Skip to content
Log inStart free trial

GHSA-wcx9-ccpj-hx3c CVE-2024-58398 GO-2024-3228

Coder vulnerable to post-auth URL redirection to untrusted site ('Open Redirect')

Medium Go
Severity
0.0 / 10
Medium · CVSS 4.0
Exploit chance (EPSS)
0.27%
Chance of exploitation in the next 30 days. Higher than 19.03% of scored vulnerabilities.
Known exploited
No
Not in CISA's catalog
Weakness
CWE-601 URL Redirection to Untrusted Site ('Open Redirect')
Fix
2.16.1
Upgrade github.com/coder/coder/v2 to this version or later

Description

Summary

An issue on Coder's login page allows attackers to craft a Coder URL that when clicked by a logged in user could redirect them to a website the attacker controls, e.g. https://google.com.

Details

On the login page, Coder checks for the presence of a redirect query parameter. On successful login, the user would be redirected to the location of the parameter. Improper sanitization allows attackers to specify a URL outside of the Coder application to redirect users to.

Impact

Coder users could potentially be redirected to a untrusted website if tricked into clicking a URL crafted by the attacker. Coder authentication tokens are not leaked to the resulting website.

To check if your deployment is vulnerable, visit the following URL for your Coder deployment:

  • https://<coder url>/login?redirect=https%3A%2F%2Fcoder.com%2Fdocs

Patched Versions

This vulnerability is remedied in

  • v2.16.1
  • v2.15.3
  • v2.14.4

All versions prior to 2.3.1 are not affected.

Thanks

References

https://github.com/coder/coder/security/advisories/GHSA-wcx9-ccpj-hx3c https://github.com/coder/coder/commit/69c1d981e3131e50d52b01f6a360abadaad699e6

Affected versions

Go

PackageVulnerableFixed in
github.com/coder/coder
all versions
 No fix yet
github.com/coder/coder/v2
>= 2.16.0, < 2.16.1
2.16.1
github.com/coder/coder/v2
>= 2.15.0, < 2.15.3
2.15.3
github.com/coder/coder/v2
>= 2.3.1, < 2.14.4
2.14.4
github.com/coder/coder/v2
>= 2.3.1, < 2.14.4
>= 2.15.0, < 2.15.3
>= 2.16.0, < 2.16.1
2.14.4
2.15.3
2.16.1

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/coder/coder/v2 Go → 2.16.1

go
go get github.com/coder/coder/v2@v2.16.1 && go mod tidy

Severity breakdown

CVSS 4.0 0.0

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

Attack vector
Adjacent
Attack complexity
Low
Attack requirements
None
Privileges required
None
User interaction
Passive
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:N/UI:R/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N

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

Packages

Other links

Timeline

  1. Published
  2. Last updated by the source
  3. Latest EPSS score
AdvisorySeverityWhy it's related
GHSA-h58c-xccx-75m3
Coder: Stored HTML injection via unescaped ApplicationName and LogoURL appearance settings
Medium Also affects github.com/coder/coder
GHSA-8fxq-53rx-ph5f
Coder: Login endpoint user enumeration via timing-defense placeholder in password comparison
Medium Also affects github.com/coder/coder
GHSA-qrwj-vh9x-gw5v
Coder's workspace agent API insecure redirect handling allowed cross-agent file read and write
High Also affects github.com/coder/coder
GHSA-5wg6-jmq2-53pw
Coder's workspace app CORS origin check can be bypassed via UUID-based subdomain spoofing
Medium Also affects github.com/coder/coder
GHSA-7qw2-f75v-62f7
Coder vulnerable to stored HTML injection via workspace agent logs in AgentLogLine component
Medium Also affects github.com/coder/coder
GHSA-84rm-42xw-mx52
Coder's AI Bridge Proxy skips TLS certificate verification in default configuration
High Also affects github.com/coder/coder
GHSA-wqxv-w64v-5wh6
Suspended Coder users retain access to AI Bridge LLM proxy endpoints
Medium Also affects github.com/coder/coder
GHSA-f5vp-w269-392g
Coder vulnerable to denial of service via unbounded request body in AI Bridge provider endpoints
Medium Also affects github.com/coder/coder
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