GHSA-mq6f-5xh5-hgcf BIT-harbor-2023-20902 CVE-2023-20902 GO-2023-2109
Harbor timing attack risk
- Severity
- 5.9 / 10
- Medium · CVSS 3.1
- Exploit chance (EPSS)
- 0.45%
- Chance of exploitation in the next 30 days. Higher than 39.32% of scored vulnerabilities.
- Known exploited
- No
- Not in CISA's catalog
- Weakness
- CWE-208 Observable Timing Discrepancy
- CWE-362 Concurrent Execution using Shared Resource with Improper Synchronization ('Race Condition')
- Fix
1.10.18- Upgrade github.com/goharbor/harbor to this version or later
Description
In the Harbor jobservice container, the comparison of secrets in the authenticator type is prone to timing attacks. The vulnerability occurs due to the following code: https://github.com/goharbor/harbor/blob/aaea068cceb4063ab89313d9785f2b40f35b0d63/src/jobservice/api/authenticator.go#L69-L69 To avoid this issue, constant time comparison should be used.
subtle.ConstantTimeCompare([]byte(expectedSecret), []byte(secret)) == 0
Impact
This attack might be possible theoretically, but no workable proof of concept is available, and access complexity is set at High. The jobservice exposes these APIs
Create a job task --- POST /api/v1/jobs
Get job task information --- GET /api/v1/jobs/{job_id}
Stop job task --- POST /api/v1/jobs/{job_id}
Get job log task --- GET /api/v1/jobs/{job_id}/log
Get job execution --- GET /api/v1/jobs/{job_id}/executions
Get job stats --- GET /api/v1/stats
Get job service configuration --- GET /api/v1/config
It is used to create jobs/stop job tasks and retrieve job task information. If an attacker obtains the secrets, it is possible to retrieve the job information, create a job, or stop a job task.
The following versions of Harbor are involved: <=Harbor 2.8.2, <=Harbor 2.7.2, <= Harbor 2.6.x, <=Harbor 1.10.17
Patches
Harbor 2.8.3, Harbor 2.7.3, Harbor 1.10.18
Workarounds
Because the jobservice only exposes HTTP service to harbor-core containers, blocking any inbound traffic from the external network to the jobservice container can reduce the risk.
Credits
Thanks to Porcupiney Hairs for reporting this issue.
Affected versions
Go
| Package | Vulnerable | Fixed in |
|---|---|---|
| github.com/goharbor/harbor | < 1.10.18 |
1.10.18 |
| github.com/goharbor/harbor | >= 2.0.0, < 2.7.3 |
2.7.3 |
| github.com/goharbor/harbor | >= 2.8.0, < 2.8.3 |
2.8.3 |
| github.com/goharbor/harbor | < 1.10.18>= 2.0.0+incompatible, < 2.7.3+incompatible>= 2.8.0+incompatible, < 2.8.3+incompatible |
1.10.182.7.3+incompatible2.8.3+incompatible |
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.
github.com/goharbor/harbor Go → 1.10.18
- go
go get github.com/goharbor/harbor@v1.10.18 && go mod tidy
Severity breakdown
CVSS 3.1 5.9
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N
- Attack vector
- Network
- Attack complexity
- High
- Privileges required
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- None
Weakness
CWE-208: Observable Timing Discrepancy
Two separate operations in a product require different amounts of time to complete, in a way that is observable to an actor and reveals security-relevant information about the state of the product, such as whether a particular operation was successful or not.
CWE-362: Concurrent Execution using Shared Resource with Improper Synchronization ('Race Condition')
The product contains a concurrent code sequence that requires temporary, exclusive access to a shared resource, but a timing window exists in which the shared resource can be modified by another code sequence operating concurrently.
How to prevent it
- Architecture and Design: In languages that support it, use synchronization primitives. Only wrap these around critical code to minimize the impact on performance.
- Architecture and Design: Use thread-safe capabilities such as the data access abstraction in Spring.
- Architecture and Design: Minimize the usage of shared resources in order to remove as much complexity as possible from the control flow and to reduce the likelihood of unexpected conditions occurring. Additionally, this will minimize the amount of synchronization necessary and may even help to reduce the likelihood of a denial of service where an attacker may be able to repeatedly trigger a critical section (CWE-400).
- Implementation: When using multithreading and operating on shared variables, only use thread-safe functions.
- Implementation: Use atomic operations on shared variables. Be wary of innocent-looking constructs such as "x++". This may appear atomic at the code layer, but it is actually non-atomic at the instruction layer, since it involves a read, followed by a computation, followed by a write.
- Implementation: Use a mutex if available, but be sure to avoid related weaknesses such as CWE-412.
- Implementation: Avoid double-checked locking (CWE-609) and other implementation errors that arise when trying to avoid the overhead of synchronization.
- Implementation: Disable interrupts or signals over critical parts of the code, but also make sure that the code does not go into a large or infinite loop.
- Implementation: Use the volatile type modifier for critical variables to avoid unexpected compiler optimization or reordering. This does not necessarily solve the synchronization problem, but it can help.
- Architecture and Design, Operation: Run your code using the lowest privileges that are required to accomplish the necessary tasks [REF-76]. If possible, create isolated accounts with limited privileges that are only used for a single task. That way, a successful attack will not immediately give the attacker access to the rest of the software or its environment. For example, database applications rarely need to run as the database administrator, especially in day-to-day operations.
References
Advisories
Packages
Other links
Timeline
- Published
- Last updated by the source
- Latest EPSS score
Related advisories
| Advisory | Severity | Why it's related |
|---|---|---|
| GHSA-prh4-vhfh-24mj Harbor: LDAP password and OIDC secret are not redacted in the audit log | Medium | Also affects github.com/goharbor/harbor |
| GHSA-hj7x-hmf2-hc2p Harbor allows the use of the default password for web UI login | Critical | Also affects github.com/goharbor/harbor |
| GHSA-h27m-3qw8-3pw8 Possible ORM Leak Vulnerability in the Harbor | Medium | Also affects github.com/goharbor/harbor |
| GHSA-f9vc-vf3r-pqqq Harbor repository description page has Cross-site Scripting vulnerability | Medium | Also affects github.com/goharbor/harbor |
| GHSA-r864-28pw-8682 Harbor fails to validate the user permissions when updating p2p preheat policies | High | Also affects github.com/goharbor/harbor |
| GHSA-hw28-333w-qxp3 Harbor fails to validate the user permissions when updating project configurations | Medium | Also affects github.com/goharbor/harbor |
| GHSA-vw63-824v-qf2j SQL Injection in Harbor scan log API | Medium | Also affects github.com/goharbor/harbor |
| GHSA-5757-v49g-f6r7 Open Redirect URL in Harbor | Medium | Also affects github.com/goharbor/harbor |
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