CVE Vulnerabilities

CVE-2014-8773

Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF)

Published: Dec 03, 2014 | Modified: Oct 22, 2019
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

MODX Revolution 2.x before 2.2.15 allows remote attackers to bypass the cross-site request forgery (CSRF) protection mechanism by (1) omitting the CSRF token or via a (2) long string in the CSRF token parameter.

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
Modx_revolution Modx 2.0.0 (including) 2.0.0 (including)
Modx_revolution Modx 2.0.1 (including) 2.0.1 (including)
Modx_revolution Modx 2.0.3 (including) 2.0.3 (including)
Modx_revolution Modx 2.0.4 (including) 2.0.4 (including)
Modx_revolution Modx 2.0.5 (including) 2.0.5 (including)
Modx_revolution Modx 2.0.6 (including) 2.0.6 (including)
Modx_revolution Modx 2.0.7 (including) 2.0.7 (including)
Modx_revolution Modx 2.0.8 (including) 2.0.8 (including)
Modx_revolution Modx 2.1.0 (including) 2.1.0 (including)
Modx_revolution Modx 2.1.1 (including) 2.1.1 (including)
Modx_revolution Modx 2.1.2 (including) 2.1.2 (including)
Modx_revolution Modx 2.1.3 (including) 2.1.3 (including)
Modx_revolution Modx 2.1.4 (including) 2.1.4 (including)
Modx_revolution Modx 2.1.5 (including) 2.1.5 (including)
Modx_revolution Modx 2.2.0 (including) 2.2.0 (including)
Modx_revolution Modx 2.2.1 (including) 2.2.1 (including)
Modx_revolution Modx 2.2.2 (including) 2.2.2 (including)
Modx_revolution Modx 2.2.3 (including) 2.2.3 (including)
Modx_revolution Modx 2.2.4 (including) 2.2.4 (including)
Modx_revolution Modx 2.2.5 (including) 2.2.5 (including)
Modx_revolution Modx 2.2.6 (including) 2.2.6 (including)
Modx_revolution Modx 2.2.7 (including) 2.2.7 (including)
Modx_revolution Modx 2.2.8 (including) 2.2.8 (including)
Modx_revolution Modx 2.2.9 (including) 2.2.9 (including)
Modx_revolution Modx 2.2.10 (including) 2.2.10 (including)
Modx_revolution Modx 2.2.11 (including) 2.2.11 (including)
Modx_revolution Modx 2.2.12 (including) 2.2.12 (including)
Modx_revolution Modx 2.2.13 (including) 2.2.13 (including)
Modx_revolution Modx 2.2.14 (including) 2.2.14 (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