Skip to content

GHSA-3c67-5hwx-f6wx CVE-2024-47084 PYSEC-2024-196

Gradios's CORS origin validation is not performed when the request has a cookie

High PyPI
Severity
0.0 / 10
High · CVSS 4.0
Exploit chance (EPSS)
0.53%
Chance of exploitation in the next 30 days. Higher than 44.72% of scored vulnerabilities.
Known exploited
No
Not in CISA's catalog
Weakness
CWE-285 Improper Authorization
CWE-346 Origin Validation Error
Fix
4.44.0
Upgrade gradio to this version or later

Description

Impact

What kind of vulnerability is it? Who is impacted?

This vulnerability is related to CORS origin validation, where the Gradio server fails to validate the request origin when a cookie is present. This allows an attacker’s website to make unauthorized requests to a local Gradio server. Potentially, attackers can upload files, steal authentication tokens, and access user data if the victim visits a malicious website while logged into Gradio. This impacts users who have deployed Gradio locally and use basic authentication.

Patches

Yes, please upgrade to gradio>=4.44 to address this issue.

Workarounds

Is there a way for users to fix or remediate the vulnerability without upgrading?

As a workaround, users can manually enforce stricter CORS origin validation by modifying the CustomCORSMiddleware class in their local Gradio server code. Specifically, they can bypass the condition that skips CORS validation for requests containing cookies to prevent potential exploitation.

Affected versions

PyPI

PackageVulnerableFixed in
gradio
< 4.44.0
4.44.0

How to fix

Move to the fixed version or later with your package manager, update the lockfile, and run your tests. If the package only arrives through another dependency, upgrade that dependency first. If none of its releases pulls a fixed version yet, force the version with your package manager's override.

gradio PyPI → 4.44.0

pip
pip install --upgrade "gradio>=4.44.0"
poetry
poetry add "gradio>=4.44.0"
uv
uv add "gradio>=4.44.0"

Severity breakdown

CVSS 4.0 0.0

CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:P/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N

Attack vector
Network
Attack complexity
Low
Attack requirements
None
Privileges required
None
User interaction
Passive
Confidentiality (vulnerable system)
High
Integrity (vulnerable system)
High
Availability (vulnerable system)
High
Confidentiality (subsequent systems)
None
Integrity (subsequent systems)
None
Availability (subsequent systems)
None

CVSS 3.1 8.8

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H

Attack vector
Network
Attack complexity
Low
Privileges required
None
User interaction
Required
Scope
Unchanged
Confidentiality
High
Integrity
High
Availability
High

Weakness

CWE-285: Improper Authorization

The product does not perform or incorrectly performs an authorization check when an actor attempts to access a resource or perform an action.

How to prevent it
  • Architecture and Design: Divide the product into anonymous, normal, privileged, and administrative areas. Reduce the attack surface by carefully mapping roles with data and functionality. Use role-based access control (RBAC) to enforce the roles at the appropriate boundaries. Note that this approach may not protect against horizontal authorization, i.e., it will not protect a user from attacking others with the same role.
  • Architecture and Design: Ensure that you perform access control checks related to your business logic. These checks may be different than the access control checks that you apply to more generic resources such as files, connections, processes, memory, and database records. For example, a database may restrict access for medical records to a specific database user, but each record might only be intended to be accessible to the patient and the patient's doctor.
  • Architecture and Design: Use a vetted library or framework that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid. For example, consider using authorization frameworks such as the JAAS Authorization Framework [REF-233] and the OWASP ESAPI Access Control feature [REF-45].
  • Architecture and Design: For web applications, make sure that the access control mechanism is enforced correctly at the server side on every page. Users should not be able to access any unauthorized functionality or information by simply requesting direct access to that page. One way to do this is to ensure that all pages containing sensitive information are not cached, and that all such pages restrict access to requests that are accompanied by an active and authenticated session token associated with a user who has the required permissions to access that page.
  • System Configuration, Installation: Use the access control capabilities of your operating system and server environment and define your access control lists accordingly. Use a "default deny" policy when defining these ACLs.

CWE-346: Origin Validation Error

The product does not properly verify that the source of data or communication is valid.

References

Timeline

  1. Published
  2. Last updated by the source
  3. Latest EPSS score
AdvisorySeverityWhy it's related
GHSA-j36p-7w88-g82j
Gradio FileExplorer preprocess path traversal allows files outside root_dir to reach callbacks
High Also affects gradio
GHSA-6655-8ph2-63j3
Gradio: Audio cache key ignores metadata when saving numpy audio outputs
Low Also affects gradio
GHSA-7hp7-4p35-3cx2
Gradio contains a cookie injection vulnerability
Medium Also affects gradio
GHSA-jmh7-g254-2cq9
Gradio has SSRF via Malicious `proxy_url` Injection in `gr.load()` Config Processing
High Also affects gradio
GHSA-pfjf-5gxr-995x
Gradio has an Open Redirect in its OAuth Flow
Medium Also affects gradio
GHSA-39mp-8hj3-5c49
Gradio is Vulnerable to Absolute Path Traversal on Windows with Python 3.13+
High Also affects gradio
GHSA-h3h8-3v2v-rg7m
Gradio: Mocked OAuth Login Exposes Server Credentials and Uses Hardcoded Session Secret
Medium Also affects gradio
GHSA-8jw3-6x8j-v96g
Gradio Allows Unauthorized File Copy via Path Manipulation
High Also affects gradio
Is this in your code?

MergeHarbor checks every repository's dependencies against this database, ranks what matters by exploitability and reachability, routes it to the owning team and opens the fix pull request.

Check your repos with MergeHarbor