CVE Vulnerabilities

CVE-2020-9309

Unrestricted Upload of File with Dangerous Type

Published: Jul 15, 2020 | Modified: Jul 24, 2020
CVSS 3.x
8.8
HIGH
Source:
NVD
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
CVSS 2.x
6.8 MEDIUM
AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:P
RedHat/V2
RedHat/V3
Ubuntu

Silverstripe CMS through 4.5 can be susceptible to script execution from malicious upload contents under allowed file extensions (for example HTML code in a TXT file). When these files are stored as protected or draft files, the MIME detection can cause browsers to execute the file contents. Uploads stored as protected or draft files are allowed by default for authorised users only, but can also be enabled through custom logic as well as modules such as silverstripe/userforms. Sites using the previously optional silverstripe/mimevalidator module can configure MIME whitelists rather than extension whitelists, and hence prevent this issue. Sites on the Common Web Platform (CWP) use this module by default, and are not affected.

Weakness

The product allows the attacker to upload or transfer files of dangerous types that can be automatically processed within the product’s environment.

Affected Software

Name Vendor Start Version End Version
Mimevalidator Silverstripe * 2.0.0 (excluding)
Recipe Silverstripe 4.0.0 (including) 4.6.0 (excluding)

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.
  • For example, limiting filenames to alphanumeric characters can help to restrict the introduction of unintended file extensions.
  • 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