GHSA-7f4f-p7mq-p4fv
Drupal External URL injection through URL aliases leading to Open Redirect
Medium
Packagist
- Severity
- Medium
- The publisher's own rating, not a CVSS score
- Exploit chance (EPSS)
- —
- No score published
- Known exploited
- No
- Not in CISA's catalog
- Weakness
- CWE-601 URL Redirection to Untrusted Site ('Open Redirect')
- Fix
7.60- Upgrade drupal/core to this version or later
Description
The path module in Drupal allows users with the 'administer paths' to create pretty URLs for content. In certain circumstances the user can enter a particular path that triggers an open redirect to a malicious url.
Affected versions
Packagist
| Package | Vulnerable | Fixed in |
|---|---|---|
| drupal/core | >= 7.0, < 7.60 |
7.60 |
| drupal/core | >= 8.0.0, < 8.5.8 |
8.5.8 |
| drupal/core | >= 8.6.0, < 8.6.2 |
8.6.2 |
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.
drupal/core Packagist → 7.60
- composer
composer require drupal/core:^7.60
Weakness
CWE-601: URL Redirection to Untrusted Site ('Open Redirect')
The web application accepts a user-controlled input that specifies a link to an external site, and uses that link in a redirect.
How to prevent it
- Implementation: Assume all input is malicious. Use an "accept known good" input validation strategy, i.e., use a list of acceptable inputs that strictly conform to specifications. Reject any input that does not strictly conform to specifications, or transform it into something that does. When performing input validation, consider all potentially relevant properties, including length, type of input, the full range of acceptable values, missing or extra inputs, syntax, consistency across related fields, and conformance to business rules. As an example of business rule logic, "boat" may be syntactically valid because it only contains alphanumeric characters, but it is not valid if the input is only expected to contain colors such as "red" or "blue." Do not rely exclusively on looking for malicious or malformed inputs. This is likely to miss at least one undesirable input, especially if the code's environment changes. This can give attackers enough room to bypass the intended validation. However, denylists can be useful for detecting potential attacks or determining which inputs are so malformed that they should be rejected outright. Use a list of approved URLs or domains to be used for redirection.
- Architecture and Design: Use an intermediate disclaimer page that provides the user with a clear warning that they are leaving the current site. Implement a long timeout before the redirect occurs, or force the user to click on the link. Be careful to avoid XSS problems (CWE-79) when generating the disclaimer page.
- Architecture and Design: When the set of acceptable objects, such as filenames or URLs, is limited or known, create a mapping from a set of fixed input values (such as numeric IDs) to the actual filenames or URLs, and reject all other inputs. For example, ID 1 could map to "/login.asp" and ID 2 could map to "http://www.example.com/". Features such as the ESAPI AccessReferenceMap [REF-45] provide this capability.
- Architecture and Design: Ensure that no externally-supplied requests are honored by requiring that all redirect requests include a unique nonce generated by the application [REF-483]. Be sure that the nonce is not predictable (CWE-330).
- Architecture and Design, Implementation: Understand all the potential areas where untrusted inputs can enter your software: parameters or arguments, cookies, anything read from the network, environment variables, reverse DNS lookups, query results, request headers, URL components, e-mail, files, filenames, databases, and any external systems that provide data to the application. Remember that such inputs may be obtained indirectly through API calls. Many open redirect problems occur because the programmer assumed that certain inputs could not be modified, such as cookies and hidden form fields.
- Operation: Use an application firewall that can detect attacks against this weakness. It can be beneficial in cases in which the code cannot be fixed (because it is controlled by a third party), as an emergency prevention measure while more comprehensive software assurance measures are applied, or to provide defense in depth [REF-1481].
References
Packages
Other links
Timeline
- Published
- Last updated by the source
Related advisories
| Advisory | Severity | Why it's related |
|---|---|---|
| DRUPAL-CORE-2026-004 Drupal Core has a SQL Injection issue | Critical Known exploited | Also affects drupal/core |
| CVE-2020-28949 Multiple vulnerabilities through filename manipulation in Archive_Tar | High Known exploited | Also affects drupal/core |
| CVE-2020-13671 Drupal core Unrestricted Upload of File with Dangerous Type | High Known exploited | Also affects drupal/core |
| CVE-2019-6340 Drupal Core Remote Code Execution Vulnerability | High Known exploited | Also affects drupal/core |
| CVE-2018-7602 Drupal Core Remote Code Execution Vulnerability | Critical Known exploited | Also affects drupal/core |
| CVE-2018-7600 Drupal Core Remote Code Execution Vulnerability | Critical Known exploited | Also affects drupal/core |
| DRUPAL-CORE-2026-016 The Navigation module doesn't sufficiently sanitize certain attributes, which can lead to a cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability. | Not rated yet | Also affects drupal/core |
| DRUPAL-CORE-2026-015 The Drupal core Link module provides a field type that can be used for internal and external URLs. | Not rated yet | Also affects drupal/core |
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