CVE Vulnerabilities

CVE-2009-4076

Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF)

Published: Nov 25, 2009 | Modified: Aug 24, 2015
CVSS 3.x
N/A
Source:
NVD
CVSS 2.x
6.8 MEDIUM
AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:P
RedHat/V2
5.8 MODERATE
AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:N
RedHat/V3
Ubuntu
MEDIUM

Cross-site request forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in Roundcube Webmail 0.2.2 and earlier allows remote attackers to hijack the authentication of unspecified users for requests that modify user information via unspecified vectors, a different vulnerability than CVE-2009-4077.

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
Webmail Roundcube * 0.2.2 (including)
Webmail Roundcube 0.1 (including) 0.1 (including)
Webmail Roundcube 0.1-20050811 (including) 0.1-20050811 (including)
Webmail Roundcube 0.1-20050820 (including) 0.1-20050820 (including)
Webmail Roundcube 0.1-20051007 (including) 0.1-20051007 (including)
Webmail Roundcube 0.1-20051021 (including) 0.1-20051021 (including)
Webmail Roundcube 0.1-alpha (including) 0.1-alpha (including)
Webmail Roundcube 0.1-beta (including) 0.1-beta (including)
Webmail Roundcube 0.1-beta2 (including) 0.1-beta2 (including)
Webmail Roundcube 0.1-rc1 (including) 0.1-rc1 (including)
Webmail Roundcube 0.1-rc2 (including) 0.1-rc2 (including)
Webmail Roundcube 0.1-stable (including) 0.1-stable (including)
Webmail Roundcube 0.1.1 (including) 0.1.1 (including)
Webmail Roundcube 0.2 (including) 0.2 (including)
Webmail Roundcube 0.2-alpha (including) 0.2-alpha (including)
Webmail Roundcube 0.2-beta (including) 0.2-beta (including)
Webmail Roundcube 0.2-stable (including) 0.2-stable (including)
Webmail Roundcube 0.2.1 (including) 0.2.1 (including)
Roundcube Ubuntu hardy *
Roundcube Ubuntu intrepid *
Roundcube Ubuntu jaunty *
Roundcube Ubuntu karmic *
Roundcube 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