1464 itens encontrados
Vulnerabilidades
Abstract
O código afirma aos seus chamadores que uma certa permissão é dada, potencialmente permitindo que um invasor ignore os controles de segurança.
Explanation
As permissões no .NET Framework funcionam subindo a memória de pilha (onde a memória cresce para baixo), para verificar se as permissões estão configuradas de forma suficiente para acessar um recurso. Quando um desenvolvedor usa Assert() com uma permissão específica, é uma maneira de dizer que o fluxo de controle atual tem a permissão especificada. Isso, por sua vez, leva o .NET Framework a interromper todas as verificações de permissão, desde que satisfaça as permissões necessárias, o que significa que o código que chama o código que faz a chamada para Assert() pode não ter a permissão necessária. O uso do Assert() é útil em alguns casos, mas pode levar a vulnerabilidades quando permite que um usuário mal-intencionado controle um recurso sem permissão para isso.
References
[1] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 279
[2] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-000213, CCI-002038, CCI-002039, CCI-002165
[3] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 AC
[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-11 Re-Authentication (P0)
[6] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 AC-3 Access Enforcement, SC-11 Trusted Path
[7] Standards Mapping - OWASP API 2023 API1 Broken Object Level Authorization
[8] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 1.4.5 Access Control Architectural Requirements (L2 L3)
[9] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M5 Poor Authorization and Authentication
[10] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M3 Insecure Authentication/Authorization
[11] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A2 Broken Access Control
[12] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A4 Insecure Direct Object Reference
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A4 Insecure Direct Object References
[14] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A4 Insecure Direct Object References
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A5 Broken Access Control
[16] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A01 Broken Access Control
[17] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.2
[18] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.5.4
[19] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.5.8
[20] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.8
[21] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.8
[22] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.8
[23] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.8
[24] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
[26] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control
[27] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control
[28] 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
[29] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2011 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 863
[30] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3510 CAT I
[31] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3510 CAT I
[32] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3510 CAT I
[33] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3510 CAT I
[34] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3510 CAT I
[35] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3510 CAT I
[36] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3510 CAT I
[37] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II, APSC-DV-001520 CAT II, APSC-DV-001530 CAT II
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II, APSC-DV-001520 CAT II, APSC-DV-001530 CAT II
[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II, APSC-DV-001520 CAT II, APSC-DV-001530 CAT II
[53] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Insufficient Authorization (WASC-02)
[54] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium 24 + 2 Insufficient Authorization
desc.semantic.dotnet.often_misused_asserting_permissions
Abstract
Os invasores podem falsificar entradas de DNS. Não confie em nomes DNS para segurança.
Explanation
Muitos servidores DNS são suscetíveis a ataques de falsificação e, portanto, você deve partir do princípio de que algum dia o seu software será executado em um ambiente com um servidor DNS comprometido. Se os invasores tiverem permissão para fazer atualizações de DNS (processo às vezes chamado de envenenamento de cache de DNS), eles poderão rotear seu tráfego de rede através das máquinas deles ou causar a impressão de que os endereços IP deles fazem parte do seu domínio. Não baseie a segurança do seu sistema em nomes DNS.
Exemplo 1: A amostra de código a seguir usa uma pesquisa de DNS para decidir se uma solicitação de entrada é ou não proveniente de um host confiável. Se um invasor puder envenenar o cache de DNS, ele poderá obter um status confiável.


IPAddress hostIPAddress = IPAddress.Parse(RemoteIpAddress);
IPHostEntry hostInfo = Dns.GetHostByAddress(hostIPAddress);
if (hostInfo.HostName.EndsWith("trustme.com")) {
trusted = true;
}


Endereços IP são mais confiáveis que nomes DNS, mas também podem ser falsificados. Os invasores podem facilmente falsificar o endereço IP de origem dos pacotes que eles enviam, mas os pacotes de resposta retornarão ao endereço IP falsificado. Para ver os pacotes de resposta, o invasor precisa realizar o sniffing do tráfego entre a máquina da vítima e o endereço IP falsificado. Para realizar o sniffing necessário, os invasores normalmente tentam se localizar na mesma sub-rede que a máquina da vítima. Os invasores podem ser capazes de se esquivar dessa exigência usando o roteamento de origem, mas esse roteamento não está habilitado em uma grande extensão da Internet hoje em dia. Em resumo, a verificação de endereços IP pode ser uma parte útil de um esquema de autenticação, mas não deve ser o único fator necessário para a autenticação.
References
[1] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 247, CWE ID 292, CWE ID 558, CWE ID 807
[2] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-000877
[3] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 IA
[4] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Access Violation
[5] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 IA-11 Re-Authentication (P0), MA-4 Nonlocal Maintenance (P2), SC-23 Session Authenticity (P1)
[6] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 MA-4 Nonlocal Maintenance, SC-11 Trusted Path, SC-23 Session Authenticity
[7] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M5 Poor Authorization and Authentication
[8] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M3 Insecure Authentication/Authorization
[9] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-AUTH-1
[10] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A3 Broken Authentication and Session Management
[11] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A7 Broken Authentication and Session Management
[12] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A3 Broken Authentication and Session Management
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A2 Broken Authentication and Session Management
[14] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A2 Broken Authentication
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A07 Identification and Authentication Failures
[16] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.3
[17] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.5.7
[18] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.5.8
[19] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.10
[20] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.10
[21] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.10
[22] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.10
[23] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[24] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection
[26] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection
[27] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection
[28] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2010 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 807
[29] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2011 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 807
[30] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3460 CAT I
[31] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3460 CAT I
[32] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3460 CAT I
[33] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3460 CAT I
[34] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3460 CAT I
[35] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3460 CAT I
[36] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3460 CAT I
[37] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-001520 CAT II, APSC-DV-001530 CAT II, APSC-DV-001970 CAT II
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-001520 CAT II, APSC-DV-001530 CAT II, APSC-DV-001970 CAT II
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 APSC-DV-001520 CAT II, APSC-DV-001530 CAT II, APSC-DV-001970 CAT II
[40] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Insufficient Authentication (WASC-01)
[41] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium 24 + 2 Insufficient Authentication
desc.semantic.dotnet.often_misused_authentication
Abstract
A função getlogin() é fácil de falsificar. Não confie no nome que ela retorna.
Explanation
A função getlogin() deve retornar uma string contendo o nome do usuário atualmente conectado ao terminal, mas um invasor pode fazer com que getlogin() retorne o nome de qualquer usuário conectado à máquina. Não confie no nome retornado por getlogin() ao tomar decisões de segurança.
Exemplo 1: O código a seguir se baseia em getlogin() para determinar se um usuário é ou não confiável. Isso é facilmente contestado.


pwd = getpwnam(getlogin());
if (isTrustedGroup(pwd->pw_gid)) {
allow();
} else {
deny();
}
References
[1] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 247, CWE ID 292, CWE ID 558, CWE ID 807
[2] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-000877
[3] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 IA
[4] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Access Violation
[5] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 IA-11 Re-Authentication (P0), MA-4 Nonlocal Maintenance (P2), SC-23 Session Authenticity (P1)
[6] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 MA-4 Nonlocal Maintenance, SC-11 Trusted Path, SC-23 Session Authenticity
[7] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M5 Poor Authorization and Authentication
[8] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M3 Insecure Authentication/Authorization
[9] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-AUTH-1
[10] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A3 Broken Authentication and Session Management
[11] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A7 Broken Authentication and Session Management
[12] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A3 Broken Authentication and Session Management
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A2 Broken Authentication and Session Management
[14] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A2 Broken Authentication
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A07 Identification and Authentication Failures
[16] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.3
[17] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.5.7
[18] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.5.8
[19] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.10
[20] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.10
[21] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.10
[22] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.10
[23] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[24] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection
[26] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection
[27] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection
[28] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2010 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 807
[29] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2011 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 807
[30] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3460 CAT I
[31] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3460 CAT I
[32] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3460 CAT I
[33] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3460 CAT I
[34] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3460 CAT I
[35] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3460 CAT I
[36] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3460 CAT I
[37] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-001520 CAT II, APSC-DV-001530 CAT II, APSC-DV-001970 CAT II
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-001520 CAT II, APSC-DV-001530 CAT II, APSC-DV-001970 CAT II
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 APSC-DV-001520 CAT II, APSC-DV-001530 CAT II, APSC-DV-001970 CAT II
[40] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Insufficient Authentication (WASC-01)
[41] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium 24 + 2 Insufficient Authentication
desc.semantic.cpp.often_misused_authentication.getlogin
Abstract
Os invasores podem falsificar entradas de DNS. Não confie em nomes DNS para segurança.
Explanation
Muitos servidores DNS são suscetíveis a ataques de falsificação e, portanto, você deve partir do princípio de que algum dia o seu software será executado em um ambiente com um servidor DNS comprometido. Se os invasores tiverem permissão para fazer atualizações de DNS (processo às vezes chamado de envenenamento de cache de DNS), eles poderão rotear seu tráfego de rede através das máquinas deles ou causar a impressão de que os endereços IP deles fazem parte do seu domínio. Não baseie a segurança do seu sistema em nomes DNS.
Exemplo 1: O código a seguir usa uma pesquisa de DNS para determinar se uma solicitação de entrada é proveniente de um host confiável. Se um invasor puder envenenar o cache de DNS, ele poderá obter um status confiável.


String ip = request.getRemoteAddr();
InetAddress addr = InetAddress.getByName(ip);
if (addr.getCanonicalHostName().endsWith("trustme.com")) {
trusted = true;
}


Endereços IP são mais confiáveis que nomes DNS, mas também podem ser falsificados. Os invasores podem facilmente falsificar o endereço IP de origem dos pacotes que eles enviam, mas os pacotes de resposta retornarão ao endereço IP falsificado. Para ver os pacotes de resposta, o invasor precisa realizar o sniffing do tráfego entre a máquina da vítima e o endereço IP falsificado. Para realizar o sniffing necessário, os invasores normalmente tentam se localizar na mesma sub-rede que a máquina da vítima. Os invasores podem ser capazes de se esquivar dessa exigência usando o roteamento de origem, mas esse roteamento não está habilitado em uma grande extensão da Internet hoje em dia. Em resumo, a verificação de endereços IP pode ser uma parte útil de um esquema de autenticação, mas não deve ser o único fator necessário para a autenticação.
References
[1] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 247, CWE ID 292, CWE ID 558, CWE ID 807
[2] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-000877
[3] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 IA
[4] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Access Violation
[5] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 IA-11 Re-Authentication (P0), MA-4 Nonlocal Maintenance (P2), SC-23 Session Authenticity (P1)
[6] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 MA-4 Nonlocal Maintenance, SC-11 Trusted Path, SC-23 Session Authenticity
[7] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M5 Poor Authorization and Authentication
[8] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M3 Insecure Authentication/Authorization
[9] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-AUTH-1
[10] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A3 Broken Authentication and Session Management
[11] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A7 Broken Authentication and Session Management
[12] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A3 Broken Authentication and Session Management
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A2 Broken Authentication and Session Management
[14] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A2 Broken Authentication
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A07 Identification and Authentication Failures
[16] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.3
[17] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.5.7
[18] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.5.8
[19] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.10
[20] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.10
[21] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.10
[22] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.10
[23] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[24] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection
[26] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection
[27] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection
[28] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2010 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 807
[29] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2011 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 807
[30] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3460 CAT I
[31] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3460 CAT I
[32] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3460 CAT I
[33] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3460 CAT I
[34] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3460 CAT I
[35] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3460 CAT I
[36] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3460 CAT I
[37] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-001520 CAT II, APSC-DV-001530 CAT II, APSC-DV-001970 CAT II
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-001520 CAT II, APSC-DV-001530 CAT II, APSC-DV-001970 CAT II
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 APSC-DV-001520 CAT II, APSC-DV-001530 CAT II, APSC-DV-001970 CAT II
[40] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Insufficient Authentication (WASC-01)
[41] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium 24 + 2 Insufficient Authentication
desc.semantic.java.often_misused_authentication
Abstract
O método Boolean.getBoolean() é muitas vezes confundido com chamadas de métodos Boolean.valueOf() ou Boolean.parseBoolean().
Explanation
Na maioria dos casos, uma chamada para Boolean.getBoolean() é muitas vezes má utilizada, pois presume-se que ela retorne o valor booliano representado pelo argumento de string especificado. No entanto, conforme indicado no Javadoc, o método Boolean.getBoolean(String) "retornará true se, e somente se, a propriedade do sistema nomeada pelo argumento existir e for igual à string 'true'".

Na maioria das vezes, o que o desenvolvedor pretendia usar era uma chamada para o método Boolean.valueOf(String) ou Boolean.parseBoolean(String).
Exemplo 1: O código a seguir não se comportará conforme esperado. Ele imprimirá "FALSE", pois Boolean.getBoolean(String) não converte uma primitiva de String. Ele apenas converte a propriedade do sistema.

...
String isValid = "true";
if ( Boolean.getBoolean(isValid) ) {
System.out.println("TRUE");
}
else {
System.out.println("FALSE");
}
...
References
[1] Class Boolean Oracle
[2] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.6
[3] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.6
[4] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.6
[5] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.6
[6] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[7] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
[8] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection
[9] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection
[10] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection
desc.semantic.java.often_misused_boolean_getboolean
Abstract
A substituição indevida das classes no .NET Framework pode levar à execução de código arbitrário no servidor, abuso da lógica do aplicativo ou à negação de serviço.
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. O método GetChars nas classes Decoder & Encoding, e o método GetBytes nas classes Encoder & Encoding no .NET Framework executam internamente a aritmética de ponteiro nas matrizes char e byte para converter o intervalo de caracteres em um intervalo de bytes e vice-versa.
Durante a execução de operações de aritmética de ponteiro, os desenvolvedores muitas vezes substituem os métodos precedentes de uma maneira ruim e introduzem vulnerabilidades, como execução de código arbitrário, abuso da lógica do aplicativo e negação de serviço.
References
[1] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 176
[2] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Indirect Access to Sensitive Data
[3] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 5.3.2 Output Encoding and Injection Prevention Requirements (L1 L2 L3)
[4] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M4 Insufficient Input/Output Validation
[5] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CODE-4
[6] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[7] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
desc.structural.dotnet.often_misused_encoding
Abstract
Esse método é difícil de usar corretamente.
Explanation
É fácil acreditar que esse método de codificação protegerá contra ataques de injeção, mas, se ele não for usado no contexto certo, poderá oferecer muito menos proteção do que anuncia.

Exemplo 1: A seguinte chamada de codificação proporciona a um invasor um pouco de latitude para inserir JavaScript mal-intencionado:

out.println("x = " + encoder.encodeForJavaScript(input) + ";");
References
[1] OWASP ESAPI Secure Coding Guideline
[2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 176
[3] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Indirect Access to Sensitive Data
[4] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 5.3.2 Output Encoding and Injection Prevention Requirements (L1 L2 L3)
[5] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M4 Insufficient Input/Output Validation
[6] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CODE-4
[7] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[8] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
desc.structural.java.often_misused_encoding
Abstract
A chamada identificada pode ajustar caracteres de uma forma melhor. Os caracteres não suportados passados para os métodos de API padrão podem ser mapeados com um melhor ajuste para caracteres perigosos.
Explanation
Quando conjuntos de caracteres são incompatíveis entre o sistema operacional e os aplicativos em execução no sistema operacional, os caracteres não suportados passados para os métodos de API padrão podem ser mapeados com um melhor ajuste para caracteres perigosos.

Exemplo 1: Em Objective-C, o seguinte exemplo converte um objeto NSString que contém um caractere UTF-8 em dados ASCII e depois o converte de volta:


...
unichar ellipsis = 0x2026;
NSString *myString = [NSString stringWithFormat:@"My Test String%C", ellipsis];
NSData *asciiData = [myString dataUsingEncoding:NSASCIIStringEncoding allowLossyConversion:YES];
NSString *asciiString = [[NSString alloc] initWithData:asciiData encoding:NSASCIIStringEncoding];
NSLog(@"Original: %@ (length %d)", myString, [myString length]);
NSLog(@"Best-fit-mapped: %@ (length %d)", asciiString, [asciiString length]);
// output:
// Original: My Test String... (length 15)
// Best-fit-mapped: My Test String... (length 17)
...


Se você observar a saída com cuidado, o caractere "..." foi traduzido para três pontos consecutivos. Se você tinha dimensionado o buffer de saída com base no buffer de entrada, o aplicativo poderia estar vulnerável a um buffer overflow. Outros caracteres podem ser mapeados de um caractere para dois. O caractere grego "fi" será mapeado como um "f" seguido por um "i". Ao fazer o carregamento frontal do buffer com esses caracteres, um invasor obtém o controle completo sobre o número de caracteres usados para estourar o buffer.
References
[1] Apple Secure Coding Guide Apple
[2] String Programming Guide Apple
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 176
[4] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Indirect Access to Sensitive Data
[5] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 5.3.2 Output Encoding and Injection Prevention Requirements (L1 L2 L3)
[6] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M4 Insufficient Input/Output Validation
[7] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CODE-4
[8] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[9] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
desc.semantic.objc.method_may_best_fit_map_characters
Abstract
A chamada identificada pode ajustar caracteres de uma forma melhor. Os caracteres não suportados passados para os métodos de API padrão podem ser mapeados com um melhor ajuste para caracteres perigosos.
Explanation
Quando conjuntos de caracteres são incompatíveis entre o sistema operacional e os aplicativos em execução no sistema operacional, os caracteres não suportados passados para os métodos de API padrão podem ser mapeados com um melhor ajuste para caracteres perigosos.

Exemplo 1: Em Swift, o seguinte exemplo converte um objeto NSString que contém um caractere UTF-8 em dados ASCII e depois o converte de volta:


...
let ellipsis = 0x2026;
let myString = NSString(format:"My Test String %C", ellipsis)
let asciiData = myString.dataUsingEncoding(NSASCIIStringEncoding, allowLossyConversion:true)
let asciiString = NSString(data:asciiData!, encoding:NSASCIIStringEncoding)
NSLog("Original: %@ (length %d)", myString, myString.length)
NSLog("Best-fit-mapped: %@ (length %d)", asciiString!, asciiString!.length)

// output:
// Original: My Test String ... (length 16)
// Best-fit-mapped: My Test String ... (length 18)
...


Se você observar a saída com cuidado, o caractere "..." foi traduzido para três pontos consecutivos. Se você tinha dimensionado o buffer de saída com base no buffer de entrada, o aplicativo poderia estar vulnerável a um buffer overflow. Outros caracteres podem ser mapeados de um caractere para dois. O caractere grego "fi" será mapeado como um "f" seguido por um "i". Ao fazer o carregamento frontal do buffer com esses caracteres, um invasor obtém o controle completo sobre o número de caracteres usados para estourar o buffer.
References
[1] Apple Secure Coding Guide Apple
[2] String Programming Guide Apple
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 176
[4] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Indirect Access to Sensitive Data
[5] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 5.3.2 Output Encoding and Injection Prevention Requirements (L1 L2 L3)
[6] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M4 Insufficient Input/Output Validation
[7] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CODE-4
[8] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[9] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
desc.semantic.swift.method_may_best_fit_map_characters
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
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 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 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 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.1, Requirement 6.5.3
[22] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.5.1
[23] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.1
[24] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.1
[26] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[27] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
[29] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection
[30] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection
[31] 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
[32] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3510 CAT I
[33] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3510 CAT I
[34] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3510 CAT I
[35] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3510 CAT I
[36] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3510 CAT I
[37] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3510 CAT I
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3510 CAT I
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[53] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[54] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[55] 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 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 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.1, Requirement 6.5.3
[22] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.5.1
[23] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.1
[24] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.1
[26] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[27] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
[29] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection
[30] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection
[31] 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
[32] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3510 CAT I
[33] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3510 CAT I
[34] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3510 CAT I
[35] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3510 CAT I
[36] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3510 CAT I
[37] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3510 CAT I
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3510 CAT I
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[53] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[54] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[55] 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 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 1.2 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 - 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-003300 CAT II
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[53] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[54] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[55] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[56] 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 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 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.1, Requirement 6.5.3
[22] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.5.1
[23] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.1
[24] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.1
[26] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[27] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
[29] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection
[30] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection
[31] 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
[32] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3510 CAT I
[33] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3510 CAT I
[34] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3510 CAT I
[35] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3510 CAT I
[36] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3510 CAT I
[37] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3510 CAT I
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3510 CAT I
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[53] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[54] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[55] 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 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 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.1, Requirement 6.5.3
[22] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.5.1
[23] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.1
[24] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.1
[26] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[27] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
[29] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection
[30] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection
[31] 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
[32] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3510 CAT I
[33] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3510 CAT I
[34] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3510 CAT I
[35] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3510 CAT I
[36] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3510 CAT I
[37] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3510 CAT I
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3510 CAT I
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[53] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[54] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[55] 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 Top 10 2004 A6 Injection Flaws
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A3 Malicious File Execution
[16] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A1 Injection
[17] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A1 Injection
[18] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A1 Injection
[19] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A04 Insecure Design
[20] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.1, Requirement 6.5.3
[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, Control Objective C.3.4 - Web Software Attack Mitigation
[31] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3510 CAT I
[32] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3510 CAT I
[33] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3510 CAT I
[34] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3510 CAT I
[35] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3510 CAT I
[36] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3510 CAT I
[37] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3510 CAT I
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[53] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[54] 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 - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 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
[52] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Insufficient Authorization (WASC-02)
[53] 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 - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 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.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 - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 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.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 - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 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.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 676
[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 - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[46] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Insufficient Authorization (WASC-02)
[47] 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 676
[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 - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 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.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 676
[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 - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 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.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 - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II, APSC-DV-001870 CAT II, APSC-DV-002360 CAT II
[48] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Insufficient Authorization (WASC-02)
[49] 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 - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II, APSC-DV-001870 CAT II, APSC-DV-002360 CAT II
[48] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Insufficient Authorization (WASC-02)
[49] 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
[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 - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 APSC-DV-002590 CAT I
[47] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Buffer Overflow (WASC-07)
[48] 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
A avaliação de expressões OGNL não validadas pode levar a uma execução remota de código.
Explanation
A OGNL (Object-Graph Navigation Language) é uma EL (Linguagem de Expressão) de código-fonte aberto para Java que permite a avaliação de expressões EL no contexto da Value Stack do Struts 2. Permitir a avaliação de expressões não validadas em relação à Value Stack pode dar acesso a um invasor para acessar e modificar variáveis do sistema ou executar código arbitrário.

No exemplo a seguir, o aplicativo está usando dados não validados controlados pelo usuário para criar e avaliar uma expressão OGNL:

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


Um invasor pode enviar a seguinte expressão para executar um código arbitrário no contexto do servidor de aplicativo:

(#rt = @java.lang.Runtime@getRuntime(),#rt.exec("calc.exe"))
References
[1] Apache Commons OGNL - Object-Graph Navigation Library
[2] Meder Kydyraliev Milking a horse or executing remote code in modern Java frameworks
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 94, CWE ID 95
[4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2019 [18] CWE ID 094
[5] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2020 [17] CWE ID 094
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2022 [25] CWE ID 094
[7] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2023 [23] CWE ID 094
[8] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [11] CWE ID 094
[9] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-002754
[10] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 SI
[11] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Indirect Access to Sensitive Data
[12] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 SI-10 Information Input Validation (P1)
[13] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SI-10 Information Input Validation
[14] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 5.2.4 Sanitization and Sandboxing Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 5.2.5 Sanitization and Sandboxing Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 5.2.8 Sanitization and Sandboxing Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 5.3.6 Output Encoding and Injection Prevention Requirements (L1 L2 L3)
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M7 Client Side Injection
[16] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M4 Insufficient Input/Output Validation
[17] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A6 Injection Flaws
[18] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A2 Injection Flaws
[19] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A1 Injection
[20] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A1 Injection
[21] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A1 Injection
[22] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A03 Injection
[23] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.6
[24] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.1, Requirement 6.5.2
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.5.1
[26] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.1
[27] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.1
[29] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[30] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[31] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
[32] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection
[33] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation
[34] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective C.3.2 - Web Software Attack Mitigation
[35] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2009 Risky Resource Management - CWE ID 094
[36] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3510 CAT I, APP3570 CAT I
[37] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3510 CAT I, APP3570 CAT I
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3510 CAT I, APP3570 CAT I
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3510 CAT I, APP3570 CAT I
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3510 CAT I, APP3570 CAT I
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3510 CAT I, APP3570 CAT I
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3510 CAT I, APP3570 CAT I
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[53] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[54] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[55] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[56] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[57] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[58] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[59] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Improper Input Handling (WASC-20)
desc.dataflow.java.ognl_expression_injection
Abstract
A avaliação OGNL dupla permite que invasores avaliem expressões OGNL arbitrárias ao controlar a saída da primeira avaliação.
Explanation
O aplicativo usa uma expressão OGNL forçada (%{expr}) em uma marca do Struts que avalia a expressão OGNL duas vezes. Um invasor no controle do resultado da primeira avaliação pode conseguir controlar a expressão a ser avaliada na segunda avaliação OGNL e injetar expressões OGNL arbitrárias.

Exemplo 1: O resultado de redirectAction é conhecido por avaliar os respectivos parâmetros duas vezes. Nesse caso, o resultado da expressão OGNL forçada no parâmetro actionName pode ser controlada por um invasor, fornecendo um parâmetro de solicitação redirect .


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


O código do Struts 2 avaliará internamente a expressão %{#parameters['redirect']} retornando uma cadeia de caracteres controlável pelo usuário que será avaliada como uma expressão OGNL, permitindo que o invasor avalie expressões OGNL arbitrárias.
References
[1] Struts 2 - Security Bulletin S2-029 Apache Struts
[2] Struts 2 - Security Bulletin S2-036 Apache Struts
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 94, CWE ID 95
[4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2019 [18] CWE ID 094
[5] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2020 [17] CWE ID 094
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2022 [25] CWE ID 094
[7] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2023 [23] CWE ID 094
[8] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [11] CWE ID 094
[9] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-002754
[10] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 SI
[11] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Indirect Access to Sensitive Data
[12] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 SI-10 Information Input Validation (P1)
[13] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SI-10 Information Input Validation
[14] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 5.2.4 Sanitization and Sandboxing Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 5.2.5 Sanitization and Sandboxing Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 5.2.8 Sanitization and Sandboxing Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 5.3.6 Output Encoding and Injection Prevention Requirements (L1 L2 L3)
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M1 Weak Server Side Controls
[16] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M4 Insufficient Input/Output Validation
[17] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A6 Injection Flaws
[18] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A2 Injection Flaws
[19] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A1 Injection
[20] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A1 Injection
[21] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A1 Injection
[22] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A03 Injection
[23] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.6
[24] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.1, Requirement 6.5.2
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.5.1
[26] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.1
[27] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.1
[29] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[30] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[31] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
[32] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection
[33] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation
[34] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective C.3.2 - Web Software Attack Mitigation
[35] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2009 Risky Resource Management - CWE ID 094
[36] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3510 CAT I, APP3570 CAT I
[37] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3510 CAT I, APP3570 CAT I
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3510 CAT I, APP3570 CAT I
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3510 CAT I, APP3570 CAT I
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3510 CAT I, APP3570 CAT I
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3510 CAT I, APP3570 CAT I
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3510 CAT I, APP3570 CAT I
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[53] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[54] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[55] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[56] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[57] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[58] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[59] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Improper Input Handling (WASC-20)
desc.configuration.java.ognl_expression_injection_double_evaluation
Abstract
O aplicativo Struts 2 habilita o Dynamic Method Invocation, que é conhecido por ser vulnerável a ataques de injeção OGNL em algumas versões do Struts 2.
Explanation
O Struts 2 introduziu um recurso chamado "Invocação de método dinâmico", que permite que uma ação exponha métodos diferentes de execute(). O caractere ! (bang) ou o prefixo method: podem ser usados no URL de ação para invocar qualquer método público na ação em que "Dynamic Method Invocation" estiver habilitado. Na versão Struts 2 2.3.20, o mecanismo para invocar o método alternativo que se baseava anteriormente na reflexão foi substituído para usar OGNL, o que permitia que os invasores fornecessem expressões OGNL mal-intencionadas em vez de um nome de método alternativo.
References
[1] Struts 2 Security Vulnerability - Dynamic Method Invocation
[2] Struts 2 - Dynamic Method Invocation Apache Struts
[3] Struts 2 - Security Bulletin S2-032 Apache Struts
[4] Struts 2 - Security Bulletin S2-033 Apache Struts
[5] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 94, CWE ID 95
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2019 [18] CWE ID 094
[7] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2020 [17] CWE ID 094
[8] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2022 [25] CWE ID 094
[9] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2023 [23] CWE ID 094
[10] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [11] CWE ID 094
[11] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-001764, CCI-001774, CCI-002754
[12] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 SI
[13] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Indirect Access to Sensitive Data
[14] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 CM-7 Least Functionality (P1), SI-2 Flaw Remediation (P1), SI-10 Information Input Validation (P1)
[15] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 CM-7 Least Functionality, SI-2 Flaw Remediation, SI-10 Information Input Validation
[16] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 5.2.4 Sanitization and Sandboxing Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 5.2.5 Sanitization and Sandboxing Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 5.2.8 Sanitization and Sandboxing Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 5.3.6 Output Encoding and Injection Prevention Requirements (L1 L2 L3)
[17] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M1 Weak Server Side Controls
[18] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M4 Insufficient Input/Output Validation
[19] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A6 Injection Flaws
[20] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A2 Injection Flaws
[21] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A1 Injection
[22] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A1 Injection
[23] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A1 Injection
[24] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A03 Injection
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.6
[26] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.1, Requirement 6.5.2
[27] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.5.1
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.1
[29] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[30] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.1
[31] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[32] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[33] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
[34] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection
[35] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation
[36] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective C.3.2 - Web Software Attack Mitigation
[37] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2009 Risky Resource Management - CWE ID 094
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3510 CAT I, APP3570 CAT I
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3510 CAT I, APP3570 CAT I
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3510 CAT I, APP3570 CAT I
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3510 CAT I, APP3570 CAT I
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3510 CAT I, APP3570 CAT I
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3510 CAT I, APP3570 CAT I
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3510 CAT I, APP3570 CAT I
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[53] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[54] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[55] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[56] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[57] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[58] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[59] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[60] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[61] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Improper Input Handling (WASC-20)
desc.config.java.ognl_expression_injection_dynamic_method_invocation
Abstract
O aplicativo é implantado no modo de desenvolvimento (devMode), permitindo a execução arbitrária de comandos no servidor e o vazamento de informações detalhadas sobre como o aplicativo é codificado.
Explanation
O Struts 2 tem uma configuração chamada devMode (modo de desenvolvimento). Quando essa configuração está habilitada, o Struts 2 fornecerá informações adicionais de registro e depuração, que podem acelerar significativamente o desenvolvimento ao custo de um alto impacto no desempenho e na segurança. O devMode aumentará o nível de depuração ou problemas normalmente ignoráveis para exceções que normalmente não seriam lançadas no modo normal.

O devMode também permite alguns recursos de depuração que permitem aos desenvolvedores verificar as variáveis armazenadas na pilha de valores. Esses recursos podem ser acionados usando o parâmetro de solicitação debug:
- debug = console irá exibir um console de avaliação OGNL, permitindo que os desenvolvedores avaliem qualquer expressão OGNL arbitrária no servidor.
- debug = command permitirá que os desenvolvedores enviem expressões OGNL arbitrárias para serem avaliadas usando o parâmetro de solicitação expression.
- debug=xml despejará os parâmetros, o contexto, a sessão e a pilha de valores como um documento XML.
- debug=browser despejará os parâmetros, o contexto, a sessão e a pilha de valores como um documento HTML navegável.
References
[1] Apache Struts 2 Documentation - devMode
[2] Apache Struts 2 Documentation - Debugging
[3] Meder Kydyraliev Milking a horse or executing remote code in modern Java frameworks
[4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 94, CWE ID 95
[5] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2019 [18] CWE ID 094
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2020 [17] CWE ID 094
[7] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2022 [25] CWE ID 094
[8] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2023 [23] CWE ID 094
[9] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [11] CWE ID 094
[10] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-002754
[11] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 SI
[12] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Indirect Access to Sensitive Data
[13] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 SI-10 Information Input Validation (P1)
[14] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SI-10 Information Input Validation
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 5.2.4 Sanitization and Sandboxing Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 5.2.5 Sanitization and Sandboxing Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 5.2.8 Sanitization and Sandboxing Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 5.3.6 Output Encoding and Injection Prevention Requirements (L1 L2 L3)
[16] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M1 Weak Server Side Controls
[17] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M4 Insufficient Input/Output Validation
[18] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A6 Injection Flaws
[19] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A2 Injection Flaws
[20] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A1 Injection
[21] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A1 Injection
[22] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A1 Injection
[23] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A03 Injection
[24] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.6
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.1, Requirement 6.5.2
[26] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.5.1
[27] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.1
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[29] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.1
[30] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[31] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[32] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
[33] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection
[34] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation
[35] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective C.3.2 - Web Software Attack Mitigation
[36] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2009 Risky Resource Management - CWE ID 094
[37] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3510 CAT I, APP3570 CAT I
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3510 CAT I, APP3570 CAT I
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3510 CAT I, APP3570 CAT I
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3510 CAT I, APP3570 CAT I
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3510 CAT I, APP3570 CAT I
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3510 CAT I, APP3570 CAT I
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3510 CAT I, APP3570 CAT I
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[53] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[54] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[55] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[56] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[57] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[58] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[59] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[60] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Improper Input Handling (WASC-20)
desc.config.java.ognl_expression_injection_struts2_devmode
Abstract
Permitir que uma entrada não validada controle a URL usada em um redirecionamento pode auxiliar ataques de phishing.
Explanation
Redirecionamentos permitem que aplicativos Web direcionem os usuários para páginas diferentes no mesmo aplicativo ou para sites externos. Os aplicativos utilizam redirecionamentos para auxiliar na navegação do site e, em alguns casos, para controlar como os usuários saem do site. Vulnerabilidades de redirecionamento aberto ocorrem quando um aplicativo Web redireciona os clientes para qualquer URL arbitrária que possa ser controlada por um invasor.

Os invasores podem utilizar open redirects para convencer os usuários a visitar uma URL para um site confiável, mas depois redirecioná-los para um site mal-intencionado. Ao codificar a URL, um invasor pode tornar difícil para os usuários finais perceberem o destino mal-intencionado do redirecionamento, mesmo quando ele é transmitido como um parâmetro de URL ao site confiável. Redirecionamentos abertos são muitas vezes mal utilizados como parte de esquemas de phishing para coletar dados confidenciais dos usuários finais.

Exemplo 1: O seguinte código ABAP instrui o navegador do usuário a abrir uma URL analisada a partir do parâmetro de solicitação dest quando esse usuário clica no link.


...
DATA: str_dest TYPE c.

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


Se a vítima tiver recebido um email com instruções para seguir um link para "http://trusted.example.com/ecommerce/redirect.asp?dest=www.wilyhacker.com", ela provavelmente clicará nesse link acreditando que será transferida ao site confiável. No entanto, quando ela clicar no link, o código no Example 1 redirecionará o navegador para "http://www.wilyhacker.com".

Muitos usuários foram instruídos a sempre inspecionarem URLs que eles recebem em emails, para garantir que o link especifique um site confiável conhecido. No entanto, se o invasor tiver codificado a URL de destino em formato hexadecimal, da seguinte maneira:
"http://trusted.example.com/ecommerce/redirect.asp?dest=%77%69%6C%79%68%61%63%6B%65%72%2E%63%6F%6D"

até mesmo um usuário final experiente poderá ser enganado e convencido a seguir o link.
References
[1] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 601
[2] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-002754
[3] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 SI
[4] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Indirect Access to Sensitive Data
[5] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 SI-10 Information Input Validation (P1)
[6] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SI-10 Information Input Validation
[7] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 5.1.5 Input Validation Requirements (L1 L2 L3)
[8] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M1 Weak Server Side Controls
[9] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M4 Insufficient Input/Output Validation
[10] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A1 Unvalidated Input
[11] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A10 Unvalidated Redirects and Forwards
[12] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A10 Unvalidated Redirects and Forwards
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A01 Broken Access Control
[14] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[15] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.1
[16] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.5.1
[17] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.1
[18] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[19] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.1
[20] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[21] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[22] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
[23] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection
[24] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective C.3.2 - Web Software Attack Mitigation
[26] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2010 Insecure Interaction - CWE ID 601
[27] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2011 Insecure Interaction - CWE ID 601
[28] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[29] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[30] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[31] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[32] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[33] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[34] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[35] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[36] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[37] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[51] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 URL Redirector Abuse (WASC-38)
[52] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium 24 + 2 Content Spoofing
desc.dataflow.abap.open_redirect
Abstract
Permitir que uma entrada não validada controle a URL usada em um redirecionamento pode auxiliar ataques de phishing.
Explanation
Redirecionamentos permitem que aplicativos Web direcionem os usuários para páginas diferentes no mesmo aplicativo ou para sites externos. Os aplicativos utilizam redirecionamentos para auxiliar na navegação do site e, em alguns casos, para controlar como os usuários saem do site. Vulnerabilidades de redirecionamento aberto ocorrem quando um aplicativo Web redireciona os clientes para qualquer URL arbitrária que possa ser controlada por um invasor.

Os invasores podem utilizar open redirects para convencer os usuários a visitar uma URL para um site confiável, mas depois redirecioná-los para um site mal-intencionado. Ao codificar a URL, um invasor pode tornar difícil para os usuários finais perceberem o destino mal-intencionado do redirecionamento, mesmo quando ele é transmitido como um parâmetro de URL ao site confiável. Redirecionamentos abertos são muitas vezes mal utilizados como parte de esquemas de phishing para coletar dados confidenciais dos usuários finais.

Exemplo 1: O seguinte código ActionScript instrui o navegador do usuário a abrir uma URL lida a partir do parâmetro de solicitação dest quando esse usuário clica no link.


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


Se a vítima tiver recebido um email com instruções para seguir um link para "http://trusted.example.com/ecommerce/redirect.asp?dest=www.wilyhacker.com", ela provavelmente clicará nesse link acreditando que será transferida ao site confiável. No entanto, quando ela clicar no link, o código no Example 1 redirecionará o navegador para "http://www.wilyhacker.com".

Muitos usuários foram instruídos a sempre inspecionarem URLs que eles recebem em emails, para garantir que o link especifique um site confiável conhecido. No entanto, se o invasor tiver codificado a URL de destino em formato hexadecimal, da seguinte maneira:
"http://trusted.example.com/ecommerce/redirect.asp?dest=%77%69%6C%79%68%61%63%6B%65%72%2E%63%6F%6D"

até mesmo um usuário final experiente poderá ser enganado e convencido a seguir o link.
References
[1] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 601
[2] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-002754
[3] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 SI
[4] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Indirect Access to Sensitive Data
[5] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 SI-10 Information Input Validation (P1)
[6] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SI-10 Information Input Validation
[7] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 5.1.5 Input Validation Requirements (L1 L2 L3)
[8] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M1 Weak Server Side Controls
[9] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M4 Insufficient Input/Output Validation
[10] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A1 Unvalidated Input
[11] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A10 Unvalidated Redirects and Forwards
[12] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A10 Unvalidated Redirects and Forwards
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A01 Broken Access Control
[14] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[15] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.1
[16] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.5.1
[17] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.1
[18] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[19] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.1
[20] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[21] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[22] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
[23] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection
[24] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective C.3.2 - Web Software Attack Mitigation
[26] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2010 Insecure Interaction - CWE ID 601
[27] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2011 Insecure Interaction - CWE ID 601
[28] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[29] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[30] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[31] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[32] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[33] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[34] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[35] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[36] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[37] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[51] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 URL Redirector Abuse (WASC-38)
[52] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium 24 + 2 Content Spoofing
desc.dataflow.actionscript.open_redirect
Abstract
Um arquivo transmite dados não validados para um redirecionamento HTTP.
Explanation
Permitir que uma entrada não validada controle a URL usada em um redirecionamento pode auxiliar ataques de phishing. Redirecionamentos permitem que aplicativos Web direcionem os usuários para páginas diferentes no mesmo aplicativo ou para sites externos. Os aplicativos usam redirecionamentos para auxiliar na navegação do site e, em alguns casos, para controlar como os usuários saem do site. As vulnerabilidades de Open Redirect ocorrem quando um aplicativo Web redireciona clientes para qualquer URL arbitrária que um invasor possa controlar.

Os invasores podem utilizar open redirects para convencer os usuários a visitar uma URL para um site confiável, mas depois redirecioná-los para um site mal-intencionado. Ao codificar a URL, um invasor pode tornar difícil para os usuários finais perceberem o destino mal-intencionado do redirecionamento, mesmo quando ele é transmitido como um parâmetro de URL ao site confiável. Redirecionamentos abertos são muitas vezes mal utilizados como parte de esquemas de phishing para coletar dados confidenciais dos usuários finais.

Exemplo 1: O método de ação a seguir do Visualforce retorna um objeto PageReference que consiste em uma URL do parâmetro de solicitação dest.


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


Se a vítima receber um email instruindo o usuário a seguir um link para "http://trusted.vf.force.com/apex/vfpage?dest=www.wilyhacker.com", esse usuário poderá clicar no link acreditando que acessará um site confiável. No entanto, quando ela clicar no link, o código no Example 1 redirecionará o navegador para "http://www.wilyhacker.com".

Muitos usuários foram instruídos a sempre inspecionarem URLs que eles recebem em emails e garantir que o link especifica um site confiável conhecido. No entanto, se o invasor tiver codificado a URL de destino da seguinte maneira:
"http://trusted.example.com/ecommerce/redirect.asp?dest=%77%69%6C%79%68%61%63%6B%65%72%2E%63%6F%6D"

até mesmo um usuário final mais experiente poderá ser levado a clicar no link.
References
[1] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 601
[2] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-002754
[3] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 SI
[4] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Indirect Access to Sensitive Data
[5] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 SI-10 Information Input Validation (P1)
[6] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SI-10 Information Input Validation
[7] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 5.1.5 Input Validation Requirements (L1 L2 L3)
[8] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M1 Weak Server Side Controls
[9] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M4 Insufficient Input/Output Validation
[10] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A1 Unvalidated Input
[11] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A10 Unvalidated Redirects and Forwards
[12] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A10 Unvalidated Redirects and Forwards
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A01 Broken Access Control
[14] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[15] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.1
[16] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.5.1
[17] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.1
[18] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[19] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.1
[20] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[21] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[22] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
[23] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection
[24] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective C.3.2 - Web Software Attack Mitigation
[26] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2010 Insecure Interaction - CWE ID 601
[27] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2011 Insecure Interaction - CWE ID 601
[28] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[29] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[30] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[31] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[32] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[33] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[34] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[35] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[36] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[37] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[51] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 URL Redirector Abuse (WASC-38)
[52] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium 24 + 2 Content Spoofing
desc.dataflow.apex.open_redirect
Abstract
Permitir que uma entrada não validada controle a URL usada em um redirecionamento pode auxiliar ataques de phishing.
Explanation
Redirecionamentos permitem que aplicativos Web direcionem os usuários para páginas diferentes no mesmo aplicativo ou para sites externos. Os aplicativos utilizam redirecionamentos para auxiliar na navegação do site e, em alguns casos, para controlar como os usuários saem do site. Vulnerabilidades de redirecionamento aberto ocorrem quando um aplicativo Web redireciona os clientes para qualquer URL arbitrária que possa ser controlada por um invasor.

Os invasores podem utilizar open redirects para convencer os usuários a visitar uma URL para um site confiável, mas depois redirecioná-los para um site mal-intencionado. Ao codificar a URL, um invasor pode tornar difícil para os usuários finais perceberem o destino mal-intencionado do redirecionamento, mesmo quando ele é transmitido como um parâmetro de URL ao site confiável. Redirecionamentos abertos são muitas vezes mal utilizados como parte de esquemas de phishing para coletar dados confidenciais dos usuários finais.

Exemplo 1: O código a seguir instrui o navegador do usuário a abrir uma URL analisada a partir do parâmetro de solicitação dest quando esse usuário clica no link.


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


Se a vítima receber um email instruindo o usuário a seguir um link para "http://trusted.example.com/ecommerce/redirect.asp?dest=www.wilyhacker.com", esse usuário poderá clicar no link acreditando que será transferido para o site confiável. No entanto, quando ela clicar no link, o código no Example 1 redirecionará o navegador para "http://www.wilyhacker.com".

Muitos usuários foram instruídos a sempre inspecionarem URLs que eles recebem em emails, para garantir que o link especifique um site confiável conhecido. No entanto, se o invasor tiver codificado a URL de destino da seguinte maneira:
"http://trusted.example.com/ecommerce/redirect.asp?dest=%77%69%6C%79%68%61%63%6B%65%72%2E%63%6F%6D"

até mesmo um usuário final experiente poderá ser enganado e convencido a seguir o link.
References
[1] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 601
[2] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-002754
[3] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 SI
[4] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Indirect Access to Sensitive Data
[5] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 SI-10 Information Input Validation (P1)
[6] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SI-10 Information Input Validation
[7] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 5.1.5 Input Validation Requirements (L1 L2 L3)
[8] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M1 Weak Server Side Controls
[9] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M4 Insufficient Input/Output Validation
[10] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A1 Unvalidated Input
[11] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A10 Unvalidated Redirects and Forwards
[12] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A10 Unvalidated Redirects and Forwards
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A01 Broken Access Control
[14] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[15] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.1
[16] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.5.1
[17] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.1
[18] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[19] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.1
[20] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[21] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[22] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
[23] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection
[24] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective C.3.2 - Web Software Attack Mitigation
[26] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2010 Insecure Interaction - CWE ID 601
[27] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2011 Insecure Interaction - CWE ID 601
[28] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[29] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[30] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[31] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[32] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[33] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[34] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[35] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[36] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[37] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[51] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 URL Redirector Abuse (WASC-38)
[52] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium 24 + 2 Content Spoofing
desc.dataflow.dotnet.open_redirect
Abstract
Permitir que uma entrada não validada controle a URL usada em um redirecionamento pode auxiliar ataques de phishing.
Explanation
Redirecionamentos permitem que aplicativos Web direcionem os usuários para páginas diferentes no mesmo aplicativo ou para sites externos. Os aplicativos utilizam redirecionamentos para auxiliar na navegação do site e, em alguns casos, para controlar como os usuários saem do site. As vulnerabilidades de Open Redirect ocorrem quando um aplicativo Web redireciona clientes para qualquer URL arbitrária que pode ser controlada por um invasor.

Os invasores podem utilizar open redirects para convencer os usuários a visitar uma URL para um site confiável, mas depois redirecioná-los para um site mal-intencionado. Ao codificar a URL, um invasor pode tornar difícil para os usuários finais perceberem o destino mal-intencionado do redirecionamento, mesmo quando ele é transmitido como um parâmetro de URL ao site confiável. Redirecionamentos abertos são muitas vezes mal utilizados como parte de esquemas de phishing para coletar dados confidenciais dos usuários finais.

Exemplo 1: O código JSP a seguir instrui o navegador do usuário a abrir uma URL analisada com base no parâmetro de solicitação dest quando esse usuário clica no link.


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


Se a vítima tiver recebido um email com instruções para seguir um link para "http://trusted.example.com/ecommerce/redirect.asp?dest=www.wilyhacker.com", ela provavelmente clicará nesse link acreditando que será transferida ao site confiável. No entanto, quando ela clicar no link, o código no Example 1 redirecionará o navegador para "http://www.wilyhacker.com".

Muitos usuários foram instruídos a sempre inspecionarem URLs que eles recebem em emails, para garantir que o link especifica um site confiável conhecido. No entanto, se o invasor tiver codificado a URL de destino em formato hexadecimal, da seguinte maneira:
"http://trusted.example.com/ecommerce/redirect.asp?dest=%77%69%6C%79%68%61%63%6B%65%72%2E%63%6F%6D"

até mesmo um usuário final mais experiente poderá ser levado a clicar no link.
References
[1] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 601
[2] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-002754
[3] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 SI
[4] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Indirect Access to Sensitive Data
[5] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 SI-10 Information Input Validation (P1)
[6] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SI-10 Information Input Validation
[7] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 5.1.5 Input Validation Requirements (L1 L2 L3)
[8] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M1 Weak Server Side Controls
[9] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M4 Insufficient Input/Output Validation
[10] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A1 Unvalidated Input
[11] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A10 Unvalidated Redirects and Forwards
[12] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A10 Unvalidated Redirects and Forwards
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A01 Broken Access Control
[14] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[15] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.1
[16] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.5.1
[17] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.1
[18] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[19] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.1
[20] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[21] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[22] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
[23] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection
[24] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective C.3.2 - Web Software Attack Mitigation
[26] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2010 Insecure Interaction - CWE ID 601
[27] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2011 Insecure Interaction - CWE ID 601
[28] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[29] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[30] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[31] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[32] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[33] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[34] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[35] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[36] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[37] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[51] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 URL Redirector Abuse (WASC-38)
[52] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium 24 + 2 Content Spoofing
desc.dataflow.dart.open_redirect
Abstract
Permitir que uma entrada não validada controle a URL usada em um redirecionamento pode auxiliar ataques de phishing.
Explanation
Redirecionamentos permitem que aplicativos Web direcionem os usuários para páginas diferentes no mesmo aplicativo ou para sites externos. Os aplicativos utilizam redirecionamentos para auxiliar na navegação do site e, em alguns casos, para controlar como os usuários saem do site. As vulnerabilidades de Open Redirect ocorrem quando um aplicativo Web redireciona clientes para qualquer URL arbitrária que um invasor possa controlar.

Os invasores podem utilizar open redirects para convencer os usuários a visitar uma URL para um site confiável, mas depois redirecioná-los para um site mal-intencionado. Ao codificar a URL, um invasor pode tornar difícil para os usuários finais perceberem o destino mal-intencionado do redirecionamento, mesmo quando ele é transmitido como um parâmetro de URL ao site confiável. Redirecionamentos abertos são muitas vezes mal utilizados como parte de esquemas de phishing para coletar dados confidenciais dos usuários finais.

Exemplo 1: O código a seguir instrui o navegador do usuário a abrir uma URL analisada com base no parâmetro de solicitação dest quando esse usuário clica no link.


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


Se uma vítima receber um email instruindo-a a seguir um link para "http://trusted.example.com/ecommerce/redirect.asp?dest=www.wilyhacker.com", o usuário provavelmente clicará no link, acreditando que será transferido para o site confiável. No entanto, quando ele clicar no link, o código no Example 1 redirecionará o navegador para "http://www.wilyhacker.com".

Muitos usuários foram instruídos a sempre inspecionarem URLs que eles recebem em emails, para garantir que o link especifica um site confiável conhecido. No entanto, se o invasor tiver codificado a URL de destino em formato hexadecimal, da seguinte maneira:
"http://trusted.example.com/ecommerce/redirect.asp?dest=%77%69%6C%79%68%61%63%6B%65%72%2E%63%6F%6D"

até mesmo um usuário final mais experiente poderá ser levado a clicar no link.
References
[1] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 601
[2] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-002754
[3] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 SI
[4] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Indirect Access to Sensitive Data
[5] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 SI-10 Information Input Validation (P1)
[6] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SI-10 Information Input Validation
[7] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 5.1.5 Input Validation Requirements (L1 L2 L3)
[8] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M1 Weak Server Side Controls
[9] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M4 Insufficient Input/Output Validation
[10] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A1 Unvalidated Input
[11] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A10 Unvalidated Redirects and Forwards
[12] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A10 Unvalidated Redirects and Forwards
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A01 Broken Access Control
[14] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[15] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.1
[16] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.5.1
[17] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.1
[18] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[19] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.1
[20] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[21] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[22] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
[23] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection
[24] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective C.3.2 - Web Software Attack Mitigation
[26] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2010 Insecure Interaction - CWE ID 601
[27] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2011 Insecure Interaction - CWE ID 601
[28] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[29] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[30] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[31] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[32] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[33] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[34] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[35] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[36] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[37] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[51] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 URL Redirector Abuse (WASC-38)
[52] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium 24 + 2 Content Spoofing
desc.dataflow.golang.open_redirect
Abstract
Permitir que uma entrada não validada controle a URL usada em um redirecionamento pode auxiliar ataques de phishing.
Explanation
Redirecionamentos permitem que aplicativos Web direcionem os usuários para páginas diferentes no mesmo aplicativo ou para sites externos. Os aplicativos utilizam redirecionamentos para auxiliar na navegação do site e, em alguns casos, para controlar como os usuários saem do site. As vulnerabilidades de Open Redirect ocorrem quando um aplicativo Web redireciona clientes para qualquer URL arbitrária que pode ser controlada por um invasor.

Os invasores podem utilizar open redirects para convencer os usuários a visitar uma URL para um site confiável, mas depois redirecioná-los para um site mal-intencionado. Ao codificar a URL, um invasor pode tornar difícil para os usuários finais perceberem o destino mal-intencionado do redirecionamento, mesmo quando ele é transmitido como um parâmetro de URL ao site confiável. Redirecionamentos abertos são muitas vezes mal utilizados como parte de esquemas de phishing para coletar dados confidenciais dos usuários finais.

Exemplo 1: A seguinte definição de estado de fluxo Spring WebFlow instrui o navegador do usuário a abrir um URL analisado com base no parâmetro de solicitação dest quando esse usuário clica no link.


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


Se a vítima tiver recebido um email com instruções para seguir um link para "http://trusted.example.com/ecommerce/redirect?dest=www.wilyhacker.com", ela provavelmente clicará nesse link acreditando que será transferida ao site confiável. No entanto, quando ela clicar no link, o código no Example 1 redirecionará o navegador para "http://www.wilyhacker.com".

Muitos usuários foram instruídos a sempre inspecionarem URLs que eles recebem em emails, para garantir que o link especifica um site confiável conhecido. No entanto, se o invasor tiver codificado a URL de destino em formato hexadecimal, da seguinte maneira:
"http://trusted.example.com/ecommerce/redirect?dest=%77%69%6C%79%68%61%63%6B%65%72%2E%63%6F%6D"

até mesmo um usuário final mais experiente poderá ser levado a clicar no link.
References
[1] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 601
[2] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-002754
[3] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 SI
[4] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Indirect Access to Sensitive Data
[5] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 SI-10 Information Input Validation (P1)
[6] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SI-10 Information Input Validation
[7] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 5.1.5 Input Validation Requirements (L1 L2 L3)
[8] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M1 Weak Server Side Controls
[9] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M4 Insufficient Input/Output Validation
[10] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A1 Unvalidated Input
[11] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A10 Unvalidated Redirects and Forwards
[12] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A10 Unvalidated Redirects and Forwards
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A01 Broken Access Control
[14] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[15] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.1
[16] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.5.1
[17] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.1
[18] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[19] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.1
[20] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[21] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[22] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
[23] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection
[24] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective C.3.2 - Web Software Attack Mitigation
[26] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2010 Insecure Interaction - CWE ID 601
[27] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2011 Insecure Interaction - CWE ID 601
[28] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[29] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[30] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[31] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[32] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[33] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[34] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[35] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[36] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[37] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[51] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 URL Redirector Abuse (WASC-38)
[52] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium 24 + 2 Content Spoofing
desc.configuration.java.open_redirect
Abstract
Permitir que uma entrada não validada controle a URL usada em um redirecionamento pode auxiliar ataques de phishing.
Explanation
Redirecionamentos permitem que aplicativos Web direcionem os usuários para páginas diferentes no mesmo aplicativo ou para sites externos. Os aplicativos utilizam redirecionamentos para auxiliar na navegação do site e, em alguns casos, para controlar como os usuários saem do site. Vulnerabilidades de redirecionamento aberto ocorrem quando um aplicativo Web redireciona os clientes para qualquer URL arbitrária que possa ser controlada por um invasor.

Os invasores podem utilizar open redirects para convencer os usuários a visitar uma URL para um site confiável, mas depois redirecioná-los para um site mal-intencionado. Ao codificar a URL, um invasor pode tornar difícil para os usuários finais perceberem o destino mal-intencionado do redirecionamento, mesmo quando ele é transmitido como um parâmetro de URL ao site confiável. Redirecionamentos abertos são muitas vezes mal utilizados como parte de esquemas de phishing para coletar dados confidenciais dos usuários finais.

Exemplo 1: Esse código JavaScript instrui o navegador do usuário a abrir uma URL lida a partir do parâmetro de solicitação dest quando um usuário clica no link.


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


Se a vítima tiver recebido um email com instruções para seguir um link para "http://trusted.example.com/ecommerce/redirect.asp?dest=www.wilyhacker.com", ela provavelmente clicará nesse link acreditando que será transferida ao site confiável. No entanto, quando ela clicar no link, o código no Example 1 redirecionará o navegador para "http://www.wilyhacker.com".

Muitos usuários foram instruídos a sempre inspecionarem URLs que eles recebem em emails, para garantir que o link especifique um site confiável conhecido. No entanto, se o invasor tiver codificado a URL de destino em formato hexadecimal, da seguinte maneira:
"http://trusted.example.com/ecommerce/redirect.asp?dest=%77%69%6C%79%68%61%63%6B%65%72%2E%63%6F%6D"

até mesmo um usuário final experiente poderá ser enganado e convencido a seguir o link.
References
[1] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 601
[2] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-002754
[3] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 SI
[4] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Indirect Access to Sensitive Data
[5] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 SI-10 Information Input Validation (P1)
[6] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SI-10 Information Input Validation
[7] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 5.1.5 Input Validation Requirements (L1 L2 L3)
[8] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M1 Weak Server Side Controls
[9] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M4 Insufficient Input/Output Validation
[10] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A1 Unvalidated Input
[11] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A10 Unvalidated Redirects and Forwards
[12] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A10 Unvalidated Redirects and Forwards
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A01 Broken Access Control
[14] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[15] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.1
[16] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.5.1
[17] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.1
[18] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[19] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.1
[20] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[21] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[22] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
[23] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection
[24] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective C.3.2 - Web Software Attack Mitigation
[26] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2010 Insecure Interaction - CWE ID 601
[27] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2011 Insecure Interaction - CWE ID 601
[28] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[29] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[30] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[31] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[32] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[33] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[34] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[35] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[36] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[37] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[51] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 URL Redirector Abuse (WASC-38)
[52] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium 24 + 2 Content Spoofing
desc.dataflow.javascript.open_redirect
Abstract
Permitir que uma entrada não validada controle a URL usada em um redirecionamento pode auxiliar ataques de phishing.
Explanation
Redirecionamentos permitem que aplicativos Web direcionem os usuários para páginas diferentes no mesmo aplicativo ou para sites externos. Os aplicativos utilizam redirecionamentos para auxiliar na navegação do site e, em alguns casos, para controlar como os usuários saem do site. Vulnerabilidades de redirecionamento aberto ocorrem quando um aplicativo Web redireciona os clientes para qualquer URL arbitrária que possa ser controlada por um invasor.

Os invasores podem utilizar open redirects para convencer os usuários a visitar uma URL para um site confiável, mas depois redirecioná-los para um site mal-intencionado. Ao codificar a URL, um invasor pode tornar difícil para os usuários finais perceberem o destino mal-intencionado do redirecionamento, mesmo quando ele é transmitido como um parâmetro de URL ao site confiável. Redirecionamentos abertos são muitas vezes mal utilizados como parte de esquemas de phishing para coletar dados confidenciais dos usuários finais.

Exemplo 1: O código PHP a seguir instrui o navegador do usuário a abrir uma URL analisada do parâmetro de solicitação dest quando um usuário clica no link.


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


Se o usuário tiver recebido um email com instruções para seguir um link para "http://trusted.example.com/ecommerce/redirect.php?dest=www.wilyhacker.com", ele provavelmente clicará nesse link acreditando que será transferido ao site confiável. No entanto, quando ela clicar no link, o código no Example 1 redirecionará o navegador para "http://www.wilyhacker.com".

Muitos usuários foram instruídos a sempre inspecionarem URLs que eles recebem em emails, para garantir que o link especifique um site confiável conhecido. No entanto, se o invasor tiver codificado a URL de destino em formato hexadecimal, da seguinte maneira:
"http://trusted.example.com/ecommerce/redirect.php?dest=%77%69%6C%79%68%61%63%6B%65%72%2E%63%6F%6D"

e até mesmo um usuário experiente poderia ser enganado a clicar no link.
References
[1] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 601
[2] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-002754
[3] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 SI
[4] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Indirect Access to Sensitive Data
[5] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 SI-10 Information Input Validation (P1)
[6] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SI-10 Information Input Validation
[7] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 5.1.5 Input Validation Requirements (L1 L2 L3)
[8] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M1 Weak Server Side Controls
[9] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M4 Insufficient Input/Output Validation
[10] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A1 Unvalidated Input
[11] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A10 Unvalidated Redirects and Forwards
[12] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A10 Unvalidated Redirects and Forwards
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A01 Broken Access Control
[14] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[15] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.1
[16] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.5.1
[17] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.1
[18] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[19] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.1
[20] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[21] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[22] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
[23] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection
[24] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective C.3.2 - Web Software Attack Mitigation
[26] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2010 Insecure Interaction - CWE ID 601
[27] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2011 Insecure Interaction - CWE ID 601
[28] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[29] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[30] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[31] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[32] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[33] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[34] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[35] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[36] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[37] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[51] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 URL Redirector Abuse (WASC-38)
[52] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium 24 + 2 Content Spoofing
desc.dataflow.php.open_redirect
Abstract
Permitir que uma entrada não validada controle a URL usada em um redirecionamento pode auxiliar ataques de phishing.
Explanation
Redirecionamentos permitem que aplicativos Web direcionem os usuários para páginas diferentes no mesmo aplicativo ou para sites externos. Os aplicativos utilizam redirecionamentos para auxiliar na navegação do site e, em alguns casos, para controlar como os usuários saem do site. Vulnerabilidades de redirecionamento aberto ocorrem quando um aplicativo Web redireciona os clientes para qualquer URL arbitrária que possa ser controlada por um invasor.

Os invasores podem utilizar open redirects para convencer os usuários a visitar uma URL para um site confiável, mas depois redirecioná-los para um site mal-intencionado. Ao codificar a URL, um invasor pode tornar difícil para os usuários finais perceberem o destino mal-intencionado do redirecionamento, mesmo quando ele é transmitido como um parâmetro de URL ao site confiável. Redirecionamentos abertos são muitas vezes mal utilizados como parte de esquemas de phishing para coletar dados confidenciais dos usuários finais.

Exemplo 1: Este procedimento instrui o navegador do usuário a abrir uma URL analisada a partir do parâmetro da solicitação dest quando um usuário clica no link.


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


Se o usuário tiver recebido um email com instruções para seguir um link para "http://trusted.example.com/pls/hr/showemps?dest=www.wilyhacker.com", ele provavelmente clicará nesse link acreditando que será transferido ao site confiável. No entanto, quando ela clicar no link, o código no Example 1 redirecionará o navegador para "http://www.wilyhacker.com".

Muitos usuários foram instruídos a sempre inspecionarem URLs que eles recebem em emails, para garantir que o link especifique um site confiável conhecido. No entanto, se o invasor tiver codificado a URL de destino em formato hexadecimal, da seguinte maneira:
"http://trusted.example.com/pls/hr/showemps?dest=%77%69%6C%79%68%61%63%6B%65%72%2E%63%6F%6D"

até mesmo um usuário final experiente poderá ser enganado e convencido a seguir o link.
References
[1] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 601
[2] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-002754
[3] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 SI
[4] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Indirect Access to Sensitive Data
[5] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 SI-10 Information Input Validation (P1)
[6] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SI-10 Information Input Validation
[7] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 5.1.5 Input Validation Requirements (L1 L2 L3)
[8] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M1 Weak Server Side Controls
[9] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M4 Insufficient Input/Output Validation
[10] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A1 Unvalidated Input
[11] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A10 Unvalidated Redirects and Forwards
[12] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A10 Unvalidated Redirects and Forwards
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A01 Broken Access Control
[14] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[15] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.1
[16] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.5.1
[17] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.1
[18] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[19] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.1
[20] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[21] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[22] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
[23] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection
[24] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective C.3.2 - Web Software Attack Mitigation
[26] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2010 Insecure Interaction - CWE ID 601
[27] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2011 Insecure Interaction - CWE ID 601
[28] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[29] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[30] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[31] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[32] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[33] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[34] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[35] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[36] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[37] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[51] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 URL Redirector Abuse (WASC-38)
[52] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium 24 + 2 Content Spoofing
desc.dataflow.sql.open_redirect
Abstract
Permitir que uma entrada não validada controle a URL usada em um redirecionamento pode auxiliar ataques de phishing.
Explanation
Redirecionamentos permitem que aplicativos Web direcionem os usuários para páginas diferentes no mesmo aplicativo ou para sites externos. Os aplicativos utilizam redirecionamentos para auxiliar na navegação do site e, em alguns casos, para controlar como os usuários saem do site. Vulnerabilidades de redirecionamento aberto ocorrem quando um aplicativo Web redireciona os clientes para qualquer URL arbitrária que possa ser controlada por um invasor.

Os invasores podem utilizar open redirects para convencer os usuários a visitar uma URL para um site confiável, mas depois redirecioná-los para um site mal-intencionado. Ao codificar a URL, um invasor pode tornar difícil para os usuários finais perceberem o destino mal-intencionado do redirecionamento, mesmo quando ele é transmitido como um parâmetro de URL ao site confiável. Redirecionamentos abertos são muitas vezes mal utilizados como parte de esquemas de phishing para coletar dados confidenciais dos usuários finais.

Exemplo 1: Este código Python instrui o navegador do usuário a abrir uma URL analisada a partir do parâmetro da solicitação dest quando um usuário clica no link.


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


Se a vítima tiver recebido um email com instruções para seguir um link para "http://trusted.example.com/ecommerce/redirect.asp?dest=www.wilyhacker.com", ela provavelmente clicará nesse link acreditando que será transferida ao site confiável. No entanto, quando ela clicar no link, o código no Example 1 redirecionará o navegador para "http://www.wilyhacker.com".

Muitos usuários foram instruídos a sempre inspecionarem URLs que eles recebem em emails, para garantir que o link especifique um site confiável conhecido. No entanto, se o invasor tiver codificado a URL de destino em formato hexadecimal, da seguinte maneira:
"http://trusted.example.com/ecommerce/redirect.asp?dest=%77%69%6C%79%68%61%63%6B%65%72%2E%63%6F%6D"

até mesmo um usuário final experiente poderá ser enganado e convencido a seguir o link.
References
[1] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 601
[2] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-002754
[3] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 SI
[4] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Indirect Access to Sensitive Data
[5] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 SI-10 Information Input Validation (P1)
[6] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SI-10 Information Input Validation
[7] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 5.1.5 Input Validation Requirements (L1 L2 L3)
[8] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M1 Weak Server Side Controls
[9] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M4 Insufficient Input/Output Validation
[10] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A1 Unvalidated Input
[11] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A10 Unvalidated Redirects and Forwards
[12] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A10 Unvalidated Redirects and Forwards
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A01 Broken Access Control
[14] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[15] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.1
[16] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.5.1
[17] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.1
[18] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[19] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.1
[20] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[21] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[22] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
[23] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection
[24] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective C.3.2 - Web Software Attack Mitigation
[26] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2010 Insecure Interaction - CWE ID 601
[27] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2011 Insecure Interaction - CWE ID 601
[28] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[29] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[30] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[31] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[32] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[33] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[34] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[35] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[36] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[37] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[51] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 URL Redirector Abuse (WASC-38)
[52] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium 24 + 2 Content Spoofing
desc.dataflow.python.open_redirect
Abstract
Permitir que uma entrada não validada controle a URL usada em um redirecionamento pode auxiliar ataques de phishing.
Explanation
Redirecionamentos permitem que aplicativos Web direcionem os usuários para páginas diferentes no mesmo aplicativo ou para sites externos. Os aplicativos utilizam redirecionamentos para auxiliar na navegação do site e, em alguns casos, para controlar como os usuários saem do site. Vulnerabilidades de redirecionamento aberto ocorrem quando um aplicativo Web redireciona os clientes para qualquer URL arbitrária que possa ser controlada por um invasor.

Os invasores podem utilizar open redirects para convencer os usuários a visitar uma URL para um site confiável, mas depois redirecioná-los para um site mal-intencionado. Ao codificar a URL, um invasor pode tornar difícil para os usuários finais perceberem o destino mal-intencionado do redirecionamento, mesmo quando ele é transmitido como um parâmetro de URL ao site confiável. Redirecionamentos abertos são muitas vezes mal utilizados como parte de esquemas de phishing para coletar dados confidenciais dos usuários finais.

Exemplo 1: Este código Ruby instrui o navegador do usuário a abrir uma URL analisada a partir do parâmetro da solicitação dest:


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


Se a vítima tiver recebido um email com instruções para seguir um link para "http://trusted.example.com/ecommerce/redirect.asp?dest=www.wilyhacker.com", ela provavelmente clicará nesse link acreditando que será transferida ao site confiável. No entanto, quando ela clicar no link, o código no Example 1 redirecionará o navegador para "http://www.wilyhacker.com".

Muitos usuários foram instruídos a sempre inspecionarem URLs que eles recebem em emails, para garantir que o link especifique um site confiável conhecido. No entanto, se o invasor tiver codificado a URL de destino em formato hexadecimal, da seguinte maneira:
"http://trusted.example.com/ecommerce/redirect.asp?dest=%77%69%6C%79%68%61%63%6B%65%72%2E%63%6F%6D"

até mesmo um usuário final experiente poderá ser enganado e convencido a seguir o link.
References
[1] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 601
[2] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-002754
[3] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 SI
[4] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Indirect Access to Sensitive Data
[5] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 SI-10 Information Input Validation (P1)
[6] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SI-10 Information Input Validation
[7] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 5.1.5 Input Validation Requirements (L1 L2 L3)
[8] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M1 Weak Server Side Controls
[9] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M4 Insufficient Input/Output Validation
[10] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A1 Unvalidated Input
[11] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A10 Unvalidated Redirects and Forwards
[12] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A10 Unvalidated Redirects and Forwards
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A01 Broken Access Control
[14] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[15] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.1
[16] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.5.1
[17] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.1
[18] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[19] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.1
[20] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[21] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[22] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
[23] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection
[24] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective C.3.2 - Web Software Attack Mitigation
[26] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2010 Insecure Interaction - CWE ID 601
[27] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2011 Insecure Interaction - CWE ID 601
[28] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[29] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[30] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[31] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[32] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[33] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[34] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[35] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[36] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[37] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[51] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 URL Redirector Abuse (WASC-38)
[52] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium 24 + 2 Content Spoofing
desc.dataflow.ruby.open_redirect
Abstract
Permitir que uma entrada não validada controle a URL usada em um redirecionamento pode auxiliar ataques de phishing.
Explanation
Redirecionamentos permitem que aplicativos Web direcionem os usuários para páginas diferentes no mesmo aplicativo ou para sites externos. Os aplicativos utilizam redirecionamentos para auxiliar na navegação do site e, em alguns casos, para controlar como os usuários saem do site. Vulnerabilidades de redirecionamento aberto ocorrem quando um aplicativo Web redireciona os clientes para qualquer URL arbitrária que possa ser controlada por um invasor.

Os invasores podem utilizar open redirects para convencer os usuários a visitar uma URL para um site confiável, mas depois redirecioná-los para um site mal-intencionado. Ao codificar a URL, um invasor pode tornar difícil para os usuários finais perceberem o destino mal-intencionado do redirecionamento, mesmo quando ele é transmitido como um parâmetro de URL ao site confiável. Redirecionamentos abertos são muitas vezes mal utilizados como parte de esquemas de phishing para coletar dados confidenciais dos usuários finais.

Exemplo 1: O seguinte método do controlador Play instrui o navegador do usuário a abrir uma URL analisada a partir do parâmetro da solicitação dest.


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


Se a vítima tiver recebido um email com instruções para seguir um link para "http://trusted.example.com/ecommerce/redirect.asp?dest=www.wilyhacker.com", ela provavelmente clicará nesse link acreditando que será transferida ao site confiável. No entanto, quando ela clicar no link, o código no Example 1 redirecionará o navegador para "http://www.wilyhacker.com".

Muitos usuários foram instruídos a sempre inspecionarem URLs que eles recebem em emails, para garantir que o link especifique um site confiável conhecido.No entanto, se o invasor tiver codificado a URL de destino em formato hexadecimal, da seguinte maneira:
"http://trusted.example.com/ecommerce/redirect.asp?dest=%77%69%6C%79%68%61%63%6B%65%72%2E%63%6F%6D"

até mesmo um usuário final experiente poderá ser enganado e convencido a seguir o link.
References
[1] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 601
[2] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-002754
[3] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 SI
[4] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Indirect Access to Sensitive Data
[5] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 SI-10 Information Input Validation (P1)
[6] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SI-10 Information Input Validation
[7] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 5.1.5 Input Validation Requirements (L1 L2 L3)
[8] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M1 Weak Server Side Controls
[9] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M4 Insufficient Input/Output Validation
[10] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A1 Unvalidated Input
[11] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A10 Unvalidated Redirects and Forwards
[12] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A10 Unvalidated Redirects and Forwards
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A01 Broken Access Control
[14] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[15] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.1
[16] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.5.1
[17] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.1
[18] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[19] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.1
[20] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[21] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[22] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
[23] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection
[24] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective C.3.2 - Web Software Attack Mitigation
[26] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2010 Insecure Interaction - CWE ID 601
[27] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2011 Insecure Interaction - CWE ID 601
[28] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[29] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[30] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[31] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[32] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[33] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[34] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[35] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[36] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[37] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[51] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 URL Redirector Abuse (WASC-38)
[52] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium 24 + 2 Content Spoofing
desc.dataflow.scala.open_redirect
Abstract
Permitir que uma entrada não validada controle a URL usada em um redirecionamento pode auxiliar ataques de phishing.
Explanation
Redirecionamentos permitem que aplicativos Web direcionem os usuários para páginas diferentes no mesmo aplicativo ou para sites externos. Os aplicativos utilizam redirecionamentos para auxiliar na navegação do site e, em alguns casos, para controlar como os usuários saem do site. Vulnerabilidades de redirecionamento aberto ocorrem quando um aplicativo Web redireciona os clientes para qualquer URL arbitrária que possa ser controlada por um invasor.

Os invasores podem utilizar open redirects para convencer os usuários a visitar uma URL para um site confiável, mas depois redirecioná-los para um site mal-intencionado. Ao codificar a URL, um invasor pode tornar difícil para os usuários finais perceberem o destino mal-intencionado do redirecionamento, mesmo quando ele é transmitido como um parâmetro de URL ao site confiável. Redirecionamentos abertos são muitas vezes mal utilizados como parte de esquemas de phishing para coletar dados confidenciais dos usuários finais.

Exemplo 1: Este código lida com quaisquer solicitações que utilizem o esquema de URL padrão, configurarequestToLoad a fim de que aponte para o parâmetro "dest" da URL original, se existente, e para a URL original por meio do esquema http:// de outra maneira, e finalmente carrega essa solicitação dentro de um WKWebView:

AppDelegate.swift:

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


ViewController.swift

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


Se a vítima recebeu um email instruindo-a a seguir um link para "custom_url_scheme://innocent_url?dest=www.wilyhacker.com", o usuário provavelmente clicou no link acreditando que ele iria realizar uma ação inocente. No entanto, quando a vítima clicar no link, o código no Example 1 tentará solicitar e carregar "http://www.wilyhacker.com" no WKWebView.

Muitos usuários foram instruídos a sempre inspecionarem URLs que eles recebem em emails, para garantir que o link especifique um site confiável conhecido. No entanto, se o invasor tiver codificado a URL de destino em formato hexadecimal, da seguinte maneira:

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

então, até mesmo um usuário final mais experiente pode ser enganado e clicar no link.
References
[1] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 601
[2] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-002754
[3] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 SI
[4] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Indirect Access to Sensitive Data
[5] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 SI-10 Information Input Validation (P1)
[6] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SI-10 Information Input Validation
[7] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 5.1.5 Input Validation Requirements (L1 L2 L3)
[8] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M1 Weak Server Side Controls
[9] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M4 Insufficient Input/Output Validation
[10] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A1 Unvalidated Input
[11] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A10 Unvalidated Redirects and Forwards
[12] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A10 Unvalidated Redirects and Forwards
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A01 Broken Access Control
[14] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[15] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.1
[16] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.5.1
[17] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.1
[18] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[19] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.1
[20] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[21] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[22] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
[23] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection
[24] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective C.3.2 - Web Software Attack Mitigation
[26] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2010 Insecure Interaction - CWE ID 601
[27] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2011 Insecure Interaction - CWE ID 601
[28] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[29] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[30] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[31] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[32] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[33] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[34] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[35] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[36] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[37] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[51] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 URL Redirector Abuse (WASC-38)
[52] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium 24 + 2 Content Spoofing
desc.dataflow.swift.open_redirect
Abstract
Permitir que uma entrada não validada controle a URL usada em um redirecionamento pode auxiliar ataques de phishing.
Explanation
Redirecionamentos permitem que aplicativos Web direcionem os usuários para páginas diferentes no mesmo aplicativo ou para sites externos. Os aplicativos utilizam redirecionamentos para auxiliar na navegação do site e, em alguns casos, para controlar como os usuários saem do site. Vulnerabilidades de redirecionamento aberto ocorrem quando um aplicativo Web redireciona os clientes para qualquer URL arbitrária que possa ser controlada por um invasor.

Os invasores podem utilizar open redirects para convencer os usuários a visitar uma URL para um site confiável, mas depois redirecioná-los para um site mal-intencionado. Ao codificar a URL, um invasor pode tornar difícil para os usuários finais perceberem o destino mal-intencionado do redirecionamento, mesmo quando ele é transmitido como um parâmetro de URL ao site confiável. Redirecionamentos abertos são muitas vezes mal utilizados como parte de esquemas de phishing para coletar dados confidenciais dos usuários finais.

Exemplo 1: O seguinte código VB instrui o navegador do usuário para abrir uma URL analisada do parâmetro de solicitação dest quando um usuário clica no link.


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


Se o usuário tiver recebido um email com instruções para seguir um link para ""http://www.trustedsite.com/ecommerce/redirect.asp?dest=www.wilyhacker.com", ele provavelmente clicará nesse link acreditando que será transferido ao site confiável. No entanto, quando ela clicar no link, o código no Example 1 redirecionará o navegador para "http://www.wilyhacker.com".

Muitos usuários foram instruídos a sempre inspecionarem URLs que eles recebem em emails, para garantir que o link especifique um site confiável conhecido. No entanto, se o invasor tiver codificado a URL de destino em formato hexadecimal, da seguinte maneira:
"http://www.trustedsite.com/ecommerce/redirect.asp?dest=%77%69%6C%79%68%61%63%6B%65%72%2E%63%6F%6D"

até mesmo um usuário final mais experiente pode ser levado a clicar no link.
References
[1] Phishers use IRS tax refund as bait CNet News
[2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 601
[3] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-002754
[4] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 SI
[5] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Indirect Access to Sensitive Data
[6] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 SI-10 Information Input Validation (P1)
[7] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SI-10 Information Input Validation
[8] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 5.1.5 Input Validation Requirements (L1 L2 L3)
[9] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M1 Weak Server Side Controls
[10] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M4 Insufficient Input/Output Validation
[11] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A1 Unvalidated Input
[12] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A10 Unvalidated Redirects and Forwards
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A10 Unvalidated Redirects and Forwards
[14] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A01 Broken Access Control
[15] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[16] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.1
[17] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.5.1
[18] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.1
[19] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[20] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.1
[21] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[22] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[23] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
[24] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation
[26] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective C.3.2 - Web Software Attack Mitigation
[27] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2010 Insecure Interaction - CWE ID 601
[28] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2011 Insecure Interaction - CWE ID 601
[29] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[30] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[31] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[32] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[33] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[34] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[35] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[36] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[37] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[52] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 URL Redirector Abuse (WASC-38)
[53] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium 24 + 2 Content Spoofing
desc.dataflow.vb.open_redirect
Abstract
A especificação do OpenAPI não impõe a comunicação criptografada durante a troca de credenciais confidenciais do cliente.
Explanation
Foi detectada uma operação da API que permite que as credenciais trafeguem por um canal não criptografado. Os requisitos de security do OpenAPI e as definições servers de destino para uma operação da API sempre substituirá as respectivas configurações globais.

No entanto, quando essas configurações não são definidas para uma operação, elas assumem como padrão os valores especificados globalmente.
References
[1] OpenAPI Initiative OpenAPI Specification v3.1.0 - 4.8.30 Security Requirement Object
[2] OpenAPI Initiative OpenAPI Specification v3.1.0 - 4.8.10 Operation Object
[3] CIO Council The HTTPS-Only Standard
[4] Josh Fruhlinger What is SSL, TLS? And how this encryption protocol works
[5] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 319
[6] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-000068, CCI-001453, CCI-002418, CCI-002420, CCI-002421, CCI-002422, CCI-002890, CCI-003123
[7] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 SC
[8] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Insufficient Data Protection
[9] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 AC-17 Remote Access (P1), MA-4 Nonlocal Maintenance (P2), SC-8 Transmission Confidentiality and Integrity (P1)
[10] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 AC-17 Remote Access, MA-4 Nonlocal Maintenance, SC-8 Transmission Confidentiality and Integrity
[11] Standards Mapping - OWASP API 2023 API8 Security Misconfiguration
[12] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 1.9.1 Communications Architectural Requirements (L2 L3), 2.2.5 General Authenticator Requirements (L3), 6.2.1 Algorithms (L1 L2 L3), 6.2.2 Algorithms (L2 L3), 6.2.3 Algorithms (L2 L3), 6.2.4 Algorithms (L2 L3), 6.2.5 Algorithms (L2 L3), 6.2.6 Algorithms (L2 L3), 6.2.7 Algorithms (L3), 8.3.7 Sensitive Private Data (L2 L3), 9.1.1 Communications Security Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 9.1.2 Communications Security Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 9.1.3 Communications Security Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 9.2.1 Server Communications Security Requirements (L2 L3), 9.2.2 Server Communications Security Requirements (L2 L3), 9.2.3 Server Communications Security Requirements (L2 L3), 14.1.3 Build (L2 L3), 14.4.5 HTTP Security Headers Requirements (L1 L2 L3)
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M3 Insufficient Transport Layer Protection
[14] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A3 Sensitive Data Exposure
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A02 Cryptographic Failures
[16] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 4.1, Requirement 6.5.4
[17] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 4.2.1, Requirement 6.2.4
[18] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 4.2.1, Requirement 6.2.4
[19] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 6.2 - Sensitive Data Protection, Control Objective 7 - Use of Cryptography
[20] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 6.2 - Sensitive Data Protection, Control Objective 7 - Use of Cryptography
[21] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 6.2 - Sensitive Data Protection, Control Objective 7 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective C.4.1 - Web Software Communications
[22] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-000160 CAT II, APSC-DV-000170 CAT II, APSC-DV-001940 CAT II, APSC-DV-001950 CAT II, APSC-DV-002440 CAT I, APSC-DV-002450 CAT II, APSC-DV-002460 CAT II, APSC-DV-002470 CAT II
[23] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-000160 CAT II, APSC-DV-000170 CAT II, APSC-DV-001940 CAT II, APSC-DV-001950 CAT II, APSC-DV-002440 CAT I, APSC-DV-002450 CAT II, APSC-DV-002460 CAT II, APSC-DV-002470 CAT II
[24] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-000160 CAT II, APSC-DV-000170 CAT II, APSC-DV-001940 CAT II, APSC-DV-001950 CAT II, APSC-DV-002440 CAT I, APSC-DV-002450 CAT II, APSC-DV-002460 CAT II, APSC-DV-002470 CAT II
[25] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-000160 CAT II, APSC-DV-000170 CAT II, APSC-DV-001940 CAT II, APSC-DV-001950 CAT II, APSC-DV-002440 CAT I, APSC-DV-002450 CAT II, APSC-DV-002460 CAT II, APSC-DV-002470 CAT II
[26] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-000160 CAT II, APSC-DV-000170 CAT II, APSC-DV-001940 CAT II, APSC-DV-001950 CAT II, APSC-DV-002440 CAT I, APSC-DV-002450 CAT II, APSC-DV-002460 CAT II, APSC-DV-002470 CAT II
[27] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 APSC-DV-000160 CAT II, APSC-DV-000170 CAT II, APSC-DV-001940 CAT II, APSC-DV-001950 CAT II, APSC-DV-002440 CAT I, APSC-DV-002450 CAT II, APSC-DV-002460 CAT II, APSC-DV-002470 CAT II
[28] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium 24 + 2 Information Leakage
desc.configuration.json.openapi_misconfiguration_credential_leakage.master
Abstract
A especificação do OpenAPI não impõe a comunicação criptografada durante a troca de credenciais confidenciais do cliente.
Explanation
Foi detectada uma operação da API que permite que as credenciais trafeguem por um canal não criptografado. Os requisitos de security do OpenAPI e as definições servers de destino para uma operação da API sempre substituirá as respectivas configurações globais.

No entanto, quando essas configurações não são definidas para uma operação, elas assumem como padrão os valores especificados globalmente.
References
[1] OpenAPI Initiative OpenAPI Specification v3.1.0 - 4.8.30 Security Requirement Object
[2] OpenAPI Initiative OpenAPI Specification v3.1.0 - 4.8.10 Operation Object
[3] CIO Council The HTTPS-Only Standard
[4] Josh Fruhlinger What is SSL, TLS? And how this encryption protocol works
[5] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 319
[6] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-000068, CCI-001453, CCI-002418, CCI-002420, CCI-002421, CCI-002422, CCI-002890, CCI-003123
[7] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 SC
[8] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Insufficient Data Protection
[9] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 AC-17 Remote Access (P1), MA-4 Nonlocal Maintenance (P2), SC-8 Transmission Confidentiality and Integrity (P1)
[10] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 AC-17 Remote Access, MA-4 Nonlocal Maintenance, SC-8 Transmission Confidentiality and Integrity
[11] Standards Mapping - OWASP API 2023 API8 Security Misconfiguration
[12] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 1.9.1 Communications Architectural Requirements (L2 L3), 2.2.5 General Authenticator Requirements (L3), 6.2.1 Algorithms (L1 L2 L3), 6.2.2 Algorithms (L2 L3), 6.2.3 Algorithms (L2 L3), 6.2.4 Algorithms (L2 L3), 6.2.5 Algorithms (L2 L3), 6.2.6 Algorithms (L2 L3), 6.2.7 Algorithms (L3), 8.3.7 Sensitive Private Data (L2 L3), 9.1.1 Communications Security Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 9.1.2 Communications Security Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 9.1.3 Communications Security Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 9.2.1 Server Communications Security Requirements (L2 L3), 9.2.2 Server Communications Security Requirements (L2 L3), 9.2.3 Server Communications Security Requirements (L2 L3), 14.1.3 Build (L2 L3), 14.4.5 HTTP Security Headers Requirements (L1 L2 L3)
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M3 Insufficient Transport Layer Protection
[14] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A3 Sensitive Data Exposure
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A02 Cryptographic Failures
[16] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 4.1, Requirement 6.5.4
[17] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 4.2.1, Requirement 6.2.4
[18] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 4.2.1, Requirement 6.2.4
[19] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 6.2 - Sensitive Data Protection, Control Objective 7 - Use of Cryptography
[20] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 6.2 - Sensitive Data Protection, Control Objective 7 - Use of Cryptography
[21] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 6.2 - Sensitive Data Protection, Control Objective 7 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective C.4.1 - Web Software Communications
[22] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-000160 CAT II, APSC-DV-000170 CAT II, APSC-DV-001940 CAT II, APSC-DV-001950 CAT II, APSC-DV-002440 CAT I, APSC-DV-002450 CAT II, APSC-DV-002460 CAT II, APSC-DV-002470 CAT II
[23] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-000160 CAT II, APSC-DV-000170 CAT II, APSC-DV-001940 CAT II, APSC-DV-001950 CAT II, APSC-DV-002440 CAT I, APSC-DV-002450 CAT II, APSC-DV-002460 CAT II, APSC-DV-002470 CAT II
[24] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-000160 CAT II, APSC-DV-000170 CAT II, APSC-DV-001940 CAT II, APSC-DV-001950 CAT II, APSC-DV-002440 CAT I, APSC-DV-002450 CAT II, APSC-DV-002460 CAT II, APSC-DV-002470 CAT II
[25] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-000160 CAT II, APSC-DV-000170 CAT II, APSC-DV-001940 CAT II, APSC-DV-001950 CAT II, APSC-DV-002440 CAT I, APSC-DV-002450 CAT II, APSC-DV-002460 CAT II, APSC-DV-002470 CAT II
[26] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-000160 CAT II, APSC-DV-000170 CAT II, APSC-DV-001940 CAT II, APSC-DV-001950 CAT II, APSC-DV-002440 CAT I, APSC-DV-002450 CAT II, APSC-DV-002460 CAT II, APSC-DV-002470 CAT II
[27] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 APSC-DV-000160 CAT II, APSC-DV-000170 CAT II, APSC-DV-001940 CAT II, APSC-DV-001950 CAT II, APSC-DV-002440 CAT I, APSC-DV-002450 CAT II, APSC-DV-002460 CAT II, APSC-DV-002470 CAT II
[28] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium 24 + 2 Information Leakage
desc.configuration.yaml.openapi_misconfiguration_credential_leakage.master