CVE Vulnerabilities

CVE-2022-24714

Incorrect Authorization

Published: Mar 08, 2022 | Modified: Mar 14, 2022
CVSS 3.x
5.3
MEDIUM
Source:
NVD
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N
CVSS 2.x
4.3 MEDIUM
AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:P/I:N/A:N
RedHat/V2
RedHat/V3
Ubuntu

Icinga Web 2 is an open source monitoring web interface, framework and command-line interface. Installations of Icinga 2 with the IDO writer enabled are affected. If you use service custom variables in role restrictions, and you regularly decommission service objects, users with said roles may still have access to a collection of content. Note that this only applies if a role has implicitly permitted access to hosts, due to permitted access to at least one of their services. If access to a host is permitted by other means, no sensible information has been disclosed to unauthorized users. This issue has been resolved in versions 2.8.6, 2.9.6 and 2.10 of Icinga Web 2.

Weakness

The software performs an authorization check when an actor attempts to access a resource or perform an action, but it does not correctly perform the check. This allows attackers to bypass intended access restrictions.

Affected Software

Name Vendor Start Version End Version
Icinga_web_2 Icinga * *
Icinga_web_2 Icinga 2.9.0 *
Icingaweb2 Ubuntu devel *
Icingaweb2 Ubuntu focal *
Icingaweb2 Ubuntu impish *
Icingaweb2 Ubuntu jammy *
Icingaweb2 Ubuntu trusty *
Icingaweb2 Ubuntu upstream *
Icingaweb2 Ubuntu xenial *

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 incorrectly 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 software 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.

References