Skip to content

GHSA-9vh6-qfv6-vcqp CVE-2022-23064

snipe-IT vulnerable to host header injection

High Packagist
Severity
8.8 / 10
High · CVSS 3.1
Exploit chance (EPSS)
1.32%
Chance of exploitation in the next 30 days. Higher than 70.89% of scored vulnerabilities.
Known exploited
No
Not in CISA's catalog
Weakness
CWE-74 Improper Neutralization of Special Elements in Output Used by a Downstream Component ('Injection')
Fix
5.3.8
Upgrade snipe/snipe-it to this version or later

Description

Snipe-IT is a free, open-source IT asset/license management systemIn Snipe-IT, versions v3.0-alpha to v5.3.7 are vulnerable to Host Header Injection. By sending a specially crafted host header in the reset password request, it is possible to send password reset links to users which once clicked lead to an attacker controlled server and thus leading to password reset token leak. This can lead to account take over.

Affected versions

Packagist

PackageVulnerableFixed in
snipe/snipe-it
>= 3.0-alpha, < 5.3.8
5.3.8

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.

snipe/snipe-it Packagist → 5.3.8

composer
composer require snipe/snipe-it:^5.3.8

Severity breakdown

CVSS 3.1 8.8

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

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

Weakness

CWE-74: Improper Neutralization of Special Elements in Output Used by a Downstream Component ('Injection')

The product constructs all or part of a command, data structure, or record using externally-influenced input from an upstream component, but it does not neutralize or incorrectly neutralizes special elements that could modify how it is parsed or interpreted when it is sent to a downstream component.

How to prevent it
  • Requirements: Programming languages and supporting technologies might be chosen which are not subject to these issues.
  • Implementation: Utilize an appropriate mix of allowlist and denylist parsing to filter control-plane syntax from all input.

References

Timeline

  1. Published
  2. Last updated by the source
  3. Latest EPSS score
AdvisorySeverityWhy it's related
GHSA-396x-xmvh-p563
Snipe-IT: Stored XSS via Inline XML Rendering in the Uploaded Files API
Medium Also affects snipe/snipe-it
GHSA-p9h3-gvpq-5539
Snipe-IT: Stored XSS via Custom Field name in asset-list column headers
High Also affects snipe/snipe-it
GHSA-hxcx-9h4f-42xx
Snipe-IT: 2FA bypass via the API token flow
High Also affects snipe/snipe-it
GHSA-c8qc-wf67-342w
Snipe-IT: Stored DOM XSS via table selected-count IDs
Medium Also affects snipe/snipe-it
GHSA-r9r3-g9fp-3q4q
Snipe-IT: Maintenance Record Disclosure via Missing Authorization on GET
Medium Also affects snipe/snipe-it
GHSA-3hgv-jr5j-cg9x
Snipe-IT: Chained Information Disclosure and IDOR Leads to Full EULA File Takeover
Medium Also affects snipe/snipe-it
GHSA-c6w2-j4wq-mvwg
Snipe-IT: Tenant Isolation Bypass in FMCS Floater Mode
High Also affects snipe/snipe-it
GHSA-35cr-9hqq-p2mg
Snipe-IT: Cross-company deletion of pending checkout acceptances via unscoped report endpoint
Medium Also affects snipe/snipe-it
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