Skip to content

GHSA-9rmf-6qgj-g3wj CVE-2023-4304

Froxlor vulnerable to business logic errors

Low Packagist
Severity
3.8 / 10
Low · CVSS 3.0
Exploit chance (EPSS)
0.59%
Chance of exploitation in the next 30 days. Higher than 48.28% of scored vulnerabilities.
Known exploited
No
Not in CISA's catalog
Weakness
CWE-284 Improper Access Control
CWE-862 Missing Authorization
Fix
2.0.22
Upgrade froxlor/froxlor to this version or later

Description

Business Logic Errors in GitHub repository froxlor/froxlor prior to 2.0.22

Affected versions

Packagist

PackageVulnerableFixed in
froxlor/froxlor
< 2.0.22
2.0.22

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.

froxlor/froxlor Packagist → 2.0.22

composer
composer require froxlor/froxlor:^2.0.22

Severity breakdown

CVSS 3.0 3.8

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

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

Weakness

CWE-284: Improper Access Control

The product does not restrict or incorrectly restricts access to a resource from an unauthorized 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: Compartmentalize the system to have "safe" areas where trust boundaries can be unambiguously drawn. Do not allow sensitive data to go outside of the trust boundary and always be careful when interfacing with a compartment outside of the safe area. Ensure that appropriate compartmentalization is built into the system design, and the compartmentalization allows for and reinforces privilege separation functionality. Architects and designers should rely on the principle of least privilege to decide the appropriate time to use privileges and the time to drop privileges.

CWE-862: Missing Authorization

The product does not perform an authorization check when an actor attempts to access a resource or perform an action.

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-7788-ghfq-c6mh
Froxlor: Credential and 2FA secret disclosure via Froxlor API endpoints
Critical Also affects froxlor/froxlor
GHSA-xpr4-8vp6-c87j
Froxlor has CSRF Vulnerability in AJAX Endpoint — Missing Cross-Site Request Forgery Protection
Medium Also affects froxlor/froxlor
GHSA-5rw4-4665-cvwf
Froxlor DomainZones.add allows DNS zone-file RR injection via record/type fields
Medium Also affects froxlor/froxlor
GHSA-w27m-rmmf-g5w4
Froxlor: Second-Order SQL Injection via `Admins.add` `ipaddress` Parameter Allows Full Database Exfiltration
High Also affects froxlor/froxlor
GHSA-43gm-9rr3-cx7g
Froxlor: Stored XSS in DNS TXT Record Content Allows Customer-to-Admin Account Takeover
High Also affects froxlor/froxlor
GHSA-q4rm-m6xh-5pv7
Froxlor customer can create MySQL databases on disallowed servers via Mysqls.add API
Medium Also affects froxlor/froxlor
GHSA-mr9h-45p9-fg8h
Froxlor: Authenticated customers can read other customers' allowed sender aliases
Medium Also affects froxlor/froxlor
GHSA-f9rx-7wf7-jr36
Froxlor's API Authentication bypasses 2FA Authentication
High Also affects froxlor/froxlor
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