CVE-2020-10771

Public on

Last Modified: UTC

ModerateModerate ImpactWhat does this mean?
DescriptionAdditional informationCVSS Score DetailsWeakness (CWE)AcknowledgementsFAQ

Description

A flaw was found in infinispan-server-rest version 10, where it is possible to perform various actions that could have side effects using GET requests. This flaw allows an attacker to perform a Cross-site request forgery (CSRF) attack.

A flaw was found in infinispan-server-rest version 10, where it is possible to perform various actions that could have side effects using GET requests. This flaw allows an attacker to perform a Cross-site request forgery (CSRF) attack.

Additional information

  • Bugzilla 1846293: infinispan-server-rest: Actions with effects should not be permitted via GET requests using REST API
  • CWE-352: Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF)
  • FAQ: Frequently asked questions about CVE-2020-10771

Common Vulnerability Scoring System (CVSS) Score Details

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 HatNVD

CVSS v3 Base Score

7.1

7.1

Attack Vector

Network

Network

Attack Complexity

Low

Low

Privileges Required

None

None

User Interaction

Required

Required

Scope

Unchanged

Unchanged

Confidentiality Impact

None

None

Integrity Impact

Low

Low

Availability Impact

High

High

CVSS v3 Vector

Red Hat: CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:H

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

Red Hat CVSS v3 Score Explanation

We believe the correct CVSS score should be : 8.2/CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:N/I:L/A:H PR:N Privilege required should be none and we have changed it to none to match NVD score. UI:R User interaction is indeed required and hence we have changed it to UI:R to match with NVD. C:N The operations which are allowed with GET requests are : GET /rest/v2/server?action=stop GET /rest/v2/cluster?action=stop GET /rest/v2/tasks/myTask?action=exec&param.p1=v1&param.p2=v2 GET /rest/v2/cache-managers/{cacheManagerName}/x-site/backups/{siteName}?action=cancel-push-state GET /rest/v2/cache-managers/{cacheManagerName}/x-site/backups/{siteName}?action=start-push-state GET /rest/v2/cache-managers/{cacheManagerName}/x-site/backups/{siteName}?action=bring-online GET /rest/v2/cache-managers/{cacheManagerName}/x-site/backups/{siteName}?action=take-offline GET /rest/v2/counters/{counterName}?action=compareAndSet&expect={expect}&update={update} GET /rest/v2/counters/{counterName}?action=compareAndSwap&expect={expect}&update={update} GET /rest/v2/counters/{counterName}?action=decrement GET /rest/v2/counters/{counterName}?action=add&delta={delta} GET /rest/v2/counters/{counterName}?action=increment GET /rest/v2/counters/{counterName}?action=reset GET /v2/caches/{cacheName}/x-site/backups/{siteName}?action=cancel-receive-state And none of them impact the confidentiality of server, hence we have marked it none. I:L Using just the simple GET request (without BODY), it is not possible to completely modify the content however it is still possible to increase/decrease the values or delete something hence we have marked it Low instead of high. A:H Availability should be high because a successful attack we can cause server to stop/shutdown. We have changed it high to match with NVD score.

We believe the correct CVSS score should be : 8.2/CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:N/I:L/A:H

PR:N Privilege required should be none and we have changed it to none to match NVD score.

UI:R User interaction is indeed required and hence we have changed it to UI:R to match with NVD.

C:N The operations which are allowed with GET requests are :

GET /rest/v2/server?action=stop GET /rest/v2/cluster?action=stop GET /rest/v2/tasks/myTask?action=exec&param.p1=v1&param.p2=v2 GET /rest/v2/cache-managers/{cacheManagerName}/x-site/backups/{siteName}?action=cancel-push-state GET /rest/v2/cache-managers/{cacheManagerName}/x-site/backups/{siteName}?action=start-push-state GET /rest/v2/cache-managers/{cacheManagerName}/x-site/backups/{siteName}?action=bring-online GET /rest/v2/cache-managers/{cacheManagerName}/x-site/backups/{siteName}?action=take-offline GET /rest/v2/counters/{counterName}?action=compareAndSet&expect={expect}&update={update} GET /rest/v2/counters/{counterName}?action=compareAndSwap&expect={expect}&update={update} GET /rest/v2/counters/{counterName}?action=decrement GET /rest/v2/counters/{counterName}?action=add&delta={delta} GET /rest/v2/counters/{counterName}?action=increment GET /rest/v2/counters/{counterName}?action=reset GET /v2/caches/{cacheName}/x-site/backups/{siteName}?action=cancel-receive-state

And none of them impact the confidentiality of server, hence we have marked it none.

I:L Using just the simple GET request (without BODY), it is not possible to completely modify the content however it is still possible to increase/decrease the values or delete something hence we have marked it Low instead of high.

A:H Availability should be high because a successful attack we can cause server to stop/shutdown. We have changed it high to match with NVD score.

Acknowledgements

This issue was discovered by Diego Lovison (Red Hat).

Frequently Asked Questions

Why is Red Hat's CVSS v3 score or Impact different from other vendors?

For open source software shipped by multiple vendors, the CVSS base scores may vary for each vendor's version depending on the version they ship, how they ship it, the platform, and even how the software is compiled. This makes scoring of vulnerabilities difficult for third-party vulnerability databases such as NVD that only provide a single CVSS base score for each vulnerability. Red Hat scores reflect how a vulnerability affects our products specifically.

For more information, see https://access.redhat.com/solutions/762393.

My product is listed as "Under investigation" or "Affected", when will Red Hat release a fix for this vulnerability?

  • "Under investigation" doesn't necessarily mean that the product is affected by this vulnerability. It only means that our Analysis Team is still working on determining whether the product is affected and how it is affected.
  • The term "Affected" means that our Analysis team has determined that this product, such as Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8 or OpenShift Container Platform 4, is affected by this vulnerability and a fix may be released to address this issue in the near future. This includes all minor releases of this product unless noted otherwise in the Statement text.

What can I do if my product is listed as "Will not fix"?

A "will not fix" status means that a fix for an affected product version is not planned or not possible due to complexity, which may create additional risk.

Available options depend mostly on the Impact of the vulnerability and the current Life Cycle phase of your product. Overall, you have the following options:
  • Upgrade to a supported product version that includes a fix for this vulnerability (recommended).
  • Apply a mitigation (if one exists).
  • Open a support case to request a prioritization of releasing a fix for this vulnerability.

What can I do if my product is listed as "Fix deferred"?

A deferred status means that a fix for an affected product version is not guaranteed due to higher-priority development work.

Available options depend mostly on the Impact of the vulnerability and the current Life Cycle phase of your product. Overall, you have the following options:
  • Apply a mitigation (if one exists).
  • Open a support case to request a prioritization of releasing a fix for this vulnerability.
  • Red Hat Engineering focuses on addressing high-priority issues based on their complexity or limited lifecycle support. Therefore, lower-priority issues will not receive immediate fixes.

What is a mitigation?

A mitigation is an action that can be taken to reduce the impact of a security vulnerability, without deploying any fixes.

I have a Red Hat product but it is not in the above list, is it affected?

The listed products were found to include one or more of the components that this vulnerability affects. These products underwent a thorough evaluation to determine their affectedness by this vulnerability. Note that layered products (such as container-based offerings) that consume affected components from any of the products listed in this table may be affected and are not represented.

Why is my security scanner reporting my product as vulnerable to this vulnerability even though my product version is fixed or not affected?

In order to maintain code stability and compatibility, Red Hat usually does not rebase packages to entirely new versions. Instead, we backport fixes and new features to an older version of the package we distribute. This can result in some security scanners that only consider the package version to report the package as vulnerable. To avoid this, we suggest that you use an approved vulnerability scanner from our Red Hat Vulnerability Scanner Certification program.

Want to get errata notifications? Sign up here.