GHSA-8727-m6gj-mc37 CVE-2020-8164
Possible Strong Parameters Bypass in ActionPack
- Severity
- 7.5 / 10
- High · CVSS 3.1
- Exploit chance (EPSS)
- 4.89%
- Chance of exploitation in the next 30 days. Higher than 92.08% of scored vulnerabilities.
- Known exploited
- No
- Not in CISA's catalog
- Weakness
- CWE-502 Deserialization of Untrusted Data
- Fix
5.2.4.3- Upgrade actionpack to this version or later
Description
There is a strong parameters bypass vector in ActionPack.
Versions Affected: rails <= 6.0.3 Not affected: rails < 5.0.0 Fixed Versions: rails >= 5.2.4.3, rails >= 6.0.3.1
Impact
In some cases user supplied information can be inadvertently leaked from
Strong Parameters. Specifically the return value of each, or each_value,
or each_pair will return the underlying "untrusted" hash of data that was
read from the parameters. Applications that use this return value may be
inadvertently use untrusted user input.
Impacted code will look something like this:
def update
# Attacker has included the parameter: `{ is_admin: true }`
User.update(clean_up_params)
end
def clean_up_params
params.each { |k, v| SomeModel.check(v) if k == :name }
end
Note the mistaken use of each in the clean_up_params method in the above
example.
Workarounds
Do not use the return values of each, each_value, or each_pair in your
application.
Affected versions
RubyGems
| Package | Vulnerable | Fixed in |
|---|---|---|
| actionpack | >= 5.0.0, < 5.2.4.3 |
5.2.4.3 |
| actionpack | >= 6.0.0, < 6.0.3.1 |
6.0.3.1 |
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.
actionpack RubyGems → 5.2.4.3
- bundler
bundle update actionpack # Gemfile: gem "actionpack", ">= 5.2.4.3"
Severity breakdown
CVSS 3.1 7.5
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N
- Attack vector
- Network
- Attack complexity
- Low
- Privileges required
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- None
Weakness
CWE-502: Deserialization of Untrusted Data
The product deserializes untrusted data without sufficiently ensuring that the resulting data will be valid.
How to prevent it
- Architecture and Design, Implementation: If available, use the signing/sealing features of the programming language to assure that deserialized data has not been tainted. For example, a hash-based message authentication code (HMAC) could be used to ensure that data has not been modified.
- Implementation: When deserializing data, populate a new object rather than just deserializing. The result is that the data flows through safe input validation and that the functions are safe.
- Implementation: Explicitly define a final object() to prevent deserialization.
- Architecture and Design, Implementation: Make fields transient to protect them from deserialization. An attempt to serialize and then deserialize a class containing transient fields will result in NULLs where the transient data should be. This is an excellent way to prevent time, environment-based, or sensitive variables from being carried over and used improperly.
- Implementation: Avoid having unnecessary types or gadgets (a sequence of instances and method invocations that can self-execute during the deserialization process, often found in libraries) available that can be leveraged for malicious ends. This limits the potential for unintended or unauthorized types and gadgets to be leveraged by the attacker. Add only acceptable classes to an allowlist. Note: new gadgets are constantly being discovered, so this alone is not a sufficient mitigation.
- Architecture and Design, Implementation: Employ cryptography of the data or code for protection. However, it's important to note that it would still be client-side security. This is risky because if the client is compromised then the security implemented on the client (the cryptography) can be bypassed.
- 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
Advisories
Packages
Other links
- hackerone.com/reports/292797
- github.com/rubysec/ruby-advisory-db/blob/master/gems/actionpack/CVE-2020-8164.yml
- groups.google.com/forum
- groups.google.com/g/rubyonrails-security/c/f6ioe4sdpbY
- lists.debian.org/debian-lts-announce/2020/06/msg00022.html
- lists.debian.org/debian-lts-announce/2020/07/msg00013.html
- debian.org/security/2020/dsa-4766
- lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-security-announce/2020-09/msg00089.html
- lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-security-announce/2020-09/msg00093.html
- lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-security-announce/2020-09/msg00107.html
Timeline
- Published
- Last updated by the source
- Latest EPSS score
Related advisories
| Advisory | Severity | Why it's related |
|---|---|---|
| GHSA-6x85-j5j2-27jx actionpack Path Traversal vulnerability | High Known exploited | Also affects actionpack |
| GHSA-xrr4-p6fq-hjg7 Directory traversal vulnerability in Action View in Ruby on Rails | High Known exploited | Also affects actionpack |
| GHSA-pgm4-439c-5jp6 Rails has a possible XSS vulnerability in its Action Pack debug exceptions | Medium | Also affects actionpack |
| GHSA-vfm5-rmrh-j26v Possible Content Security Policy bypass in Action Dispatch | Low | Also affects actionpack |
| GHSA-vfg9-r3fq-jvx4 Possible ReDoS vulnerability in HTTP Token authentication in Action Controller | Medium | Also affects actionpack |
| GHSA-x76w-6vjr-8xgj Possible ReDoS vulnerability in query parameter filtering in Action Dispatch | Medium | Also affects actionpack |
| GHSA-fwhr-88qx-h9g7 Missing security headers in Action Pack on non-HTML responses | Critical | Also affects actionpack |
| GHSA-9822-6m93-xqf4 Rails has possible XSS Vulnerability in Action Controller | Medium | Also affects actionpack |
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