CVE Vulnerabilities

CVE-2007-6420

Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF)

Published: Jan 12, 2008 | Modified: Apr 26, 2024
CVSS 3.x
N/A
Source:
NVD
CVSS 2.x
4.3 MEDIUM
AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:N/I:P/A:N
RedHat/V2
RedHat/V3
Ubuntu
LOW

Cross-site request forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in the balancer-manager in mod_proxy_balancer for Apache HTTP Server 2.2.x allows remote attackers to gain privileges via unspecified vectors.

Weakness

The web application does not, or can not, sufficiently verify whether a well-formed, valid, consistent request was intentionally provided by the user who submitted the request.

Affected Software

Name Vendor Start Version End Version
Http_server Apache 2.2.0 (including) 2.2.0 (including)
Http_server Apache 2.2.2 (including) 2.2.2 (including)
Http_server Apache 2.2.3 (including) 2.2.3 (including)
Http_server Apache 2.2.4 (including) 2.2.4 (including)
Http_server Apache 2.2.5 (including) 2.2.5 (including)
Http_server Apache 2.2.6 (including) 2.2.6 (including)
Http_server Apache 2.2.8 (including) 2.2.8 (including)
Apache2 Ubuntu devel *
Apache2 Ubuntu edgy *
Apache2 Ubuntu feisty *
Apache2 Ubuntu gutsy *
Apache2 Ubuntu hardy *
Apache2 Ubuntu intrepid *
Apache2 Ubuntu upstream *

Potential Mitigations

  • Use a vetted library or framework that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid.
  • For example, use anti-CSRF packages such as the OWASP CSRFGuard. [REF-330]
  • Another example is the ESAPI Session Management control, which includes a component for CSRF. [REF-45]
  • Use the “double-submitted cookie” method as described by Felten and Zeller:
  • When a user visits a site, the site should generate a pseudorandom value and set it as a cookie on the user’s machine. The site should require every form submission to include this value as a form value and also as a cookie value. When a POST request is sent to the site, the request should only be considered valid if the form value and the cookie value are the same.
  • Because of the same-origin policy, an attacker cannot read or modify the value stored in the cookie. To successfully submit a form on behalf of the user, the attacker would have to correctly guess the pseudorandom value. If the pseudorandom value is cryptographically strong, this will be prohibitively difficult.
  • This technique requires Javascript, so it may not work for browsers that have Javascript disabled. [REF-331]

References