Coturn is free open source implementation of TURN and STUN Server. Coturn before version 4.5.2 by default does not allow peers to connect and relay packets to loopback addresses in the range of 127.x.x.x. However, it was observed that when sending a CONNECT request with the XOR-PEER-ADDRESS value of 0.0.0.0, a successful response was received and subsequently, CONNECTIONBIND also received a successful response. Coturn then is able to relay packets to the loopback interface. Additionally, when coturn is listening on IPv6, which is default, the loopback interface can also be reached by making use of either [::1] or [::] as the peer address. By using the address 0.0.0.0 as the peer address, a malicious user will be able to relay packets to the loopback interface, unless --denied-peer-ip=0.0.0.0 (or similar) has been specified. Since the default configuration implies that loopback peers are not allowed, coturn administrators may choose to not set the denied-peer-ip setting. The issue patched in version 4.5.2. As a workaround the addresses in the address block 0.0.0.0/8, [::1] and [::] should be denied by default unless --allow-loopback-peers has been specified.
The product receives a request, message, or directive from an upstream component, but the product does not sufficiently preserve the original source of the request before forwarding the request to an external actor that is outside of the product’s control sphere. This causes the product to appear to be the source of the request, leading it to act as a proxy or other intermediary between the upstream component and the external actor.
| Name | Vendor | Start Version | End Version |
|---|---|---|---|
| Coturn | Coturn_project | * | 4.5.2 (excluding) |
If an attacker cannot directly contact a target, but the product has access to the target, then the attacker can send a request to the product and have it be forwarded to the target. The request would appear to be coming from the product’s system, not the attacker’s system. As a result, the attacker can bypass access controls (such as firewalls) or hide the source of malicious requests, since the requests would not be coming directly from the attacker. Since proxy functionality and message-forwarding often serve a legitimate purpose, this issue only becomes a vulnerability when: