Vulnerabilities
Misconfiguration
Compliance
CVE Vulnerabilities

CVE-2019-14858

Improper Output Neutralization for Logs

Published: Oct 14, 2019 | Modified: Nov 21, 2024
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
5 MODERATE
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N
Ubuntu
LOW
Vulnerability-free packages from our partners
Additional information
NVDhttps://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2019-14858
CWEhttps://cwe.mitre.org/data/definitions/117.html

A vulnerability was found in Ansible engine 2.x up to 2.8 and Ansible tower 3.x up to 3.5. When a module has an argument_spec with sub parameters marked as no_log, passing an invalid parameter name to the module will cause the task to fail before the no_log options in the sub parameters are processed. As a result, data in the sub parameter fields will not be masked and will be displayed if Ansible is run with increased verbosity and present in the module invocation arguments for the task.

Weakness

The product constructs a log message from external input, but it does not neutralize or incorrectly neutralizes special elements when the message is written to a log file.

Affected Software

Name Vendor Start Version End Version
Ansible_engine Redhat 2.0 (including) 2.8.0 (including)
Ansible_tower Redhat 3.0 (including) 3.5.0 (including)
Red Hat Ansible Engine 2.6 for RHEL 7 RedHat ansible-0:2.6.20-1.el7ae *
Red Hat Ansible Engine 2.7 for RHEL 7 RedHat ansible-0:2.7.14-1.el7ae *
Red Hat Ansible Engine 2.8 for RHEL 7 RedHat ansible-0:2.8.6-1.el7ae *
Red Hat Ansible Engine 2.8 for RHEL 8 RedHat ansible-0:2.8.6-1.el8ae *
Red Hat Ansible Engine 2 for RHEL 7 RedHat ansible-0:2.8.6-1.el7ae *
Red Hat Ansible Engine 2 for RHEL 8 RedHat ansible-0:2.8.6-1.el8ae *
Red Hat OpenStack Platform 13.0 (Queens) RedHat ansible-0:2.6.20-1.el7ae *
Red Hat OpenStack Platform 13.0 (Queens) for RHEL 7.6 EUS RedHat ansible-0:2.6.20-1.el7ae *
Ansible Ubuntu bionic *
Ansible Ubuntu disco *
Ansible Ubuntu eoan *
Ansible Ubuntu esm-apps/bionic *
Ansible Ubuntu trusty *
Ansible Ubuntu trusty/esm *
Ansible Ubuntu upstream *
Ansible Ubuntu xenial *

Potential Mitigations

  • Assume all input is malicious. Use an “accept known good” input validation strategy, i.e., use a list of acceptable inputs that strictly conform to specifications. Reject any input that does not strictly conform to specifications, or transform it into something that does.
  • When performing input validation, consider all potentially relevant properties, including length, type of input, the full range of acceptable values, missing or extra inputs, syntax, consistency across related fields, and conformance to business rules. As an example of business rule logic, “boat” may be syntactically valid because it only contains alphanumeric characters, but it is not valid if the input is only expected to contain colors such as “red” or “blue.”
  • Do not rely exclusively on looking for malicious or malformed inputs. This is likely to miss at least one undesirable input, especially if the code’s environment changes. This can give attackers enough room to bypass the intended validation. However, denylists can be useful for detecting potential attacks or determining which inputs are so malformed that they should be rejected outright.

References

Aqua Security is the largest pure-play cloud native security company, providing customers the freedom to innovate and run their businesses with minimal friction. The Aqua Cloud Native Security Platform provides prevention, detection, and response automation across the entire application lifecycle to secure the build, secure cloud infrastructure and secure running workloads wherever they are deployed.
Copyright © 2025 Aqua Security Software Ltd.   Privacy Policy | Terms of Use