CVE-2020-26217
Description
A flaw was found in xstream. An unsafe deserialization of user-supplied XML, in conjunction with relying on the default deny list, allows a remote attacker to perform a variety of attacks including a remote code execution of arbitrary code in the context of the JVM running the XStream application. The highest threat from this vulnerability is to data confidentiality and integrity as well as system availability.
Statement
OpenShift Container Platform (OCP) delivers jenkins package with bundled XStream library. Due to JEP-200 Jenkins project [1] and advisory SECURITY-383 [2], OCP jenkins package is not affected by this flaw.
[1] https://github.com/jenkinsci/jep/blob/master/jep/200/README.adoc [2] https://www.jenkins.io/security/advisory/2017-02-01/ (see SECURITY-383 / CVE-2017-2608)
Mitigation
Depending on the version of XStream used there are various usage patterns that mitigate this flaw, though we would strongly recommend using the allow list approach if at all possible as there are likely more class combinations the deny list approach may not address.
Allow list approach
java
XStream xstream = new XStream();
XStream.setupDefaultSecurity(xstream);
xstream.allowTypesByWildcard(new String[] {"com.misc.classname"})
Deny list for XStream 1.4.13
java
xstream.denyTypes(new String[]{ "javax.imageio.ImageIO$ContainsFilter" });
xstream.denyTypes(new Class[]{ java.lang.ProcessBuilder.class });
Deny list for XStream 1.4.7 -> 1.4.12
java
xstream.denyTypes(new String[]{ "javax.imageio.ImageIO$ContainsFilter" });
xstream.denyTypes(new Class[]{ java.lang.ProcessBuilder.class, java.beans.EventHandler.class, java.lang.ProcessBuilder.class, java.lang.Void.class, void.class });
Deny list for versions prior to XStream 1.4.7
java
xstream.registerConverter(new Converter() {
public boolean canConvert(Class type) {
return type != null && (type == java.beans.EventHandler.class || type == java.lang.ProcessBuilder.class || type == java.lang.Void.class || void.class || type.getName().equals("javax.imageio.ImageIO$ContainsFilter") || Proxy.isProxy(type));
}
public Object unmarshal(HierarchicalStreamReader reader, UnmarshallingContext context) {
throw new ConversionException("Unsupported type due to security reasons.");
}
public void marshal(Object source, HierarchicalStreamWriter writer, MarshallingContext context) {
throw new ConversionException("Unsupported type due to security reasons.");
}
}, XStream.PRIORITY_LOW);
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 | 9 | 8.8 | N/A |
| Attack Vector | Network | Network | N/A |
| Attack Complexity | High | Low | N/A |
| Privileges Required | None | Low | N/A |
| User Interaction | None | None | N/A |
| Scope | Changed | Unchanged | N/A |
| Confidentiality | High | High | N/A |
| Integrity Impact | High | High | N/A |
| Availability Impact | High | High | N/A |
Vector
Red Hat: CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H
NVD: CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
Understanding the Weakness (CWE)
Integrity
Technical Impact: Modify Application Data; Unexpected State
Attackers can modify unexpected objects or data that was assumed to be safe from modification. Deserialized data or code could be modified without using the provided accessor functions, or unexpected functions could be invoked.
Availability
Technical Impact: DoS: Resource Consumption (CPU)
If a function is making an assumption on when to terminate, based on a sentry in a string, it could easily never terminate.
Other
Technical Impact: Varies by Context
The consequences can vary widely, because it depends on which objects or methods are being deserialized, and how they are used. Making an assumption that the code in the deserialized object is valid is dangerous and can enable exploitation. One example is attackers using gadget chains to perform unauthorized actions, such as generating a shell.
Frequently Asked Questions
Not sure what something means? Check out our Security Glossary.
Want to get errata notifications? Sign up here.