CVE Vulnerabilities

CVE-2013-7043

Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF)

Published: Dec 10, 2013 | Modified: Aug 29, 2017
CVSS 3.x
N/A
Source:
NVD
CVSS 2.x
8.3 HIGH
AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:C
RedHat/V2
RedHat/V3
Ubuntu

Multiple cross-site request forgery (CSRF) vulnerabilities on Cisco Scientific Atlanta DPR2320R2 routers with software 2.0.2r1262-090417 allow remote attackers to hijack the authentication of administrators for requests that (1) change a password via the Password parameter to goform/RgSecurity; (2) reboot the device via the Restart parameter to goform/restart; (3) modify Wi-Fi settings, as demonstrated by the WpaPreSharedKey parameter to goform/wlanSecurity; or (4) modify parental controls via the ParentalPassword parameter to goform/RgParentalBasic.

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
Scientific_atlanta__dpr/epr2320_firmware Cisco 2.0.2-r1262-090417 (including) 2.0.2-r1262-090417 (including)

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