CVE Vulnerabilities

CVE-2009-1525

Improper Input Validation

Published: May 05, 2009 | Modified: Aug 17, 2017
CVSS 3.x
N/A
Source:
NVD
CVSS 2.x
8.5 HIGH
AV:N/AC:M/Au:S/C:C/I:C/A:C
RedHat/V2
RedHat/V3
Ubuntu

CMD_DB in JBMC Software DirectAdmin before 1.334 allows remote authenticated users to gain privileges via shell metacharacters in the name parameter during a restore action.

Weakness

The product receives input or data, but it does not validate or incorrectly validates that the input has the properties that are required to process the data safely and correctly.

Affected Software

Name Vendor Start Version End Version
Directadmin Jbmc-software 1.16 1.16
Directadmin Jbmc-software 1.02 1.02
Directadmin Jbmc-software 1.17 1.17
Directadmin Jbmc-software 1.282 1.282
Directadmin Jbmc-software 1.235 1.235
Directadmin Jbmc-software 1.231 1.231
Directadmin Jbmc-software 1.05 1.05
Directadmin Jbmc-software 1.281 1.281
Directadmin Jbmc-software 1.255 1.255
Directadmin Jbmc-software 1.205 1.205
Directadmin Jbmc-software 1.332 1.332
Directadmin Jbmc-software 1.192 1.192
Directadmin Jbmc-software 1.221 1.221
Directadmin Jbmc-software 1.23 1.23
Directadmin Jbmc-software 1.232 1.232
Directadmin Jbmc-software 1.12 1.12
Directadmin Jbmc-software 1.204 1.204
Directadmin Jbmc-software 1.264 1.264
Directadmin Jbmc-software 1.291 1.291
Directadmin Jbmc-software 1.111 1.111
Directadmin Jbmc-software 1.225 1.225
Directadmin Jbmc-software 1.28 1.28
Directadmin Jbmc-software * 1.333
Directadmin Jbmc-software 1.172 1.172
Directadmin Jbmc-software 1.286 1.286
Directadmin Jbmc-software 1.244 1.244
Directadmin Jbmc-software 1.315 1.315
Directadmin Jbmc-software 1.253 1.253
Directadmin Jbmc-software 1.313 1.313
Directadmin Jbmc-software 1.081 1.081
Directadmin Jbmc-software 1.201 1.201
Directadmin Jbmc-software 1.19 1.19
Directadmin Jbmc-software 1.224 1.224
Directadmin Jbmc-software 1.211 1.211
Directadmin Jbmc-software 1.261 1.261
Directadmin Jbmc-software 1.13 1.13
Directadmin Jbmc-software 1.222 1.222
Directadmin Jbmc-software 1.293 1.293
Directadmin Jbmc-software 1.29 1.29
Directadmin Jbmc-software 1.1941 1.1941
Directadmin Jbmc-software 1.193 1.193
Directadmin Jbmc-software 1.251 1.251
Directadmin Jbmc-software 1.31 1.31
Directadmin Jbmc-software 1.252 1.252
Directadmin Jbmc-software 1.242 1.242
Directadmin Jbmc-software 1.213 1.213
Directadmin Jbmc-software 1.312 1.312
Directadmin Jbmc-software 1.203 1.203
Directadmin Jbmc-software 1.273 1.273
Directadmin Jbmc-software 1.1741 1.1741
Directadmin Jbmc-software 1.202 1.202
Directadmin Jbmc-software 1.21 1.21
Directadmin Jbmc-software 1.266 1.266
Directadmin Jbmc-software 1.15 1.15
Directadmin Jbmc-software 1.22 1.22
Directadmin Jbmc-software 1.26 1.26
Directadmin Jbmc-software 1.181 1.181
Directadmin Jbmc-software 1.294 1.294
Directadmin Jbmc-software 1.24 1.24
Directadmin Jbmc-software 1.06 1.06
Directadmin Jbmc-software 1.27 1.27
Directadmin Jbmc-software 1.243 1.243
Directadmin Jbmc-software 1.302 1.302
Directadmin Jbmc-software 0.95 0.95
Directadmin Jbmc-software 1.151 1.151
Directadmin Jbmc-software 1.331 1.331
Directadmin Jbmc-software 1.14 1.14
Directadmin Jbmc-software 1.3 1.3
Directadmin Jbmc-software 1.195 1.195
Directadmin Jbmc-software 1.08 1.08
Directadmin Jbmc-software 1.33 1.33
Directadmin Jbmc-software 1.212 1.212
Directadmin Jbmc-software 1.03 1.03
Directadmin Jbmc-software 1.323 1.323
Directadmin Jbmc-software 1.1 1.1
Directadmin Jbmc-software 1.174 1.174
Directadmin Jbmc-software 1.297 1.297
Directadmin Jbmc-software 1 1
Directadmin Jbmc-software 1.196 1.196
Directadmin Jbmc-software 1.18 1.18
Directadmin Jbmc-software 1.241 1.241
Directadmin Jbmc-software 1.275 1.275
Directadmin Jbmc-software 1.263 1.263
Directadmin Jbmc-software 1.234 1.234
Directadmin Jbmc-software 1.292 1.292
Directadmin Jbmc-software 1.32 1.32
Directadmin Jbmc-software 1.09 1.09
Directadmin Jbmc-software 1.262 1.262
Directadmin Jbmc-software 1.311 1.311
Directadmin Jbmc-software 1.321 1.321
Directadmin Jbmc-software 1.285 1.285
Directadmin Jbmc-software 1.2 1.2
Directadmin Jbmc-software 1.322 1.322
Directadmin Jbmc-software 1.04 1.04
Directadmin Jbmc-software 1.171 1.171
Directadmin Jbmc-software 1.173 1.173
Directadmin Jbmc-software 1.226 1.226
Directadmin Jbmc-software 1.01 1.01
Directadmin Jbmc-software 1.274 1.274
Directadmin Jbmc-software 1.161 1.161
Directadmin Jbmc-software 1.11 1.11
Directadmin Jbmc-software 1.233 1.233
Directadmin Jbmc-software 1.206 1.206
Directadmin Jbmc-software 1.152 1.152
Directadmin Jbmc-software 1.295 1.295
Directadmin Jbmc-software 1.07 1.07
Directadmin Jbmc-software 1.296 1.296
Directadmin Jbmc-software 1.25 1.25
Directadmin Jbmc-software 1.223 1.223
Directadmin Jbmc-software 1.314 1.314
Directadmin Jbmc-software 1.121 1.121
Directadmin Jbmc-software 1.301 1.301
Directadmin Jbmc-software 1.265 1.265
Directadmin Jbmc-software 1.207 1.207
Directadmin Jbmc-software 1.254 1.254

Extended Description

Input validation is a frequently-used technique for checking potentially dangerous inputs in order to ensure that the inputs are safe for processing within the code, or when communicating with other components. When software does not validate input properly, an attacker is able to craft the input in a form that is not expected by the rest of the application. This will lead to parts of the system receiving unintended input, which may result in altered control flow, arbitrary control of a resource, or arbitrary code execution. Input validation is not the only technique for processing input, however. Other techniques attempt to transform potentially-dangerous input into something safe, such as filtering (CWE-790) - which attempts to remove dangerous inputs - or encoding/escaping (CWE-116), which attempts to ensure that the input is not misinterpreted when it is included in output to another component. Other techniques exist as well (see CWE-138 for more examples.) Input validation can be applied to:

Data can be simple or structured. Structured data can be composed of many nested layers, composed of combinations of metadata and raw data, with other simple or structured data. Many properties of raw data or metadata may need to be validated upon entry into the code, such as:

Implied or derived properties of data must often be calculated or inferred by the code itself. Errors in deriving properties may be considered a contributing factor to improper input validation.

Note that “input validation” has very different meanings to different people, or within different classification schemes. Caution must be used when referencing this CWE entry or mapping to it. For example, some weaknesses might involve inadvertently giving control to an attacker over an input when they should not be able to provide an input at all, but sometimes this is referred to as input validation. Finally, it is important to emphasize that the distinctions between input validation and output escaping are often blurred, and developers must be careful to understand the difference, including how input validation is not always sufficient to prevent vulnerabilities, especially when less stringent data types must be supported, such as free-form text. Consider a SQL injection scenario in which a person’s last name is inserted into a query. The name “O’Reilly” would likely pass the validation step since it is a common last name in the English language. However, this valid name cannot be directly inserted into the database because it contains the “'” apostrophe character, which would need to be escaped or otherwise transformed. In this case, removing the apostrophe might reduce the risk of SQL injection, but it would produce incorrect behavior because the wrong name would be recorded.

Potential Mitigations

  • 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.
  • For any security checks that are performed on the client side, ensure that these checks are duplicated on the server side, in order to avoid CWE-602. Attackers can bypass the client-side checks by modifying values after the checks have been performed, or by changing the client to remove the client-side checks entirely. Then, these modified values would be submitted to the server.
  • Even though client-side checks provide minimal benefits with respect to server-side security, they are still useful. First, they can support intrusion detection. If the server receives input that should have been rejected by the client, then it may be an indication of an attack. Second, client-side error-checking can provide helpful feedback to the user about the expectations for valid input. Third, there may be a reduction in server-side processing time for accidental input errors, although this is typically a small savings.
  • Inputs should be decoded and canonicalized to the application’s current internal representation before being validated (CWE-180, CWE-181). Make sure that your application does not inadvertently decode the same input twice (CWE-174). Such errors could be used to bypass allowlist schemes by introducing dangerous inputs after they have been checked. Use libraries such as the OWASP ESAPI Canonicalization control.
  • Consider performing repeated canonicalization until your input does not change any more. This will avoid double-decoding and similar scenarios, but it might inadvertently modify inputs that are allowed to contain properly-encoded dangerous content.

References