CVE Vulnerabilities

CVE-2018-9867

Incorrect Permission Assignment for Critical Resource

Published: Feb 19, 2019 | Modified: Jun 16, 2022
CVSS 3.x
5.5
MEDIUM
Source:
NVD
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N
CVSS 2.x
2.1 LOW
AV:L/AC:L/Au:N/C:P/I:N/A:N
RedHat/V2
RedHat/V3
Ubuntu

In SonicWall SonicOS, administrators without full permissions can download imported certificates. Occurs when administrators who are not in the SonicWall Administrators user group attempt to download imported certificates. This vulnerability affected SonicOS Gen 5 version 5.9.1.10 and earlier, Gen 6 version 6.2.7.3, 6.5.1.3, 6.5.2.2, 6.5.3.1, 6.2.7.8, 6.4.0.0, 6.5.1.8, 6.0.5.3-86o and SonicOSv 6.5.0.2-8v_RC363 (VMWARE), 6.5.0.2.8v_RC367 (AZURE), SonicOSv 6.5.0.2.8v_RC368 (AWS), SonicOSv 6.5.0.2.8v_RC366 (HYPER_V).

Weakness

The product specifies permissions for a security-critical resource in a way that allows that resource to be read or modified by unintended actors.

Affected Software

Name Vendor Start Version End Version
Sonicos Sonicwall 5.0.0.0 (including) 5.9.1.10 (including)
Sonicos Sonicwall 6.0.5.3-86o (including) 6.0.5.3-86o (including)
Sonicos Sonicwall 6.2.7.3 (including) 6.2.7.3 (including)
Sonicos Sonicwall 6.2.7.8 (including) 6.2.7.8 (including)
Sonicos Sonicwall 6.4.0.0 (including) 6.4.0.0 (including)
Sonicos Sonicwall 6.5.1.3 (including) 6.5.1.3 (including)
Sonicos Sonicwall 6.5.1.8 (including) 6.5.1.8 (including)
Sonicos Sonicwall 6.5.2.2 (including) 6.5.2.2 (including)
Sonicos Sonicwall 6.5.3.1 (including) 6.5.3.1 (including)
Sonicosv Sonicwall 6.5.0.2-8v_rc363 (including) 6.5.0.2-8v_rc363 (including)
Sonicosv Sonicwall 6.5.0.2.8v_rc366 (including) 6.5.0.2.8v_rc366 (including)
Sonicosv Sonicwall 6.5.0.2.8v_rc367 (including) 6.5.0.2.8v_rc367 (including)
Sonicosv Sonicwall 6.5.0.2.8v_rc368 (including) 6.5.0.2.8v_rc368 (including)

Potential Mitigations

  • Run the code in a “jail” or similar sandbox environment that enforces strict boundaries between the process and the operating system. This may effectively restrict which files can be accessed in a particular directory or which commands can be executed by the software.
  • OS-level examples include the Unix chroot jail, AppArmor, and SELinux. In general, managed code may provide some protection. For example, java.io.FilePermission in the Java SecurityManager allows the software to specify restrictions on file operations.
  • This may not be a feasible solution, and it only limits the impact to the operating system; the rest of the application may still be subject to compromise.
  • Be careful to avoid CWE-243 and other weaknesses related to jails.

References