CVE-2020-1760
Description
A flaw was found in the Ceph Object Gateway, where it supports request sent by an anonymous user in Amazon S3. This flaw could lead to potential XSS attacks due to the lack of proper neutralization of untrusted input.
Statement
Red Hat OpenStack Platform 15 (RHOSP) packages Ceph but no longer uses it, instead pulling ceph directly from the Red Hat Ceph Storage 4 repository. For this reason, RHOSP will not be updated for this flaw.
This issue affects the versions of ceph as shipped with Red Hat Ceph Storage 3, 4 and Red Hat Openshift Container Storage 4.2 as it allows unauthenticated requests sent by an anonymous user for Amazon S3.
Mitigation
* Mitigation provided by DigitalOcean:
Mitigation relies on the HAProxy load-balancers in front of RGW, and uses HAProxy ACLs combined with in-house Lua embedded in HAProxy.
1. Detect usage of the query-parameters without any signature (either pre-signed or header), and return S3-formatted error.
2. Validate the content in the query-parameters, return S3-formatted error.
HAProxy mitigation:
===
acl req_s3_GetObject REDACTED ## redacted uses internal Lua to detect GetObject
acl has_accesskey REDACTED ## redacted uses internal Lua to detect & validate signature
# detection 1, QPs present
acl req_s3_GetObject_urlp_response url_param(response-cache-control) -m found
acl req_s3_GetObject_urlp_response url_param(response-expires) -m found
acl req_s3_GetObject_urlp_response url_param(response-content-disposition) -m found
acl req_s3_GetObject_urlp_response url_param(response-content-encoding) -m found
acl req_s3_GetObject_urlp_response url_param(response-content-language) -m found
acl req_s3_GetObject_urlp_response url_param(response-content-type) -m found
# detection 2, QPs containing unprintable ascii incl CRLR
acl req_s3_GetObject_urlp_response_crlf url_param(response-cache-control) -m sub -i %00 %01 %02 %03 %04 %05 %06 %07 %08 %09 %0a %0b %0c %0d %0e %0f %10 %11 %12 %13 %14 %15 %16 %17 %18 %19 %1a %1b %1c %1d %1e %1f
acl req_s3_GetObject_urlp_response_crlf url_param(response-expires) -m sub -i %00 %01 %02 %03 %04 %05 %06 %07 %08 %09 %0a %0b %0c %0d %0e %0f %10 %11 %12 %13 %14 %15 %16 %17 %18 %19 %1a %1b %1c %1d %1e %1f
acl req_s3_GetObject_urlp_response_crlf url_param(response-content-disposition) -m sub -i %00 %01 %02 %03 %04 %05 %06 %07 %08 %09 %0a %0b %0c %0d %0e %0f %10 %11 %12 %13 %14 %15 %16 %17 %18 %19 %1a %1b %1c %1d %1e %1f
acl req_s3_GetObject_urlp_response_crlf url_param(response-content-encoding) -m sub -i %00 %01 %02 %03 %04 %05 %06 %07 %08 %09 %0a %0b %0c %0d %0e %0f %10 %11 %12 %13 %14 %15 %16 %17 %18 %19 %1a %1b %1c %1d %1e %1f
acl req_s3_GetObject_urlp_response_crlf url_param(response-content-language) -m sub -i %00 %01 %02 %03 %04 %05 %06 %07 %08 %09 %0a %0b %0c %0d %0e %0f %10 %11 %12 %13 %14 %15 %16 %17 %18 %19 %1a %1b %1c %1d %1e %1f
acl req_s3_GetObject_urlp_response_crlf url_param(response-content-type) -m sub -i %00 %01 %02 %03 %04 %05 %06 %07 %08 %09 %0a %0b %0c %0d %0e %0f %10 %11 %12 %13 %14 %15 %16 %17 %18 %19 %1a %1b %1c %1d %1e %1f
# block for detection 1
http-request use-service lua.REDACTED if req_s3_GetObject req_s3_GetObject_urlp_response !has_accesskey
# block for detection 2
http-request use-service lua.REDACTED if req_s3_GetObject req_s3_GetObject_urlp_response_crlf
===
Common Vulnerability Scoring System (CVSS) Score Details
Info alert:Important note
CVSS scores for open source components depend on vendor-specific factors (e.g. version or build chain). Therefore, Red Hat's score and impact rating can be different from NVD and other vendors. Red Hat remains the authoritative CVE Naming Authority (CNA) source for its products and services (see Red Hat classifications).
CVSS v3 Score Breakdown
| Red Hat | NVD | cve.org | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Base Score | 5.8 | 6.1 | N/A |
| Attack Vector | Network | Network | N/A |
| Attack Complexity | High | Low | N/A |
| Privileges Required | None | None | N/A |
| User Interaction | Required | Required | N/A |
| Scope | Changed | Changed | N/A |
| Confidentiality | Low | Low | N/A |
| Integrity Impact | Low | Low | N/A |
| Availability Impact | Low | None | N/A |
Vector
Red Hat: CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:L/I:L/A:L
NVD: CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:L/I:L/A:N
Understanding the Weakness (CWE)
Access Control,Confidentiality
Technical Impact: Bypass Protection Mechanism; Read Application Data
The most common attack performed with cross-site scripting involves the disclosure of private information stored in user cookies, such as session information. Typically, a malicious user will craft a client-side script, which -- when parsed by a web browser -- performs some activity on behalf of the victim to an attacker-controlled system (such as sending all site cookies to a given E-mail address). This could be especially dangerous to the site if the victim has administrator privileges to manage that site. This script will be loaded and run by each user visiting the web site. Since the site requesting to run the script has access to the cookies in question, the malicious script does also.
Integrity,Confidentiality,Availability
Technical Impact: Execute Unauthorized Code or Commands
In some circumstances it may be possible to run arbitrary code on a victim's computer when cross-site scripting is combined with other flaws, for example, "drive-by hacking."
Confidentiality,Integrity,Availability,Access Control
Technical Impact: Execute Unauthorized Code or Commands; Bypass Protection Mechanism; Read Application Data
The consequence of an XSS attack is the same regardless of whether it is stored or reflected. The difference is in how the payload arrives at the server. XSS can cause a variety of problems for the end user that range in severity from an annoyance to complete account compromise. Some cross-site scripting vulnerabilities can be exploited to manipulate or steal cookies, create requests that can be mistaken for those of a valid user, compromise confidential information, or execute malicious code on the end user systems for a variety of nefarious purposes. Other damaging attacks include the disclosure of end user files, installation of Trojan horse programs, redirecting the user to some other page or site, running "Active X" controls (under Microsoft Internet Explorer) from sites that a user perceives as trustworthy, and modifying presentation of content.
Acknowledgements
Red Hat would like to thank Robin H. Johnson (DigitalOcean) for reporting this issue. Upstream acknowledges William Bowling as the original reporter.
Frequently Asked Questions
Not sure what something means? Check out our Security Glossary.
Want to get errata notifications? Sign up here.
