Skip to content

GHSA-rw98-5846-pqhx CVE-2022-0597

Open redirect in microweber

Medium Packagist
Severity
6.1 / 10
Medium · CVSS 3.1
Exploit chance (EPSS)
2.60%
Chance of exploitation in the next 30 days. Higher than 85.38% of scored vulnerabilities.
Known exploited
No
Not in CISA's catalog
Weakness
CWE-601 URL Redirection to Untrusted Site ('Open Redirect')
Fix
1.2.11
Upgrade microweber/microweber to this version or later

Description

Open Redirect in Packagist microweber/microweber prior to 1.2.11.

Affected versions

Packagist

PackageVulnerableFixed in
microweber/microweber
< 1.2.11
1.2.11

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.

microweber/microweber Packagist → 1.2.11

composer
composer require microweber/microweber:^1.2.11

Severity breakdown

CVSS 3.1 6.1

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

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

Weakness

CWE-601: URL Redirection to Untrusted Site ('Open Redirect')

The web application accepts a user-controlled input that specifies a link to an external site, and uses that link in a redirect.

How to prevent it
  • Implementation: Assume all input is malicious. Use an "accept known good" input validation strategy, i.e., use a list of acceptable inputs that strictly conform to specifications. Reject any input that does not strictly conform to specifications, or transform it into something that does. When performing input validation, consider all potentially relevant properties, including length, type of input, the full range of acceptable values, missing or extra inputs, syntax, consistency across related fields, and conformance to business rules. As an example of business rule logic, "boat" may be syntactically valid because it only contains alphanumeric characters, but it is not valid if the input is only expected to contain colors such as "red" or "blue." Do not rely exclusively on looking for malicious or malformed inputs. This is likely to miss at least one undesirable input, especially if the code's environment changes. This can give attackers enough room to bypass the intended validation. However, denylists can be useful for detecting potential attacks or determining which inputs are so malformed that they should be rejected outright. Use a list of approved URLs or domains to be used for redirection.
  • Architecture and Design: Use an intermediate disclaimer page that provides the user with a clear warning that they are leaving the current site. Implement a long timeout before the redirect occurs, or force the user to click on the link. Be careful to avoid XSS problems (CWE-79) when generating the disclaimer page.
  • Architecture and Design: When the set of acceptable objects, such as filenames or URLs, is limited or known, create a mapping from a set of fixed input values (such as numeric IDs) to the actual filenames or URLs, and reject all other inputs. For example, ID 1 could map to "/login.asp" and ID 2 could map to "http://www.example.com/". Features such as the ESAPI AccessReferenceMap [REF-45] provide this capability.
  • Architecture and Design: Ensure that no externally-supplied requests are honored by requiring that all redirect requests include a unique nonce generated by the application [REF-483]. Be sure that the nonce is not predictable (CWE-330).
  • Architecture and Design, Implementation: Understand all the potential areas where untrusted inputs can enter your software: parameters or arguments, cookies, anything read from the network, environment variables, reverse DNS lookups, query results, request headers, URL components, e-mail, files, filenames, databases, and any external systems that provide data to the application. Remember that such inputs may be obtained indirectly through API calls. Many open redirect problems occur because the programmer assumed that certain inputs could not be modified, such as cookies and hidden form fields.
  • Operation: Use an application firewall that can detect attacks against this weakness. It can be beneficial in cases in which the code cannot be fixed (because it is controlled by a third party), as an emergency prevention measure while more comprehensive software assurance measures are applied, or to provide defense in depth [REF-1481].

References

Timeline

  1. Published
  2. Last updated by the source
  3. Latest EPSS score
AdvisorySeverityWhy it's related
GHSA-vv4x-qcpq-wgrg
Microweber vulnerable to Path Traversal
High Also affects microweber/microweber
GHSA-6w5w-jx4x-vjvw
Microweber Cross-site Scripting vulnerability
Medium Also affects microweber/microweber
GHSA-5jg5-xqfw-rv92
Microweber has a Cross-site Scripting vulnerability
Medium Also affects microweber/microweber
GHSA-2x2j-3c2v-g3c2
Microweber XSS Vulnerability in the homepage Endpoint
High Also affects microweber/microweber
GHSA-mvj3-hc7j-vp74
Microweber has Reflected XSS Vulnerability in the layout Parameter
Medium Also affects microweber/microweber
GHSA-8357-fjvx-xrm8
Microweber has Reflected XSS Vulnerability in the id Parameter
Medium Also affects microweber/microweber
GHSA-782f-gxj5-xvqc
Microweber Has Stored XSS Vulnerability in User Profile Fields
High Also affects microweber/microweber
GHSA-j64v-xh5w-8hqj
Microweber CMS API has authenticated local file inclusion vulnerability
High Also affects microweber/microweber
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