GHSA-5f6p-4hxq-rjxm CVE-2015-8814
Umbraco CMS vulnerable to CSRF
High
NuGet
- Severity
- 8.8 / 10
- High · CVSS 3.0
- Exploit chance (EPSS)
- 0.62%
- Chance of exploitation in the next 30 days. Higher than 49.97% of scored vulnerabilities.
- Known exploited
- No
- Not in CISA's catalog
- Weakness
- CWE-352 Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF)
- Fix
7.4.0- Upgrade Umbraco.CMS to this version or later
Description
Umbraco before 7.4.0 allows remote attackers to bypass anti-forgery security measures and conduct cross-site request forgery (CSRF) attacks as demonstrated by editing user account information in the templates.asmx.cs file.
Affected versions
NuGet
| Package | Vulnerable | Fixed in |
|---|---|---|
| Umbraco.CMS | < 7.4.0 |
7.4.0 |
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.
Umbraco.CMS NuGet → 7.4.0
- dotnet
dotnet add package Umbraco.CMS --version 7.4.0
Severity breakdown
CVSS 3.0 8.8
CVSS:3.0/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-352: Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF)
The web application does not, or cannot, sufficiently verify whether a request was intentionally provided by the user who sent the request, which could have originated from an unauthorized actor.
How to prevent it
- 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 [REF-1482]. For example, use anti-CSRF packages such as the OWASP CSRFGuard. [REF-330] Another example is the ESAPI Session Management control, which includes a component for CSRF. [REF-45]
- Implementation: Ensure that the application is free of cross-site scripting issues (CWE-79), because most CSRF defenses can be bypassed using attacker-controlled script.
- Architecture and Design: Generate a unique nonce for each form, place the nonce into the form, and verify the nonce upon receipt of the form. Be sure that the nonce is not predictable (CWE-330). [REF-332]
- Architecture and Design: Identify especially dangerous operations. When the user performs a dangerous operation, send a separate confirmation request to ensure that the user intended to perform that operation.
- Architecture and Design: Use the "double-submitted cookie" method as described by Felten and Zeller: When a user visits a site, the site should generate a pseudorandom value and set it as a cookie on the user's machine. The site should require every form submission to include this value as a form value and also as a cookie value. When a POST request is sent to the site, the request should only be considered valid if the form value and the cookie value are the same. Because of the same-origin policy, an attacker cannot read or modify the value stored in the cookie. To successfully submit a form on behalf of the user, the attacker would have to correctly guess the pseudorandom value. If the pseudorandom value is cryptographically strong, this will be prohibitively difficult. This technique requires Javascript, so it may not work for browsers that have Javascript disabled. [REF-331]
- Architecture and Design: Do not use the GET method for any request that triggers a state change.
- Implementation: Check the HTTP Referer header to see if the request originated from an expected page. This could break legitimate functionality, because users or proxies may have disabled sending the Referer for privacy reasons.
References
Advisories
Other links
Timeline
- Published
- Last updated by the source
- Latest EPSS score
Related advisories
| Advisory | Severity | Why it's related |
|---|---|---|
| GHSA-wr57-hqmp-fgvh Umbraco: Delivery API leaks protected (Public Access) content through Content Picker / Multi-Node Tree Picker expansion | High | Also affects Umbraco.Cms |
| GHSA-vr9v-27gg-qgx4 Umbraco.Cms: XSS/HTML Injection in Umbraco Backoffice confirmation dialog | Medium | Also affects Umbraco.Cms |
| GHSA-2qjj-h6wp-c7h7 Umbraco.Cms: Open Redirect Vulnerability in Surface Controllers | Medium | Also affects Umbraco.Cms |
| GHSA-rhcg-3h8r-v6vp Umbraco Affected by Vertical Privilege Escalation via Missing Authorization Checks | High | Also affects Umbraco.Cms |
| GHSA-vrqc-59mw-qqg7 Umbraco has Stored XSS in UFM Rendering Pipeline via Permissive DOMPurify Attribute Filtering | Medium | Also affects Umbraco.Cms |
| GHSA-fpvf-fvp5-996r Umbraco Backoffice API Allows Unauthorized Modification of Domain Data | Medium | Also affects Umbraco.Cms |
| GHSA-54mj-vcvj-q3v5 Umbraco CMS has an arbitrary file upload vulnerability | Critical | Also affects Umbraco.Cms |
| GHSA-hfv2-pf68-m33x Umbraco Vulnerable to Improper File Access and Credential Exposure in Dictionary Import Functionality | Medium | Also affects Umbraco.Cms |
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