CVE Vulnerabilities

CVE-2014-4717

Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF)

Published: Jul 03, 2014 | Modified: Nov 15, 2022
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
RedHat/V3
Ubuntu

Multiple cross-site request forgery (CSRF) vulnerabilities in the Simple Share Buttons Adder plugin before 4.5 for WordPress allow remote attackers to hijack the authentication of administrators for requests that conduct cross-site scripting (XSS) attacks via the (1) ssba_share_text parameter in a save action to wp-admin/options-general.php, which is not properly handled in the homepage, and unspecified vectors related to (2) Pages, (3) Posts, (4) Category/Archive pages or (5) post Excerpts.

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
Simple_share_buttons_adder Sharethis * 4.4 (including)
Simple_share_buttons_adder Sharethis 1.0 (including) 1.0 (including)
Simple_share_buttons_adder Sharethis 1.1 (including) 1.1 (including)
Simple_share_buttons_adder Sharethis 1.2 (including) 1.2 (including)
Simple_share_buttons_adder Sharethis 1.3 (including) 1.3 (including)
Simple_share_buttons_adder Sharethis 1.4 (including) 1.4 (including)
Simple_share_buttons_adder Sharethis 1.5 (including) 1.5 (including)
Simple_share_buttons_adder Sharethis 1.6 (including) 1.6 (including)
Simple_share_buttons_adder Sharethis 1.7 (including) 1.7 (including)
Simple_share_buttons_adder Sharethis 1.8 (including) 1.8 (including)
Simple_share_buttons_adder Sharethis 1.9 (including) 1.9 (including)
Simple_share_buttons_adder Sharethis 2.0 (including) 2.0 (including)
Simple_share_buttons_adder Sharethis 2.1 (including) 2.1 (including)
Simple_share_buttons_adder Sharethis 2.2 (including) 2.2 (including)
Simple_share_buttons_adder Sharethis 2.3 (including) 2.3 (including)
Simple_share_buttons_adder Sharethis 2.4 (including) 2.4 (including)
Simple_share_buttons_adder Sharethis 2.5 (including) 2.5 (including)
Simple_share_buttons_adder Sharethis 2.6 (including) 2.6 (including)
Simple_share_buttons_adder Sharethis 2.7 (including) 2.7 (including)
Simple_share_buttons_adder Sharethis 2.8 (including) 2.8 (including)
Simple_share_buttons_adder Sharethis 2.9 (including) 2.9 (including)
Simple_share_buttons_adder Sharethis 3.0 (including) 3.0 (including)
Simple_share_buttons_adder Sharethis 3.1 (including) 3.1 (including)
Simple_share_buttons_adder Sharethis 3.2 (including) 3.2 (including)
Simple_share_buttons_adder Sharethis 3.3 (including) 3.3 (including)
Simple_share_buttons_adder Sharethis 3.4 (including) 3.4 (including)
Simple_share_buttons_adder Sharethis 3.5 (including) 3.5 (including)
Simple_share_buttons_adder Sharethis 3.6 (including) 3.6 (including)
Simple_share_buttons_adder Sharethis 3.7 (including) 3.7 (including)
Simple_share_buttons_adder Sharethis 3.8 (including) 3.8 (including)
Simple_share_buttons_adder Sharethis 3.9 (including) 3.9 (including)
Simple_share_buttons_adder Sharethis 4.0 (including) 4.0 (including)
Simple_share_buttons_adder Sharethis 4.1 (including) 4.1 (including)
Simple_share_buttons_adder Sharethis 4.2 (including) 4.2 (including)
Simple_share_buttons_adder Sharethis 4.3 (including) 4.3 (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