The Angular SSR is a server-rise rendering tool for Angular applications. An Open Redirect vulnerability exists in the internal URL processing logic in versions on the 19.x branch prior to 19.2.21, the 20.x branch prior to 20.3.17, and the 21.x branch prior to 21.1.5 and 21.2.0-rc.1. The logic normalizes URL segments by stripping leading slashes; however, it only removes a single leading slash. When an Angular SSR application is deployed behind a proxy that passes the X-Forwarded-Prefix header, an attacker can provide a value starting with three slashes. This vulnerability allows attackers to conduct large-scale phishing and SEO hijacking. In order to be vulnerable, the application must use Angular SSR, the application must have routes that perform internal redirects, the infrastructure (Reverse Proxy/CDN) must pass the X-Forwarded-Prefix header to the SSR process without sanitization, and the cache must not vary on the X-Forwarded-Prefix header. Versions 21.2.0-rc.1, 21.1.5, 20.3.17, and 19.2.21 contain a patch. Until the patch is applied, developers should sanitize the X-Forwarded-Prefix header in theirserver.ts before the Angular engine processes the request.
Weakness
The web application accepts a user-controlled input that specifies a link to an external site, and uses that link in a redirect.
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.
- Use a list of approved URLs or domains to be used for redirection.
- When the set of acceptable objects, such as filenames or URLs, is limited or known, create a mapping from a set of fixed input values (such as numeric IDs) to the actual filenames or URLs, and reject all other inputs.
- For example, ID 1 could map to “/login.asp” and ID 2 could map to “http://www.example.com/". Features such as the ESAPI AccessReferenceMap [REF-45] provide this capability.
- Understand all the potential areas where untrusted inputs can enter your software: parameters or arguments, cookies, anything read from the network, environment variables, reverse DNS lookups, query results, request headers, URL components, e-mail, files, filenames, databases, and any external systems that provide data to the application. Remember that such inputs may be obtained indirectly through API calls.
- Many open redirect problems occur because the programmer assumed that certain inputs could not be modified, such as cookies and hidden form fields.
Related Attack Patterns
References
- https://github.com/angular/angular-cli/commit/877f017ace4b83277d773aa37f5813e5e9faec7e
- https://github.com/angular/angular-cli/issues/32501
- https://github.com/angular/angular-cli/pull/32521
- https://github.com/angular/angular-cli/security/advisories/GHSA-xh43-g2fq-wjrj
- https://github.com/angular/angular-cli/issues/32501