CVE Vulnerabilities

CVE-2024-56320

Improper Authorization

Published: Jan 03, 2025 | Modified: Jan 03, 2025
CVSS 3.x
N/A
Source:
NVD
CVSS 2.x
RedHat/V2
RedHat/V3
Ubuntu

GoCD is a continuous deliver server. GoCD versions prior to 24.5.0 are vulnerable to admin privilege escalation due to improper authorization of access to the admin Configuration XML UI feature, and its associated API. A malicious insider/existing authenticated GoCD user with an existing GoCD user account could abuse this vulnerability to access information intended only for GoCD admins, or to escalate their privileges to that of a GoCD admin in a persistent manner. it is not possible for this vulnerability to be abused prior to authentication/login. The issue is fixed in GoCD 24.5.0. GoCD users who are not able to immediate upgrade can mitigate this issue by using a reverse proxy, WAF or similar to externally block access paths with a /go/rails/ prefix. Blocking this route causes no loss of functionality. If it is not possible to upgrade or block the above route, consider reducing the GoCD user base to more trusted set of users, including temporarily disabling use of plugins such as the guest-login-plugin, which allow limited anonymous access as a regular user account.

Weakness

The product does not perform or incorrectly performs an authorization check when an actor attempts to access a resource or perform an action.

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 not applied consistently - or not at all - 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 product 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) 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