CVE Vulnerabilities

CVE-2018-11632

Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF)

Published: May 31, 2018 | Modified: Nov 21, 2024
CVSS 3.x
6.5
MEDIUM
Source:
NVD
CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:N
CVSS 2.x
4.3 MEDIUM
AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:N/I:P/A:N
RedHat/V2
RedHat/V3
Ubuntu
root.io logo minimus.io logo echo.ai logo

An issue was discovered in the MULTIDOTS Add Social Share Messenger Buttons Whatsapp and Viber plugin 1.0.8 for WordPress. If an admin user can be tricked into visiting a crafted URL created by an attacker (via spear phishing/social engineering), the attacker can change the plugin settings via wp-admin/admin-post.php CSRF. Theres no nonce or capability check in the whatsapp_share_setting_add_update() function.

Weakness

The web application does not, or cannot, sufficiently verify whether a request was intentionally provided by the user who sent the request, which could have originated from an unauthorized actor.

Affected Software

NameVendorStart VersionEnd Version
Add_social_share_messenger_buttons_whatsapp_and_viberMultidots1.0.8 (including)1.0.8 (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 [REF-1482].
  • 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