CVE Vulnerabilities

CVE-2021-4140

XML Injection (aka Blind XPath Injection)

Published: Dec 22, 2022 | Modified: Jan 03, 2023
CVSS 3.x
10
CRITICAL
Source:
NVD
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H
CVSS 2.x
RedHat/V2
RedHat/V3
9.6 IMPORTANT
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H
Ubuntu
MEDIUM

It was possible to construct specific XSLT markup that would be able to bypass an iframe sandbox. This vulnerability affects Firefox ESR < 91.5, Firefox < 96, and Thunderbird < 91.5.

Weakness

The product does not properly neutralize special elements that are used in XML, allowing attackers to modify the syntax, content, or commands of the XML before it is processed by an end system.

Affected Software

Name Vendor Start Version End Version
Firefox Mozilla * 96.0 (excluding)
Firefox_esr Mozilla * 91.5 (excluding)
Thunderbird Mozilla * 91.5 (excluding)
Red Hat Enterprise Linux 7 RedHat firefox-0:91.5.0-1.el7_9 *
Red Hat Enterprise Linux 7 RedHat thunderbird-0:91.5.0-1.el7_9 *
Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8 RedHat thunderbird-0:91.5.0-1.el8_5 *
Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8 RedHat firefox-0:91.5.0-1.el8_5 *
Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8.1 Update Services for SAP Solutions RedHat firefox-0:91.5.0-1.el8_1 *
Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8.1 Update Services for SAP Solutions RedHat thunderbird-0:91.5.0-1.el8_1 *
Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8.2 Extended Update Support RedHat thunderbird-0:91.5.0-1.el8_2 *
Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8.2 Extended Update Support RedHat firefox-0:91.5.0-1.el8_2 *
Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8.4 Extended Update Support RedHat firefox-0:91.5.0-1.el8_4 *
Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8.4 Extended Update Support RedHat thunderbird-0:91.5.0-1.el8_4 *
Firefox Ubuntu bionic *
Firefox Ubuntu devel *
Firefox Ubuntu focal *
Firefox Ubuntu hirsute *
Firefox Ubuntu impish *
Firefox Ubuntu jammy *
Firefox Ubuntu kinetic *
Firefox Ubuntu lunar *
Firefox Ubuntu mantic *
Firefox Ubuntu noble *
Firefox Ubuntu trusty *
Firefox Ubuntu upstream *
Firefox Ubuntu xenial *
Mozjs38 Ubuntu bionic *
Mozjs38 Ubuntu esm-apps/bionic *
Mozjs38 Ubuntu upstream *
Mozjs52 Ubuntu bionic *
Mozjs52 Ubuntu esm-apps/focal *
Mozjs52 Ubuntu esm-infra/bionic *
Mozjs52 Ubuntu focal *
Mozjs52 Ubuntu upstream *
Mozjs68 Ubuntu focal *
Mozjs68 Ubuntu upstream *
Mozjs78 Ubuntu esm-apps/jammy *
Mozjs78 Ubuntu hirsute *
Mozjs78 Ubuntu impish *
Mozjs78 Ubuntu jammy *
Mozjs78 Ubuntu kinetic *
Mozjs78 Ubuntu lunar *
Mozjs78 Ubuntu upstream *
Thunderbird Ubuntu bionic *
Thunderbird Ubuntu devel *
Thunderbird Ubuntu focal *
Thunderbird Ubuntu hirsute *
Thunderbird Ubuntu impish *
Thunderbird Ubuntu jammy *
Thunderbird Ubuntu kinetic *
Thunderbird Ubuntu lunar *
Thunderbird Ubuntu mantic *
Thunderbird Ubuntu noble *
Thunderbird Ubuntu trusty *
Thunderbird Ubuntu upstream *
Thunderbird 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