GHSA-8v23-w4w5-w83c BIT-moodle-2022-45149 CVE-2022-45149
Cross-Site Request Forgery in Moodle
- Severity
- 5.4 / 10
- Medium · CVSS 3.1
- Exploit chance (EPSS)
- 0.44%
- Chance of exploitation in the next 30 days. Higher than 38.32% of scored vulnerabilities.
- Known exploited
- No
- Not in CISA's catalog
- Weakness
- CWE-352 Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF)
- Fix
3.9.18- Upgrade moodle/moodle to this version or later
Description
A vulnerability was found in Moodle which exists due to insufficient validation of the HTTP request origin in course redirect URL. A user's CSRF token was unnecessarily included in the URL when being redirected to a course they have just restored. A remote attacker can trick the victim to visit a specially crafted web page and perform arbitrary actions on behalf of the victim on the vulnerable website. This flaw allows an attacker to perform cross-site request forgery attacks.
Affected versions
Packagist
| Package | Vulnerable | Fixed in |
|---|---|---|
| moodle/moodle | >= 3.9.0, < 3.9.18 |
3.9.18 |
| moodle/moodle | >= 3.11.0, < 3.11.11 |
3.11.11 |
| moodle/moodle | >= 4.0.0, < 4.0.5 |
4.0.5 |
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.
moodle/moodle Packagist → 3.9.18
- composer
composer require moodle/moodle:^3.9.18
Severity breakdown
CVSS 3.1 5.4
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:N
- Attack vector
- Network
- Attack complexity
- Low
- Privileges required
- None
- User interaction
- Required
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- Low
- 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
Advisories
Other links
- bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi
- lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-announce@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/2DHYI…
- lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-announce@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/74SXN…
- lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-announce@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/NLRJB…
- moodle.org/mod/forum/discuss.php
- git.moodle.org/gw
Timeline
- Published
- Last updated by the source
- Latest EPSS score
Related advisories
| Advisory | Severity | Why it's related |
|---|---|---|
| GHSA-cg8j-5cr2-568q Moodle TeX formula editor is vulnerable to DoS through lack of execution time limits | Medium | Also affects moodle/moodle |
| GHSA-ggxq-2mg9-8966 Moodle has a Remote Code Execution risk via file restore | High | Also affects moodle/moodle |
| GHSA-8jrv-wx83-w3xj Moodle Inserts Sensitive Information Into Sent Data | Medium | Also affects moodle/moodle |
| GHSA-hcm6-q6pc-xfhm Moodle has an authorization logic flaw | Critical | Also affects moodle/moodle |
| GHSA-vwhw-vp9v-q9c9 Moodle vulnerable to Cross-site Scripting | Medium | Also affects moodle/moodle |
| GHSA-5cx4-w4fh-fr57 Moodle Affected by Improper Restriction of Excessive Authentication Attempts | High | Also affects moodle/moodle |
| GHSA-qv78-6gpp-hm68 Moodle Open Redirect vulnerability | Medium | Also affects moodle/moodle |
| GHSA-qfh6-h7j6-fvjv Moodle formula injection vulnerability | High | Also affects moodle/moodle |
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