Skip to content

GHSA-838h-jqp6-cf2f CVE-2022-24783

Sandbox bypass leading to arbitrary code execution in Deno

Critical crates.io
Severity
10.0 / 10
Critical · CVSS 3.1
Exploit chance (EPSS)
1.15%
Chance of exploitation in the next 30 days. Higher than 66.80% of scored vulnerabilities.
Known exploited
No
Not in CISA's catalog
Weakness
CWE-269 Improper Privilege Management
CWE-863 Incorrect Authorization
Fix
1.20.3
Upgrade deno to this version or later

Description

Impact

The versions of Deno between release 1.18.0 and 1.20.2 (inclusive) are vulnerable to an attack where a malicious actor controlling the code executed in a Deno runtime could bypass permission checks and execute arbitrary shell code.

There is no evidence that this vulnerability has been exploited in the wild.

This vulnerability does not affect users of Deno Deploy.

Patches

The vulnerability has been patched in Deno 1.20.3.

Workarounds

There is no workaround. All users are recommended to upgrade to 1.20.3 immediately


The cause of this error was that certain FFI operations did not correctly check for permissions. The issue was fixed in this pull request.

Affected versions

crates.io

PackageVulnerableFixed in
deno
>= 1.18.0, < 1.20.3
1.20.3

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.

deno crates.io → 1.20.3

cargo
cargo update -p deno --precise 1.20.3

Severity breakdown

CVSS 3.1 10.0

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

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

Weakness

CWE-269: Improper Privilege Management

The product does not properly assign, modify, track, or check privileges for an actor, creating an unintended sphere of control for that actor.

How to prevent it
  • Architecture and Design, Operation: Very carefully manage the setting, management, and handling of privileges. Explicitly manage trust zones in the software.
  • Architecture and Design: Follow the principle of least privilege when assigning access rights to entities in a software system.
  • Architecture and Design: Consider following the principle of separation of privilege. Require multiple conditions to be met before permitting access to a system resource.

CWE-863: Incorrect Authorization

The product performs an authorization check when an actor attempts to access a resource or perform an action, but it does not correctly perform the check.

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) [REF-229] 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 access control checks are performed related to the business logic. These checks may be different than the access control checks that are applied 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 [REF-7].
  • 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.

References

Timeline

  1. Published
  2. Last updated by the source
  3. Latest EPSS score
AdvisorySeverityWhy it's related
GHSA-x2qc-cmh9-f4hf
Deno: Denial of service via non-ASCII bytes in WebSocket response headers
Medium Also affects deno
GHSA-8xpq-cjcf-3wh9
Deno: Permission Bypass via Unicode Normalization Mismatch on macOS (APFS)
High Also affects deno
GHSA-968w-xfqw-vp9q
Deno: BYONM module resolution allows `package.json` main path traversal to bypass `--allow-read` restrictions
Medium Also affects deno
GHSA-v8fw-85r8-5m23
Deno: Node TCPWrap numeric hostname aliases bypass --deny-net resolved-IP deny checks
Medium Also affects deno
GHSA-9xg4-qhm4-g43w
Deno: Miller-Rabin Primality Test Allows Zero Rounds
High Also affects deno
GHSA-7xh3-mhg9-jcw8
Deno: Command Injection via spawnSync & spawn on Windows
High Also affects deno
GHSA-4c8g-jvcx-v4hv
Deno: process.loadEnvFile() bypasses env permission checks and mutates process.env with only read access
Medium Also affects deno
GHSA-83pc-3rw9-qpwj
Deno: WebSocket API sandbox bypass via missing post-DNS check
Medium Also affects deno
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