 CAT I, APSC-DV-001500 CAT II, APSC-DV-001795 CAT II, APSC-DV-002960 CAT II
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-000500 CAT II, APSC-DV-000510 CAT I, APSC-DV-001500 CAT II, APSC-DV-001795 CAT II, APSC-DV-002960 CAT II
[50] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Insufficient Authorization (WASC-02)
[51] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium 24 + 2 Insufficient Authorization
desc.dataflow.python.often_misused_privilege_management
Abstract
O aplicativo executa operações relacionadas a SMS específicas de iOS.
Explanation
As operações relacionadas a SMS específicas de iOS não devem ser realizadas a menos que sejam essenciais para a funcionalidade principal de um aplicativo. Os malwares desenvolvidos para dispositivos móveis muitas vezes abusam de tal funcionalidade a fim de roubar dinheiro ou dados do usuário.

Exemplo 1: Nesses casos, o aplicativo envia uma mensagem SMS ou escrita previamente e apresenta uma mensagem SMS ao usuário a qual ele ou ela é solicitado a enviar ou cancelar:

...
Device.OpenUri("sms:+12345678910");
...
References
[1] Apple UIApplication Class Reference
[2] Apple MFMessageComposeViewController Class Reference
[3] Xamarin Messaging Plugin for Xamarin and Windows
[4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 265
[5] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-000213, CCI-002165
[6] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 AC
[7] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Indirect Access to Sensitive Data
[8] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 AC-3 Access Enforcement (P1)
[9] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 AC-3 Access Enforcement
[10] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 1.14.5 Configuration Architectural Requirements (L2 L3)
[11] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M5 Poor Authorization and Authentication
[12] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M3 Insecure Authentication/Authorization
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-AUTH-1
[14] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A2 Broken Access Control
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A6 Security Misconfiguration
[16] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A5 Security Misconfiguration
[17] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A6 Security Misconfiguration
[18] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A05 Security Misconfiguration
[19] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.6
[20] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.6
[21] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.6
[22] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.6
[23] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 4.2.2, Requirement 6.2.4
[24] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 4.2.2, Requirement 6.2.4
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection
[26] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection
[27] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection
[28] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2009 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 285
[29] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2010 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 285
[30] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[31] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[32] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[33] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[34] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[35] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[36] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[37] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[45] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Insufficient Authorization (WASC-02)
[46] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium 24 + 2 Insufficient Authorization
desc.semantic.dotnet.often_misused_sms
Abstract
O aplicativo executa operações relacionadas a SMS.
Explanation
As operações relacionadas a SMS não devem ser realizadas a menos que sejam essenciais para a funcionalidade principal de um aplicativo. Os malwares desenvolvidos para dispositivos móveis muitas vezes abusam de tal funcionalidade a fim de roubar dinheiro ou dados do usuário.

Exemplo 1: Nestes casos, o aplicativo envia uma mensagem SMS ou escrita previamente e apresenta uma mensagem SMS ao usuário a qual ele ou ela é solicitado a enviar ou cancelar:

...
[[CTMessageCenter sharedMessageCenter] sendSMSWithText:@"Hello world!" serviceCenter:nil toAddress:@"+12345678910"];
...

// or

...
[[UIApplication sharedApplication] openURL:[NSURL URLWithString:@"sms:+12345678910"]];
...

// or

...
MFMessageComposeViewController *messageComposerVC = [[MFMessageComposeViewController alloc] init];

[messageComposerVC setMessageComposeDelegate:self];
[messageComposerVC setBody:@"Hello World!"];
[messageComposerVC setRecipients:[NSArray arrayWithObject:@"+12345678910"]];

[self presentViewController:messageComposerVC animated:YES completion:nil];
...
References
[1] Apple UIApplication Class Reference
[2] Apple MFMessageComposeViewController Class Reference
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 265
[4] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-000213, CCI-002165
[5] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 AC
[6] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Indirect Access to Sensitive Data
[7] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 AC-3 Access Enforcement (P1)
[8] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 AC-3 Access Enforcement
[9] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 1.14.5 Configuration Architectural Requirements (L2 L3)
[10] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M5 Poor Authorization and Authentication
[11] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M3 Insecure Authentication/Authorization
[12] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-AUTH-1
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A2 Broken Access Control
[14] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A6 Security Misconfiguration
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A5 Security Misconfiguration
[16] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A6 Security Misconfiguration
[17] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A05 Security Misconfiguration
[18] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.6
[19] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.6
[20] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.6
[21] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.6
[22] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 4.2.2, Requirement 6.2.4
[23] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 4.2.2, 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
[26] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection
[27] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2009 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 285
[28] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2010 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 285
[29] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[30] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[31] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[32] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[33] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[34] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[35] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[36] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[37] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[44] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Insufficient Authorization (WASC-02)
[45] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium 24 + 2 Insufficient Authorization
desc.semantic.objc.often_misused_sms
Abstract
O aplicativo executa operações relacionadas a SMS.
Explanation
As operações relacionadas a SMS não devem ser realizadas a menos que sejam essenciais para a funcionalidade principal de um aplicativo. Os malwares desenvolvidos para dispositivos móveis muitas vezes abusam de tal funcionalidade a fim de roubar dinheiro ou dados do usuário.

Exemplo 1: Nestes casos, o aplicativo envia uma mensagem SMS ou escrita previamente e apresenta uma mensagem SMS ao usuário a qual ele ou ela é solicitado a enviar ou cancelar:


...
UIApplication.sharedApplication().openURL(NSURL(string: "sms:+12345678910"))
...


ou


...
let messageComposeVC = MFMessageComposeViewController()
messageComposeVC.messageComposeDelegate = self
messageComposeVC.body = "Hello World!"
messageComposeVC.recipients = ["+12345678910"]

presentViewController(messageComposeVC, animated: true, completion: nil)
...
References
[1] Apple UIApplication Class Reference
[2] Apple MFMessageComposeViewController Class Reference
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 265
[4] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-000213, CCI-002165
[5] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 AC
[6] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Indirect Access to Sensitive Data
[7] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 AC-3 Access Enforcement (P1)
[8] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 AC-3 Access Enforcement
[9] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 1.14.5 Configuration Architectural Requirements (L2 L3)
[10] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M5 Poor Authorization and Authentication
[11] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M3 Insecure Authentication/Authorization
[12] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-AUTH-1
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A2 Broken Access Control
[14] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A6 Security Misconfiguration
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A5 Security Misconfiguration
[16] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A6 Security Misconfiguration
[17] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A05 Security Misconfiguration
[18] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.6
[19] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.6
[20] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.6
[21] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.6
[22] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 4.2.2, Requirement 6.2.4
[23] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 4.2.2, 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
[26] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection
[27] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2009 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 285
[28] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2010 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 285
[29] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[30] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[31] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[32] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[33] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[34] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[35] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[36] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[37] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[44] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Insufficient Authorization (WASC-02)
[45] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium 24 + 2 Insufficient Authorization
desc.structural.swift.often_misused_sms
Abstract
Os serviços remotos são configurados no aplicativo Spring. Por padrão, esses serviços remotos não exigem autenticação e as informações transferidas de ou para este serviço estão em texto simples. Isso pode permitir que um invasor acesse operações com privilégios ou exponha dados confidenciais.
Explanation
O Spring fornece um mecanismo fácil para transformar qualquer bean gerenciado pelo Spring em um objeto que é exposto externamente por meio dos protocolos RMI, HTTP, Burlap, Hessian e JMX. Qualquer método público do bean Spring remoto pode ser chamado externamente e os dados transmitidos entre o cliente e os objetos remotos estão em texto simples. O maior problema com esses serviços é que eles são abertos por padrão e não oferecem garantias de confidencialidade ou integridade por padrão.
References
[1] Anirvan Chakraborty , Jessica Ditt , Aleksa Vukotic , Jan Machacek ProSpring 2.5
[2] Gary Mak , Daniel Rubio , Josh Long Spring Recipes
[3] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-000213, CCI-000804, CCI-001084, CCI-002165
[4] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Access Violation
[5] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 AC-3 Access Enforcement (P1), IA-8 Identification and Authentication (Non-Organizational Users) (P1), SC-3 Security Function Isolation (P1), SC-8 Transmission Confidentiality and Integrity (P1)
[6] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 AC-3 Access Enforcement, IA-8 Identification and Authentication (Non-Organizational Users), SC-3 Security Function Isolation, SC-8 Transmission Confidentiality and Integrity
[7] Standards Mapping - OWASP API 2023 API8 Security Misconfiguration
[8] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M5 Poor Authorization and Authentication
[9] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M8 Security Misconfiguration
[10] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A5 Security Misconfiguration
[11] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A6 Security Misconfiguration
[12] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A05 Security Misconfiguration
[13] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.1, Requirement 6.5.10
[14] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.5.4, Requirement 6.5.9
[15] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.5.4, Requirement 6.5.8
[16] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.4, Requirement 6.5.8
[17] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.4, Requirement 6.5.8
[18] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.4, Requirement 6.5.8
[19] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.4, Requirement 6.5.8
[20] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[21] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
[22] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control, Control Objective 6.2 - Sensitive Data Protection
[23] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control, Control Objective 6.2 - Sensitive Data Protection
[24] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control, Control Objective 6.2 - Sensitive Data Protection, Control Objective C.2.3 - Web Software Access Controls, Control Objective C.4.1 - Web Software Communications
[25] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3260.1 CAT II
[26] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3260 CAT II
[27] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3260 CAT II
[28] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3260 CAT II
[29] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3260 CAT II
[30] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3260 CAT II
[31] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3260 CAT II
[32] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II, APSC-DV-001870 CAT II, APSC-DV-002360 CAT II
[33] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II, APSC-DV-001870 CAT II, APSC-DV-002360 CAT II
[34] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II, APSC-DV-001870 CAT II, APSC-DV-002360 CAT II
[35] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II, APSC-DV-001870 CAT II, APSC-DV-002360 CAT II
[36] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II, APSC-DV-001870 CAT II, APSC-DV-002360 CAT II
[37] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II, APSC-DV-001870 CAT II, APSC-DV-002360 CAT II
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II, APSC-DV-001870 CAT II, APSC-DV-002360 CAT II
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II, APSC-DV-001870 CAT II, APSC-DV-002360 CAT II
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II, APSC-DV-001870 CAT II, APSC-DV-002360 CAT II
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II, APSC-DV-001870 CAT II, APSC-DV-002360 CAT II
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II, APSC-DV-001870 CAT II, APSC-DV-002360 CAT II
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II, APSC-DV-001870 CAT II, APSC-DV-002360 CAT II
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II, APSC-DV-001870 CAT II, APSC-DV-002360 CAT II
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II, APSC-DV-001870 CAT II, APSC-DV-002360 CAT II
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II, APSC-DV-001870 CAT II, APSC-DV-002360 CAT II
[47] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Insufficient Authorization (WASC-02)
[48] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium 24 + 2 Insufficient Authorization
desc.configuration.java.often_misused_spring_remote_service
Abstract
Os serviços da web são configurados no aplicativo Spring. Por padrão, esses serviços da web não requerem autenticação e as informações transferidas deste serviço e para ele estão em texto simples. Isso pode permitir que um invasor acesse operações com privilégios ou exponha dados confidenciais.
Explanation
O Spring fornece um mecanismo fácil para transformar qualquer bean gerenciado pelo Spring em serviços da web por meio do Spring WS ou XFire. Qualquer método público do bean Spring remoto pode ser chamado externamente e os dados que estão sendo passados entre o cliente e os objetos habilitados pelo serviço da web estão em texto simples. O maior problema com esses serviços é que eles são abertos por padrão e não oferecem garantias de confidencialidade ou integridade por padrão.
References
[1] Anirvan Chakraborty , Jessica Ditt , Aleksa Vukotic , Jan Machacek ProSpring 2.5
[2] Gary Mak , Daniel Rubio , Josh Long Spring Recipes
[3] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-000213, CCI-000804, CCI-001084, CCI-002165
[4] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Access Violation
[5] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 AC-3 Access Enforcement (P1), IA-8 Identification and Authentication (Non-Organizational Users) (P1), SC-3 Security Function Isolation (P1), SC-8 Transmission Confidentiality and Integrity (P1)
[6] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 AC-3 Access Enforcement, IA-8 Identification and Authentication (Non-Organizational Users), SC-3 Security Function Isolation, SC-8 Transmission Confidentiality and Integrity
[7] Standards Mapping - OWASP API 2023 API8 Security Misconfiguration
[8] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M5 Poor Authorization and Authentication
[9] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M8 Security Misconfiguration
[10] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A5 Security Misconfiguration
[11] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A6 Security Misconfiguration
[12] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A05 Security Misconfiguration
[13] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.1, Requirement 6.5.10
[14] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.5.4, Requirement 6.5.9
[15] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.5.4, Requirement 6.5.8
[16] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.4, Requirement 6.5.8
[17] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.4, Requirement 6.5.8
[18] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.4, Requirement 6.5.8
[19] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.4, Requirement 6.5.8
[20] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[21] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
[22] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control, Control Objective 6.2 - Sensitive Data Protection
[23] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control, Control Objective 6.2 - Sensitive Data Protection
[24] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control, Control Objective 6.2 - Sensitive Data Protection, Control Objective C.2.3 - Web Software Access Controls, Control Objective C.4.1 - Web Software Communications
[25] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3260.1 CAT II
[26] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3260 CAT II
[27] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3260 CAT II
[28] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3260 CAT II
[29] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3260 CAT II
[30] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3260 CAT II
[31] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3260 CAT II
[32] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II, APSC-DV-001870 CAT II, APSC-DV-002360 CAT II
[33] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II, APSC-DV-001870 CAT II, APSC-DV-002360 CAT II
[34] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II, APSC-DV-001870 CAT II, APSC-DV-002360 CAT II
[35] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II, APSC-DV-001870 CAT II, APSC-DV-002360 CAT II
[36] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II, APSC-DV-001870 CAT II, APSC-DV-002360 CAT II
[37] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II, APSC-DV-001870 CAT II, APSC-DV-002360 CAT II
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II, APSC-DV-001870 CAT II, APSC-DV-002360 CAT II
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II, APSC-DV-001870 CAT II, APSC-DV-002360 CAT II
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II, APSC-DV-001870 CAT II, APSC-DV-002360 CAT II
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II, APSC-DV-001870 CAT II, APSC-DV-002360 CAT II
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II, APSC-DV-001870 CAT II, APSC-DV-002360 CAT II
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II, APSC-DV-001870 CAT II, APSC-DV-002360 CAT II
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II, APSC-DV-001870 CAT II, APSC-DV-002360 CAT II
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II, APSC-DV-001870 CAT II, APSC-DV-002360 CAT II
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II, APSC-DV-001870 CAT II, APSC-DV-002360 CAT II
[47] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Insufficient Authorization (WASC-02)
[48] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium 24 + 2 Insufficient Authorization
desc.configuration.java.often_misused_spring_web_service
Abstract
Funções que convertem entre cadeias de caracteres Multibyte e Unicode incentivam estouros de buffer.
Explanation
O Windows fornece as funções MultiByteToWideChar(), WideCharToMultiByte(), UnicodeToBytes() e BytesToUnicode() para converter entre cadeias de caracteres multibyte arbitrários (geralmente ANSI) e cadeias de caracteres Unicode (caracteres largos). Os argumentos de tamanho para essas funções são especificados em unidades diferentes (um em bytes e o outro em caracteres), fazendo com seu uso seja propenso a erros. Em uma cadeia de caracteres multibyte, cada caractere ocupa um número de bytes variável e, portanto, o tamanho dessas cadeias de caracteres é mais facilmente especificado como um número total de bytes. Por outro lado, em Unicode, os caracteres sempre têm um tamanho fixo, e os comprimentos de cadeias de caracteres são normalmente determinados pelo número de caracteres que as cadeias contêm. Especificar as unidades erradas por engano em um argumento de tamanho pode causar um buffer overflow.

Exemplo 1: A função a seguir usa um nome de usuário especificado como uma cadeias de caracteres multibyte e um ponteiro para uma estrutura de informações do usuário e preenche essa estrutura com informações sobre o usuário especificado. Como a autenticação do Windows usa Unicode para nomes de usuário, o argumento username é primeiro convertido de uma string de vários bytes em uma string Unicode.


void getUserInfo(char *username, struct _USER_INFO_2 info){
WCHAR unicodeUser[UNLEN+1];
MultiByteToWideChar(CP_ACP, 0, username, -1,
unicodeUser, sizeof(unicodeUser));
NetUserGetInfo(NULL, unicodeUser, 2, (LPBYTE *)&info);
}


Em seguida, essa função transmite incorretamente o tamanho de unicodeUser em bytes em vez de em caracteres. Portanto, a chamada para MultiByteToWideChar() pode gravar caracteres com um comprimento de até (UNLEN+1)*sizeof(WCHAR, ouUNLEN+1)*sizeof(WCHAR)*sizeof(WCHAR) bytes, no array unicodeUser, que tem apenas (UNLEN+1)*sizeof(WCHAR) bytes alocados. Se a string username contiver mais de UNLEN caracteres, a chamada para MultiByteToWideChar() causará um estouro no buffer unicodeUser.
References
[1] Security Considerations: International Features Microsoft
[2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 176, CWE ID 251
[3] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-002824
[4] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Indirect Access to Sensitive Data
[5] Standards Mapping - Motor Industry Software Reliability Association (MISRA) C Guidelines 2012 Rule 1.3
[6] Standards Mapping - Motor Industry Software Reliability Association (MISRA) C Guidelines 2023 Rule 1.3
[7] Standards Mapping - Motor Industry Software Reliability Association (MISRA) C++ Guidelines 2023 Rule 4.1.3
[8] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 SI-16 Memory Protection (P1)
[9] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SI-16 Memory Protection
[10] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 5.3.2 Output Encoding and Injection Prevention Requirements (L1 L2 L3)
[11] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A5 Buffer Overflow
[12] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.5
[13] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.1
[14] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.5.2
[15] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.2
[16] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.2
[17] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.2
[18] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.2
[19] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[20] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
[21] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection
[22] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection
[23] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection
[24] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3590.1 CAT I
[25] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3590.1 CAT I
[26] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3590.1 CAT I
[27] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3590.1 CAT I
[28] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3590.1 CAT I
[29] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3590.1 CAT I
[30] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3590.1 CAT I
[31] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002590 CAT I
[32] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002590 CAT I
[33] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002590 CAT I
[34] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002590 CAT I
[35] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002590 CAT I
[36] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002590 CAT I
[37] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002590 CAT I
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002590 CAT I
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002590 CAT I
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002590 CAT I
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002590 CAT I
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002590 CAT I
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002590 CAT I
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002590 CAT I
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002590 CAT I
[46] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Buffer Overflow (WASC-07)
[47] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium 24 + 2 Buffer Overflow
desc.semantic.cpp.often_misused_strings.multibytewidechar
Abstract
O aplicativo usa a funcionalidade de sun.misc.Unsafe. Todas as funcionalidades dessa classe são inerentemente inseguras de usar e só podem ser acessadas por meio de reflexão.
Explanation
A classe sun.misc.Unsafe é para executar operações inseguras e de baixo nível e não se destina ao uso por desenvolvedores.
A classe Unsafe só pode ser obtida por código confiável e normalmente é obtida por meio de reflexão, pois pode ser usada para corromper o sistema ou alocar manualmente memória heap que, se não for tratada adequadamente, poderá ter efeitos prejudiciais no sistema. É imperativo que toda a funcionalidade em torno de sun.misc.Unsafe seja cuidadosamente revisada e testada para estar ausente de falhas.
References
[1] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 676
[2] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Indirect Access to Sensitive Data
[3] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.6
[4] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.6
[5] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.6
[6] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.6
[7] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[8] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
[9] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection
[10] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection
[11] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection
[12] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2011 Risky Resource Management - CWE ID 676
[13] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP2060.4 CAT II, APP3590.2 CAT I
[14] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP2060.4 CAT II, APP3590.2 CAT II
[15] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP2060.4 CAT II, APP3590.2 CAT II
[16] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP2060.4 CAT II, APP3590.2 CAT II
[17] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP2060.4 CAT II, APP3590.2 CAT II
[18] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP2060.4 CAT II, APP3590.2 CAT II
[19] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP2060.4 CAT II, APP3590.2 CAT II
desc.structural.java.often_misused_sun_misc_unsafe
Abstract
Para fins de confirmação de senha, a nova senha deve ser fornecida duas vezes em vez de duplicada.
Explanation
Alterar uma senha ou criar uma nova conta de usuário geralmente requer que a nova senha seja fornecida duas vezes para fins de confirmação. Passar uma senha duplicada em vez de passá-la duas vezes evita que a API verifique se o usuário não digitou a senha incorretamente e contorna o mecanismo de segurança de confirmação de senha.

Exemplo 1:

String password=request.getParameter("password");
...
DefaultUser user = (DefaultUser) ESAPI.authenticator().createUser(username, password, password);
References
[1] OWASP ESAPI Secure Coding API: User
[2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 521
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2019 [13] CWE ID 287
[4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2020 [14] CWE ID 287
[5] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2021 [14] CWE ID 287
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2022 [14] CWE ID 287
[7] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2023 [13] CWE ID 287
[8] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [14] CWE ID 287
[9] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 IA
[10] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Insufficient Data Protection
[11] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 2.1.11 Password Security Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.1 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.2 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.3 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.8.4 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.8.5 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.1 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.2 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 3.7.1 Defenses Against Session Management Exploits (L1 L2 L3), 9.2.3 Server Communications Security Requirements (L2 L3)
[12] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M5 Poor Authorization and Authentication
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M3 Insecure Authentication/Authorization
[14] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-AUTH-1
[15] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[16] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.3, Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[17] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.4
[18] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[19] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[20] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[21] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[22] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.4, Requirement 6.5.6, Requirement 8.3.1
[23] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.4, Requirement 6.5.6, Requirement 8.3.1
[24] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 5.3 - Authentication and Access Control, Control Objective 7 - Use of Cryptography
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 5.3 - Authentication and Access Control, Control Objective 7 - Use of Cryptography
[26] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 5.3 - Authentication and Access Control, Control Objective 7 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective C.2.1.2 - Web Software Access Controls
desc.structural.java.password_management_weak_redundancy
Abstract
O método finalize() só deve ser chamado pela JVM após o objeto ter sido coletado como lixo.
Explanation
Embora a especificação da linguagem Java permita que o método finalize() de um objeto seja chamado de fora do finalizador, fazer isso é normalmente uma má ideia. Por exemplo, chamar finalize() explicitamente significa que finalize() será chamado mais de uma vez: a primeira vez será a chamada explícita e a última vez será a chamada que é feita depois que o objeto é coletado como lixo.

Exemplo 1: O fragmento de código a seguir chama finalize() explicitamente:


// time to clean up
widget.finalize();
References
[1] MET12-J. Do not use finalizers CERT
[2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 586
desc.structural.java.poor_style_explicit_call_to_finalize
Abstract
dangerouslySetInnerHTML O atributo é definido como HTML do código desnecessariamente.
Explanation
O atributo dangerouslySetInnerHTML no React substitui o uso de innerHTML no DOM do navegador, mas a API foi renomeada para transmitir os possíveis perigos de usá-lo. Em geral, definir o HTML com base no código é arriscado porque é fácil expor inadvertidamente seus usuários a um ataque de script entre sites (XSS).
Exemplo 1: O seguinte código define o HTML com base no código para o atributo dangerouslySetInnerHTML:

function MyComponent(data) {
return (
<div
dangerouslySetInnerHTML={{__html: data.innerHTML}}
/>
);
}
desc.structural.javascript.react_bad_practices_dangerously_set_innerhtml
Abstract
O método é restrito. Todo uso desse método é sinalizado como um problema.
Explanation
Na API Foreign Function and Memory, alguns métodos são considerados restritos porque usá-los incorretamente pode levar a travamentos da JVM ou corrupção de memória.
References
[1] Oracle Foreign Function and Memory API: Restricted Methods
[2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 749
[3] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 SI-16 Memory Protection (P1)
[4] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SI-16 Memory Protection
[5] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 5.4.2 Memory/String/Unmanaged Code Requirements (L1 L2 L3)
[6] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2011 Risky Resource Management - CWE ID 676
desc.structural.java.ffr_restricted_methods
Abstract
As operações de gravação Open SQL diretas são uma prática imprópria e devem ser evitadas.
Explanation
Em geral, operações de gravação Open SQL diretas (Insert/Update/Modify/Delete) são uma prática imprópria e devem ser evitadas. Elas prejudicam a integridade e a segurança do sistema e não devem ser permitidas.



As operações de gravação Open SQL diretas também são propensas a erros e podem provocar o comportamento inesperado do sistema. Alguns dos problemas que devem ser observados no SAP incluem:

- A SAP recomenda o uso de técnicas de "agrupamento de atualizações" para garantir a integridade dos dados em uma LUW (unidade lógica de trabalho) SAP que pode propagar várias LUWs de banco de dados. Modificações diretas em entradas de tabelas sem o agrupamento de atualizações podem deixar a transação SAP em um estado inconsistente.

- Operações de gravação Open SQL diretas apenas definem bloqueios no nível do banco de dados e ignoram os bloqueios de aplicativos SAP. Isso pode resultar em deadlocks e dados corrompidos.

- Operações de gravação Open SQL diretas ignoram verificações de autorização SAP dentro do programa aplicativo.

- Quando mecanismos padrão são utilizados para gravar entradas de tabela, editar verificações e realizar trilhas de auditoria, todas as atualizações dependentes (como documentos de alteração, por exemplo) são realizadas corretamente. Este não é o caso quando operações de gravação Open SQL diretas são utilizadas.

References
[1] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 662
[2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2022 [22] CWE ID 362
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2023 [21] CWE ID 362
[4] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-002235
[5] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Indirect Access to Sensitive Data
[6] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 AC-6 Least Privilege (P1)
[7] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 AC-6 Least Privilege
[8] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-000500 CAT II
[9] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-000500 CAT II
[10] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-000500 CAT II
desc.structural.abap.sql_bad_practices_direct_update
Abstract
Os identificadores sem esquemas não devem ser usados nos pacotes de direitos do chamador.
Explanation
Nos direitos de um chamador, ou no pacote AUTHID CURRENT_USER, os identificadores são primeiro resolvidos de acordo com o esquema atual do usuário. Isso pode causar um comportamento inesperado se o definidor do código não disser explicitamente a qual esquema um identificador pertence.

Exemplo 1: O código a seguir verifica se o usuário tem permissões para executar uma ação ao buscar o usuário em uma tabela de permissões. A maioria dos usuários terá apenas o acesso de leitura a SYS.PERMISSIONS e não poderá modificar as permissões definidas.


CREATE or REPLACE FUNCTION check_permissions(
p_name IN VARCHAR2, p_action IN VARCHAR2)
RETURN BOOLEAN
AUTHID CURRENT_USER
IS
r_count NUMBER;
perm BOOLEAN := FALSE;
BEGIN
SELECT count(*) INTO r_count FROM PERMISSIONS
WHERE name = p_name AND action = p_action;
IF r_count > 0 THEN
perm := TRUE;
END IF;
RETURN perm;
END check_permissions


Se o usuário que está chamando a função check_permissions definir uma tabela de PERMISSIONS no esquema dele, o banco de dados resolverá o identificador para consultar a tabela local. O usuário teria acesso de gravação à nova tabela e poderia modificá-la para obter permissões que não teria de outra maneira.
References
[1] Oracle Oracle Database PL/SQL Language Reference
[2] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Indirect Access to Sensitive Data
desc.structural.sql.sql_bad_practices_underspecified_identifier
Abstract
Uma Ação do Struts 2.x implementa uma classe que permite a um invasor modificar a lógica de negócios do aplicativo associando dados arbitrários a objetos de sessão, de aplicativo ou de solicitação no lado do servidor
Explanation
O Apache Struts 2.x inclui as novas interfaces Aware para permitir que desenvolvedores injetem mapas facilmente com informações de tempo de execução relevantes em seus códigos de Ações. Essas interfaces incluem: org.apache.struts2.interceptor.ApplicationtAware, org.apache.struts2.interceptor.SessionAware e org.apache.struts2.interceptor.RequestAware. Para que qualquer um desses mapas de dados seja injetado em seus códigos de Ações, os desenvolvedores precisam implementar o setter especificado na interface (por exemplo: setSession para a Interface SessionAware):

public class VulnerableAction extends ActionSupport implements SessionAware {

protected Map<String, Object> session;

@Override
public void setSession(Map<String, Object> session) {
this.session = session;
}

Por outro lado, o Struts 2.x associa automaticamente os dados de solicitações provenientes do usuário às propriedades da Ação por meio de assessores públicos definidos na Ação. Como as interfaces Aware exigem a implementação do setter público definido na interface Aware, esse setter também será automaticamente associado a qualquer parâmetro de solicitação que corresponder ao nome do setter da interface Aware, o que pode permitir que invasores remotos modifiquem valores de dados em tempo de execução através de um parâmetro trabalhado para um aplicativo que implementa uma interface afetada, conforme demonstrado pelas interfaces SessionAware, RequestAware e ApplicationAware.

A URL a seguir permitirá que um atacante substitua o atributo "roles" no mapa de sessão. Isso pode acabar permitindo que o invasor se torne um administrador.

http://server/VulnerableAction?session.roles=admin


Embora essas interfaces só exijam a implementação dos assessores setter, se o getter correspondente também for implementado, as alterações nessas coleções de mapas terão o escopo definido para a sessão, em vez de somente afetarem o escopo da solicitação atual.
References
[1] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 20
[2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2021 [4] CWE ID 020
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2022 [4] CWE ID 020
[4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2023 [6] CWE ID 020
[5] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [12] CWE ID 020
[6] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-001082, CCI-002754
[7] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Indirect Access to Sensitive Data
[8] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 SC-2 Application Partitioning (P1), SI-10 Information Input Validation (P1)
[9] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SC-2 Separation of System and User Functionality, SI-10 Information Input Validation
[10] Standards Mapping - OWASP API 2023 API3 Broken Object Property Level Authorization
[11] 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)
[12] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M1 Weak Server Side Controls
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A1 Unvalidated Input
[14] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A4 Insecure Direct Object Reference
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A4 Insecure Direct Object References
[16] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A4 Insecure Direct Object References
[17] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A5 Broken Access Control
[18] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A03 Injection
[19] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.6
[20] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.5.2
[21] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.5.1
[22] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.1
[23] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[24] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.1
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[26] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[27] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection
[29] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection
[30] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection
[31] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002150 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[32] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002150 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[33] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002150 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[34] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002150 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[35] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002150 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[36] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002150 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[37] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002150 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002150 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002150 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002150 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002150 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002150 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002150 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002150 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002150 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[46] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Insufficient Process Validation (WASC-40)
desc.structural.java.struts2_bad_practices_application_map_tampering
Abstract
A Ação do Struts 2 expõe um método público que pode ser invocado pelos usuários finais, substituindo o método execute() dessa Ação.
Explanation
O Struts 2 introduziu um recurso chamado “Invocação de método dinâmico", que permite que uma Ação exponha métodos diferentes de execute(). O caractere ! (exclamação) ou o prefixo method: pode ser usado na URL da Ação para invocar qualquer método público nessa Ação quando a “Invocação de método dinâmico" está habilitada. Os desenvolvedores que não estiverem cientes desse recurso poderão inadvertidamente expor a lógica de negócios interna aos invasores.

Como exemplo, se a Ação contiver um método público chamado getUserPassword(), que não usa argumentos e não consegue desabilitar o recurso "Invocação de Métodos Dinâmica", um invasor será capaz de tirar proveito disso visitando a seguinte URL: http://server/app/recoverpassword!getPassword.action
References
[1] Struts 2 Security Vulnerability - Dynamic Method Invocation
[2] Struts 2 - Dynamic Method Invocation
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 285
[4] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-000213, CCI-001764, CCI-001774, CCI-002165
[5] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 AC
[6] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Indirect Access to Sensitive Data
[7] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 AC-3 Access Enforcement (P1), CM-7 Least Functionality (P1)
[8] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 AC-3 Access Enforcement, CM-7 Least Functionality
[9] Standards Mapping - OWASP API 2023 API5 Broken Function Level Authorization
[10] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 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), 13.1.4 Generic Web Service Security Verification Requirements (L2 L3)
[11] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M1 Weak Server Side Controls
[12] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A2 Broken Access Control
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A4 Insecure Direct Object Reference
[14] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A4 Insecure Direct Object References
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A4 Insecure Direct Object References
[16] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A5 Broken Access Control
[17] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A01 Broken Access Control
[18] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.2
[19] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.5.4
[20] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.5.8
[21] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.8
[22] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.8
[23] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.8
[24] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.8
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[26] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
[27] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control
[29] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control, Control Objective C.2.3 - Web Software Access Controls
[30] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2009 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 285
[31] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2010 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 285
[32] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2011 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 862
[33] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3510 CAT I
[34] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3510 CAT I
[35] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3510 CAT I
[36] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3510 CAT I
[37] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3510 CAT I
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3510 CAT I
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3510 CAT I
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II, APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II, APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II, APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II, APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II, APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II, APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II, APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II, APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II, APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II, APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II, APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II, APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II
[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II, APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II
[53] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II, APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II
[54] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II, APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II
[55] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Insufficient Authorization (WASC-02)
[56] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium 24 + 2 Insufficient Authorization
desc.structural.java.struts2_bad_practices_dynamic_method_invocation
Abstract
Uma Ação do Struts 2.x implementa uma classe que permite a um invasor modificar a lógica de negócios do aplicativo associando dados arbitrários a objetos de sessão, de aplicativo ou de solicitação no lado do servidor
Explanation
O Apache Struts 2.x inclui as novas interfaces Aware para permitir que desenvolvedores injetem mapas facilmente com informações de tempo de execução relevantes em seus códigos de Ações. Essas interfaces incluem: org.apache.struts2.interceptor.ApplicationtAware, org.apache.struts2.interceptor.SessionAware e org.apache.struts2.interceptor.RequestAware. Para que qualquer um desses mapas de dados seja injetado em seus códigos de Ações, os desenvolvedores precisam implementar o setter especificado na interface (por exemplo: setSession para a Interface SessionAware):

public class VulnerableAction extends ActionSupport implements SessionAware {

protected Map<String, Object> session;

@Override
public void setSession(Map<String, Object> session) {
this.session = session;
}

Por outro lado, o Struts 2.x associa automaticamente os dados de solicitações provenientes do usuário às propriedades da Ação por meio de assessores públicos definidos na Ação. Como as interfaces Aware exigem a implementação do setter público definido na interface Aware, esse setter também será automaticamente associado a qualquer parâmetro de solicitação que corresponder ao nome do setter da interface Aware, o que pode permitir que invasores remotos modifiquem valores de dados em tempo de execução através de um parâmetro trabalhado para um aplicativo que implementa uma interface afetada, conforme demonstrado pelas interfaces SessionAware, RequestAware e ApplicationAware.

A URL a seguir permitirá que um atacante substitua o atributo "roles" no mapa de sessão. Isso pode acabar permitindo que o invasor se torne um administrador.

http://server/VulnerableAction?session.roles=admin


Embora essas interfaces só exijam a implementação dos assessores setter, se o getter correspondente também for implementado, as alterações nessas coleções de mapas terão o escopo definido para a sessão, em vez de somente afetarem o escopo da solicitação atual.
References
[1] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 20
[2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2021 [4] CWE ID 020
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2022 [4] CWE ID 020
[4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2023 [6] CWE ID 020
[5] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [12] CWE ID 020
[6] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-001082, CCI-002754
[7] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Indirect Access to Sensitive Data
[8] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 SC-2 Application Partitioning (P1), SI-10 Information Input Validation (P1)
[9] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SC-2 Separation of System and User Functionality, SI-10 Information Input Validation
[10] Standards Mapping - OWASP API 2023 API3 Broken Object Property Level Authorization
[11] 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)
[12] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M1 Weak Server Side Controls
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A1 Unvalidated Input
[14] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A4 Insecure Direct Object Reference
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A4 Insecure Direct Object References
[16] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A4 Insecure Direct Object References
[17] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A5 Broken Access Control
[18] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A03 Injection
[19] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.6
[20] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.5.2
[21] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.5.1
[22] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.1
[23] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[24] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.1
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[26] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[27] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control
[29] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control
[30] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control, Control Objective C.2.3 - Web Software Access Controls
[31] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002150 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[32] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002150 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[33] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002150 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[34] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002150 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[35] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002150 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[36] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002150 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[37] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002150 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002150 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002150 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002150 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002150 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002150 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002150 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002150 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002150 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[46] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Insufficient Process Validation (WASC-40)
desc.structural.java.struts2_bad_practices_request_map_tampering
Abstract
Uma Ação do Struts 2.x implementa uma classe que permite a um invasor modificar a lógica de negócios do aplicativo associando dados arbitrários a objetos de sessão, de aplicativo ou de solicitação no lado do servidor
Explanation
O Apache Struts 2.x inclui as novas interfaces Aware para permitir que desenvolvedores injetem mapas facilmente com informações de tempo de execução relevantes em seus códigos de Ações. Essas interfaces incluem: org.apache.struts2.interceptor.ApplicationtAware, org.apache.struts2.interceptor.SessionAware e org.apache.struts2.interceptor.RequestAware. Para que qualquer um desses mapas de dados seja injetado em seus códigos de Ações, os desenvolvedores precisam implementar o setter especificado na interface (por exemplo: setSession para a Interface SessionAware):

public class VulnerableAction extends ActionSupport implements SessionAware {

protected Map<String, Object> session;

@Override
public void setSession(Map<String, Object> session) {
this.session = session;
}

Por outro lado, o Struts 2.x associa automaticamente os dados de solicitações provenientes do usuário às propriedades da Ação por meio de assessores públicos definidos na Ação. Como as interfaces Aware exigem a implementação do setter público definido na interface Aware, esse setter também será automaticamente associado a qualquer parâmetro de solicitação que corresponder ao nome do setter da interface Aware, o que pode permitir que invasores remotos modifiquem valores de dados em tempo de execução através de um parâmetro trabalhado para um aplicativo que implementa uma interface afetada, conforme demonstrado pelas interfaces SessionAware, RequestAware e ApplicationAware.

A URL a seguir permitirá que um atacante substitua o atributo "roles" no mapa de sessão. Isso pode acabar permitindo que o invasor se torne um administrador.

http://server/VulnerableAction?session.roles=admin


Embora essas interfaces só exijam a implementação dos assessores setter, se o getter correspondente também for implementado, as alterações nessas coleções de mapas terão o escopo definido para a sessão, em vez de somente afetarem o escopo da solicitação atual.
References
[1] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 20
[2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2021 [4] CWE ID 020
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2022 [4] CWE ID 020
[4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2023 [6] CWE ID 020
[5] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [12] CWE ID 020
[6] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-001082, CCI-002754
[7] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Indirect Access to Sensitive Data
[8] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 SC-2 Application Partitioning (P1), SI-10 Information Input Validation (P1)
[9] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SC-2 Separation of System and User Functionality, SI-10 Information Input Validation
[10] Standards Mapping - OWASP API 2023 API3 Broken Object Property Level Authorization
[11] 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)
[12] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M1 Weak Server Side Controls
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A1 Unvalidated Input
[14] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A4 Insecure Direct Object Reference
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A4 Insecure Direct Object References
[16] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A4 Insecure Direct Object References
[17] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A5 Broken Access Control
[18] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A03 Injection
[19] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.6
[20] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.5.2
[21] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.5.1
[22] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.1
[23] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[24] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.1
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[26] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[27] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection
[29] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection
[30] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection
[31] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002150 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[32] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002150 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[33] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002150 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[34] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002150 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[35] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002150 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[36] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002150 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[37] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002150 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002150 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002150 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002150 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002150 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002150 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002150 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002150 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002150 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[46] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Insufficient Process Validation (WASC-40)
desc.structural.java.struts2_bad_practices_session_map_tampering