GSD-2024-31205
Vulnerability from gsd - Updated: 2024-04-03 05:02Details
Saleor is an e-commerce platform. Starting in version 3.10.0 and prior to versions 3.14.64, 3.15.39, 3.16.39, 3.17.35, 3.18.31, and 3.19.19, an attacker may bypass cross-set request forgery (CSRF) validation when calling refresh token mutation with empty string. When a user provides an empty string in `refreshToken` mutation, while the token persists in `JWT_REFRESH_TOKEN_COOKIE_NAME` cookie, application omits validation against CSRF token and returns valid access token. Versions 3.14.64, 3.15.39, 3.16.39, 3.17.35, 3.18.31, and 3.19.19 contain a patch for the issue. As a workaround, one may replace `saleor.graphql.account.mutations.authentication.refresh_token.py.get_refresh_token`. This will fix the issue, but be aware, that it returns `JWT_MISSING_TOKEN` instead of `JWT_INVALID_TOKEN`.
Aliases
{
"gsd": {
"metadata": {
"exploitCode": "unknown",
"remediation": "unknown",
"reportConfidence": "confirmed",
"type": "vulnerability"
},
"osvSchema": {
"aliases": [
"CVE-2024-31205"
],
"details": "Saleor is an e-commerce platform. Starting in version 3.10.0 and prior to versions 3.14.64, 3.15.39, 3.16.39, 3.17.35, 3.18.31, and 3.19.19, an attacker may bypass cross-set request forgery (CSRF) validation when calling refresh token mutation with empty string. When a user provides an empty string in `refreshToken` mutation, while the token persists in `JWT_REFRESH_TOKEN_COOKIE_NAME` cookie, application omits validation against CSRF token and returns valid access token. Versions 3.14.64, 3.15.39, 3.16.39, 3.17.35, 3.18.31, and 3.19.19 contain a patch for the issue. As a workaround, one may replace `saleor.graphql.account.mutations.authentication.refresh_token.py.get_refresh_token`. This will fix the issue, but be aware, that it returns `JWT_MISSING_TOKEN` instead of `JWT_INVALID_TOKEN`.\n",
"id": "GSD-2024-31205",
"modified": "2024-04-03T05:02:25.567130Z",
"schema_version": "1.4.0"
}
},
"namespaces": {
"cve.org": {
"CVE_data_meta": {
"ASSIGNER": "security-advisories@github.com",
"ID": "CVE-2024-31205",
"STATE": "PUBLIC"
},
"affects": {
"vendor": {
"vendor_data": [
{
"product": {
"product_data": [
{
"product_name": "saleor",
"version": {
"version_data": [
{
"version_affected": "=",
"version_value": "\u003e= 3.10.0, \u003c 3.14.64"
},
{
"version_affected": "=",
"version_value": "\u003e= 3.15.0, \u003c 3.15.39"
},
{
"version_affected": "=",
"version_value": "\u003e= 3.16.0, \u003c 3.16.39"
},
{
"version_affected": "=",
"version_value": "\u003e= 3.17.0, \u003c 3.17.35"
},
{
"version_affected": "=",
"version_value": "\u003e= 3.18.0, \u003c 3.18.31"
},
{
"version_affected": "=",
"version_value": "\u003e= 3.19.0, \u003c 3.19.19"
}
]
}
}
]
},
"vendor_name": "saleor"
}
]
}
},
"data_format": "MITRE",
"data_type": "CVE",
"data_version": "4.0",
"description": {
"description_data": [
{
"lang": "eng",
"value": "Saleor is an e-commerce platform. Starting in version 3.10.0 and prior to versions 3.14.64, 3.15.39, 3.16.39, 3.17.35, 3.18.31, and 3.19.19, an attacker may bypass cross-set request forgery (CSRF) validation when calling refresh token mutation with empty string. When a user provides an empty string in `refreshToken` mutation, while the token persists in `JWT_REFRESH_TOKEN_COOKIE_NAME` cookie, application omits validation against CSRF token and returns valid access token. Versions 3.14.64, 3.15.39, 3.16.39, 3.17.35, 3.18.31, and 3.19.19 contain a patch for the issue. As a workaround, one may replace `saleor.graphql.account.mutations.authentication.refresh_token.py.get_refresh_token`. This will fix the issue, but be aware, that it returns `JWT_MISSING_TOKEN` instead of `JWT_INVALID_TOKEN`.\n"
}
]
},
"impact": {
"cvss": [
{
"attackComplexity": "HIGH",
"attackVector": "NETWORK",
"availabilityImpact": "NONE",
"baseScore": 4.2,
"baseSeverity": "MEDIUM",
"confidentialityImpact": "LOW",
"integrityImpact": "LOW",
"privilegesRequired": "NONE",
"scope": "UNCHANGED",
"userInteraction": "REQUIRED",
"vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:N",
"version": "3.1"
}
]
},
"problemtype": {
"problemtype_data": [
{
"description": [
{
"cweId": "CWE-352",
"lang": "eng",
"value": "CWE-352: Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF)"
}
]
}
]
},
"references": {
"reference_data": [
{
"name": "https://github.com/saleor/saleor/security/advisories/GHSA-ff69-fwjf-3c9w",
"refsource": "MISC",
"url": "https://github.com/saleor/saleor/security/advisories/GHSA-ff69-fwjf-3c9w"
},
{
"name": "https://github.com/saleor/saleor/commit/36699c6f5c99590d24f46e3d5c5b1a3c2fd072e7",
"refsource": "MISC",
"url": "https://github.com/saleor/saleor/commit/36699c6f5c99590d24f46e3d5c5b1a3c2fd072e7"
}
]
},
"source": {
"advisory": "GHSA-ff69-fwjf-3c9w",
"discovery": "UNKNOWN"
}
},
"nvd.nist.gov": {
"cve": {
"descriptions": [
{
"lang": "en",
"value": "Saleor is an e-commerce platform. Starting in version 3.10.0 and prior to versions 3.14.64, 3.15.39, 3.16.39, 3.17.35, 3.18.31, and 3.19.19, an attacker may bypass cross-set request forgery (CSRF) validation when calling refresh token mutation with empty string. When a user provides an empty string in `refreshToken` mutation, while the token persists in `JWT_REFRESH_TOKEN_COOKIE_NAME` cookie, application omits validation against CSRF token and returns valid access token. Versions 3.14.64, 3.15.39, 3.16.39, 3.17.35, 3.18.31, and 3.19.19 contain a patch for the issue. As a workaround, one may replace `saleor.graphql.account.mutations.authentication.refresh_token.py.get_refresh_token`. This will fix the issue, but be aware, that it returns `JWT_MISSING_TOKEN` instead of `JWT_INVALID_TOKEN`.\n"
},
{
"lang": "es",
"value": "Saleor es una plataforma de comercio electr\u00f3nico. A partir de la versi\u00f3n 3.10.0 y anteriores a las versiones 3.14.64, 3.15.39, 3.16.39, 3.17.35, 3.18.31 y 3.19.19, un atacante puede omitir la validaci\u00f3n de cross-set request forgery (CSRF) al llamar. actualizar la mutaci\u00f3n del token con una cadena vac\u00eda. Cuando un usuario proporciona una cadena vac\u00eda en la mutaci\u00f3n `refreshToken`, mientras el token persiste en la cookie `JWT_REFRESH_TOKEN_COOKIE_NAME`, la aplicaci\u00f3n omite la validaci\u00f3n contra el token CSRF y devuelve un token de acceso v\u00e1lido. Las versiones 3.14.64, 3.15.39, 3.16.39, 3.17.35, 3.18.31 y 3.19.19 contienen un parche para el problema. Como workaround, se puede reemplazar `saleor.graphql.account.mutations.authentication.refresh_token.py.get_refresh_token`. Esto solucionar\u00e1 el problema, pero tenga en cuenta que devuelve `JWT_MISSING_TOKEN` en lugar de `JWT_INVALID_TOKEN`."
}
],
"id": "CVE-2024-31205",
"lastModified": "2024-04-08T18:48:40.217",
"metrics": {
"cvssMetricV31": [
{
"cvssData": {
"attackComplexity": "HIGH",
"attackVector": "NETWORK",
"availabilityImpact": "NONE",
"baseScore": 4.2,
"baseSeverity": "MEDIUM",
"confidentialityImpact": "LOW",
"integrityImpact": "LOW",
"privilegesRequired": "NONE",
"scope": "UNCHANGED",
"userInteraction": "REQUIRED",
"vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:N",
"version": "3.1"
},
"exploitabilityScore": 1.6,
"impactScore": 2.5,
"source": "security-advisories@github.com",
"type": "Secondary"
}
]
},
"published": "2024-04-08T15:15:08.023",
"references": [
{
"source": "security-advisories@github.com",
"url": "https://github.com/saleor/saleor/commit/36699c6f5c99590d24f46e3d5c5b1a3c2fd072e7"
},
{
"source": "security-advisories@github.com",
"url": "https://github.com/saleor/saleor/security/advisories/GHSA-ff69-fwjf-3c9w"
}
],
"sourceIdentifier": "security-advisories@github.com",
"vulnStatus": "Awaiting Analysis",
"weaknesses": [
{
"description": [
{
"lang": "en",
"value": "CWE-352"
}
],
"source": "security-advisories@github.com",
"type": "Secondary"
}
]
}
}
}
}
Loading…
Loading…
Sightings
| Author | Source | Type | Date |
|---|
Nomenclature
- Seen: The vulnerability was mentioned, discussed, or observed by the user.
- Confirmed: The vulnerability has been validated from an analyst's perspective.
- Published Proof of Concept: A public proof of concept is available for this vulnerability.
- Exploited: The vulnerability was observed as exploited by the user who reported the sighting.
- Patched: The vulnerability was observed as successfully patched by the user who reported the sighting.
- Not exploited: The vulnerability was not observed as exploited by the user who reported the sighting.
- Not confirmed: The user expressed doubt about the validity of the vulnerability.
- Not patched: The vulnerability was not observed as successfully patched by the user who reported the sighting.
Loading…
Loading…