CVE-2023-45670

Frigate is an open source network video recorder. Prior to version 0.13.0 Beta 3, the config/save and config/set endpoints of Frigate do not implement any CSRF protection. This makes it possible for a request sourced from another site to update the configuration of the Frigate server (e.g. via drive-by attack). Exploiting this vulnerability requires the attacker to both know very specific information about a users Frigate server and requires an authenticated user to be tricked into clicking a specially crafted link to their Frigate instance. This vulnerability could exploited by an attacker under the following circumstances: Frigate publicly exposed to the internet (even with authentication); attacker knows the address of a users Frigate instance; attacker crafts a specialized page which links to the users Frigate instance; attacker finds a way to get an authenticated user to visit their specialized page and click the button/link. This issue can lead to arbitrary configuration updates for the Frigate server, resulting in denial of service and possible data exfiltration. Version 0.13.0 Beta 3 contains a patch.

Weakness

The web application does not, or can not, sufficiently verify whether a well-formed, valid, consistent request was intentionally provided by the user who submitted the request.

Affected Software

Potential Mitigations

• 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, use anti-CSRF packages such as the OWASP CSRFGuard. [REF-330]
• Another example is the ESAPI Session Management control, which includes a component for CSRF. [REF-45]
• Use the “double-submitted cookie” method as described by Felten and Zeller:
• When a user visits a site, the site should generate a pseudorandom value and set it as a cookie on the user’s machine. The site should require every form submission to include this value as a form value and also as a cookie value. When a POST request is sent to the site, the request should only be considered valid if the form value and the cookie value are the same.
• Because of the same-origin policy, an attacker cannot read or modify the value stored in the cookie. To successfully submit a form on behalf of the user, the attacker would have to correctly guess the pseudorandom value. If the pseudorandom value is cryptographically strong, this will be prohibitively difficult.
• This technique requires Javascript, so it may not work for browsers that have Javascript disabled. [REF-331]

Related Attack Patterns

• https://cwe.mitre.org/data/definitions/111.html
• https://cwe.mitre.org/data/definitions/462.html
• https://cwe.mitre.org/data/definitions/467.html
• https://cwe.mitre.org/data/definitions/62.html

References

• https://about.gitlab.com/blog/2021/09/07/why-are-developers-vulnerable-to-driveby-attacks/
• https://github.com/blakeblackshear/frigate/blob/5658e5a4cc7376504af9de5e1eff178939a13e7f/frigate/http.py#L1060
• https://github.com/blakeblackshear/frigate/blob/6aedc39a9a421cf48000a727f36b4c1495848a1d/frigate/http.py#L998
• https://github.com/blakeblackshear/frigate/discussions/8366
• https://github.com/blakeblackshear/frigate/security/advisories/GHSA-xq49-hv88-jr6h
• https://securitylab.github.com/advisories/GHSL-2023-190_Frigate/