CVE-2020-15245

In Sylius before versions 1.6.9, 1.7.9 and 1.8.3, the user may register in a shop by email mail@example.com, verify it, change it to the mail another@domain.com and stay verified and enabled. This may lead to having accounts addressed to totally different emails, that were verified. Note, that this way one is not able to take over any existing account (guest or normal one). The issue has been patched in Sylius 1.6.9, 1.7.9 and 1.8.3. As a workaround, you may resolve this issue on your own by creating a custom event listener, which will listen to the sylius.customer.pre_update event. You can determine that email has been changed if customer email and user username are different. They are synchronized later on. Pay attention, to email changing behavior for administrators. You may need to skip this logic for them. In order to achieve this, you should either check master request path info, if it does not contain /admin prefix or adjust event triggered during customer update in the shop. You can find more information on how to customize the event here.

Weakness

The product does not perform an authorization check when an actor attempts to access a resource or perform an action.

Affected Software

Extended Description

Assuming a user with a given identity, authorization is the process of determining whether that user can access a given resource, based on the user’s privileges and any permissions or other access-control specifications that apply to the resource. When access control checks are not applied, users are able to access data or perform actions that they should not be allowed to perform. This can lead to a wide range of problems, including information exposures, denial of service, and arbitrary code execution.

Potential Mitigations

• Divide the product into anonymous, normal, privileged, and administrative areas. Reduce the attack surface by carefully mapping roles with data and functionality. Use role-based access control (RBAC) [REF-229] to enforce the roles at the appropriate boundaries.
• Note that this approach may not protect against horizontal authorization, i.e., it will not protect a user from attacking others with the same role.
• 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, consider using authorization frameworks such as the JAAS Authorization Framework [REF-233] and the OWASP ESAPI Access Control feature [REF-45].
• For web applications, make sure that the access control mechanism is enforced correctly at the server side on every page. Users should not be able to access any unauthorized functionality or information by simply requesting direct access to that page.
• One way to do this is to ensure that all pages containing sensitive information are not cached, and that all such pages restrict access to requests that are accompanied by an active and authenticated session token associated with a user who has the required permissions to access that page.

Related Attack Patterns

• https://cwe.mitre.org/data/definitions/665.html

References

• https://github.com/Sylius/Sylius/commit/60636d711a4011e8694d10d201b53632c7e8ecaf
• https://github.com/Sylius/Sylius/security/advisories/GHSA-6gw4-x63h-5499