Skip to content

GHSA-7pm4-g2qj-j85x CVE-2020-5397

CSRF attack via CORS preflight requests with Spring MVC or Spring WebFlux

Medium Maven
Severity
5.3 / 10
Medium · CVSS 3.0
Exploit chance (EPSS)
2.55%
Chance of exploitation in the next 30 days. Higher than 85.04% of scored vulnerabilities.
Known exploited
No
Not in CISA's catalog
Weakness
CWE-352 Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF)
Fix
Available
2 packages have a fixed version

Description

Spring Framework, versions 5.2.x prior to 5.2.3 are vulnerable to CSRF attacks through CORS preflight requests that target Spring MVC (spring-webmvc module) or Spring WebFlux (spring-webflux module) endpoints. Only non-authenticated endpoints are vulnerable because preflight requests should not include credentials and therefore requests should fail authentication. However a notable exception to this are Chrome based browsers when using client certificates for authentication since Chrome sends TLS client certificates in CORS preflight requests in violation of spec requirements. No HTTP body can be sent or received as a result of this attack.

Affected versions

Maven

PackageVulnerableFixed in
org.springframework:spring-webflux
>= 5.2.0, < 5.2.3
5.2.3
org.springframework:spring-webmvc
>= 5.2.0, < 5.2.3
5.2.3

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.

org.springframework:spring-webflux Maven → 5.2.3

maven
<dependency><groupId>org.springframework</groupId><artifactId>spring-webflux</artifactId><version>5.2.3</version></dependency>
gradle
implementation("org.springframework:spring-webflux:5.2.3")

org.springframework:spring-webmvc Maven → 5.2.3

maven
<dependency><groupId>org.springframework</groupId><artifactId>spring-webmvc</artifactId><version>5.2.3</version></dependency>
gradle
implementation("org.springframework:spring-webmvc:5.2.3")

Severity breakdown

CVSS 3.0 5.3

CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N

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

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

Timeline

  1. Published
  2. Last updated by the source
  3. Latest EPSS score
AdvisorySeverityWhy it's related
GHSA-36p3-wjmg-h94x
Remote Code Execution in Spring Framework
Critical Known exploited Also affects org.springframework:spring-webflux
GHSA-9qf2-26p9-2q2q
Spring Framework Header Predicate Bypass in WebFlux Functional Endpoints
Critical Also affects org.springframework:spring-webflux
GHSA-j9f9-w8pj-32f8
Spring Framework Server Sent Event stream corruption while rendering fragments
Critical Also affects org.springframework:spring-webflux
GHSA-pc63-qcmh-9cmg
Spring Framework Improper Path Limitation in XsltView
Critical Also affects org.springframework:spring-webmvc
GHSA-cjpg-rgq5-fr37
Spring Framework Multipart Request Smuggling in Spring MVC and WebFlux
Medium Also affects org.springframework:spring-webflux
GHSA-vqgp-pf68-6947
Spring Framework Security Filter Bypass in WebFlux Kotlin Router DSL
Medium Also affects org.springframework:spring-webflux
GHSA-957g-f97v-vppc
Spring Framework Cross-site Scripting via JSP Form Tags
Medium Also affects org.springframework:spring-webmvc
GHSA-3chg-m5w7-qfv5
Spring Framework Cross-site Scripting via JavaScriptUtils
Medium Also affects org.springframework:spring-webmvc
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