Skip to content

GHSA-qjxf-6pr8-j87v CVE-2013-4198 PYSEC-2014-62

Plone's authenticated users able to alter their password despite of policy definition

Medium PyPI
Severity
0.0 / 10
Medium · CVSS 4.0
Exploit chance (EPSS)
1.12%
Chance of exploitation in the next 30 days. Higher than 66.12% of scored vulnerabilities.
Known exploited
No
Not in CISA's catalog
Weakness
CWE-863 Incorrect Authorization
Fix
4.2.6
Upgrade plone to this version or later

Description

mail_password.py in Plone 2.1 through 4.1, 4.2.x through 4.2.5, and 4.3.x through 4.3.1 allows remote authenticated users to bypass the prohibition on password changes via the forgotten password email functionality.

Affected versions

PyPI

PackageVulnerableFixed in
plone
>= 2.1, <= 4.1
No fix yet
plone
>= 4.2, < 4.2.6
4.2.6
plone
>= 4.3, < 4.3.2
4.3.2
plone
>= 2.1, < 4.1.1
>= 4.2, < 4.2.6
>= 4.3, < 4.3.2
4.1.1
4.2.6
4.3.2

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.

plone PyPI → 4.2.6

pip
pip install --upgrade "plone>=4.2.6"
poetry
poetry add "plone>=4.2.6"
uv
uv add "plone>=4.2.6"

Severity breakdown

CVSS 4.0 0.0

CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:N/VI:L/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N

Attack vector
Network
Attack complexity
Low
Attack requirements
None
Privileges required
Low
User interaction
None
Confidentiality (vulnerable system)
None
Integrity (vulnerable system)
Low
Availability (vulnerable system)
None
Confidentiality (subsequent systems)
None
Integrity (subsequent systems)
None
Availability (subsequent systems)
None

CVSS 3.1 4.3

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

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

Weakness

CWE-863: Incorrect Authorization

The product performs an authorization check when an actor attempts to access a resource or perform an action, but it does not correctly perform the check.

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-xg5p-8wg5-rhxm
Phone information disclosure vulnerability
High Also affects plone
GHSA-5xfx-55x4-j223
Cross-Frame Scripting vulnerability has been found on Plone CMS
High Also affects plone
GHSA-47p5-p3jw-w78w
Server-Side Request Forgery in Plone CMS
High Also affects plone
GHSA-cvwc-g7fw-7xrj
Plone XSS Vulnerability
Medium Also affects plone
GHSA-pwgm-jvqv-6v8p
Plone anonymous access to sub-objects in CMFEditions where KwAsAttributes classes were publishable
High Also affects plone
GHSA-46f9-f8jm-mw2x
Plone Cross-site Scripting vulnerability in the LiveSearch module
Medium Also affects plone
GHSA-hjp5-hv33-q58g
Plone credentials stored in session cookie
Medium Also affects plone
GHSA-593c-j348-f3gv
Plone Improper Session Management
High Also affects plone
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