CVE-2024-38351 : 詳細

CVE-2024-38351

5.4
/
中
0.19%V4
2024-06-18
17h00 +00:00
Authorization problems
A07-Identif. and Authent. Fail
Network
2024-08-02
04h04 +00:00
特定のCVEの通知
特定のCVEの変更情報をいち早くお届けします。
通知を管理する

CVE の説明

Password auth and OAuth2 unverified email linking

Pocketbase is an open source web backend written in go. In affected versions a malicious user may be able to compromise other user accounts. In order to be exploited users must have both OAuth2 and Password auth methods enabled. A possible attack scenario could be: 1. a malicious actor register with the targeted user's email (it is unverified), 2. at some later point in time the targeted user stumble on your app and decides to sign-up with OAuth2 (_this step could be also initiated by the attacker by sending an invite email to the targeted user_), 3. on successful OAuth2 auth we search for an existing PocketBase user matching with the OAuth2 user's email and associate them, 4. because we haven't changed the password of the existing PocketBase user during the linking, the malicious actor has access to the targeted user account and will be able to login with the initially created email/password. To prevent this for happening we now reset the password for this specific case if the previously created user wasn't verified (an exception to this is if the linking is explicit/manual, aka. when you send `Authorization:TOKEN` with the OAuth2 auth call). Additionally to warn existing users we now send an email alert in case the user has logged in with password but has at least one OAuth2 account linked. The flow will be further improved with ongoing refactoring and we will start sending emails for "unrecognized device" logins (OTP and MFA is already implemented and will be available with the next v0.23.0 release in the near future). For the time being users are advised to update to version 0.22.14. There are no known workarounds for this vulnerability.

CVE の情報

関連する弱点

CWE-ID 弱点名 出典
CWE-287 Improper Authentication
When an actor claims to have a given identity, the product does not prove or insufficiently proves that the claim is correct.

メトリクス

メトリクス スコア 深刻度 CVSS ベクター 出典
V3.1 5.4 MEDIUM CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:N

Base: Exploitabilty Metrics

The Exploitability metrics reflect the characteristics of the thing that is vulnerable, which we refer to formally as the vulnerable component.

Attack Vector

This metric reflects the context by which vulnerability exploitation is possible.

Network

The vulnerable component is bound to the network stack and the set of possible attackers extends beyond the other options listed below, up to and including the entire Internet. Such a vulnerability is often termed “remotely exploitable” and can be thought of as an attack being exploitable at the protocol level one or more network hops away (e.g., across one or more routers).

Attack Complexity

This metric describes the conditions beyond the attacker’s control that must exist in order to exploit the vulnerability.

Low

Specialized access conditions or extenuating circumstances do not exist. An attacker can expect repeatable success when attacking the vulnerable component.

Privileges Required

This metric describes the level of privileges an attacker must possess before successfully exploiting the vulnerability.

None

The attacker is unauthorized prior to attack, and therefore does not require any access to settings or files of the vulnerable system to carry out an attack.

User Interaction

This metric captures the requirement for a human user, other than the attacker, to participate in the successful compromise of the vulnerable component.

Required

Successful exploitation of this vulnerability requires a user to take some action before the vulnerability can be exploited. For example, a successful exploit may only be possible during the installation of an application by a system administrator.

Base: Scope Metrics

The Scope metric captures whether a vulnerability in one vulnerable component impacts resources in components beyond its security scope.

Scope

Formally, a security authority is a mechanism (e.g., an application, an operating system, firmware, a sandbox environment) that defines and enforces access control in terms of how certain subjects/actors (e.g., human users, processes) can access certain restricted objects/resources (e.g., files, CPU, memory) in a controlled manner. All the subjects and objects under the jurisdiction of a single security authority are considered to be under one security scope. If a vulnerability in a vulnerable component can affect a component which is in a different security scope than the vulnerable component, a Scope change occurs. Intuitively, whenever the impact of a vulnerability breaches a security/trust boundary and impacts components outside the security scope in which vulnerable component resides, a Scope change occurs.

Unchanged

An exploited vulnerability can only affect resources managed by the same security authority. In this case, the vulnerable component and the impacted component are either the same, or both are managed by the same security authority.

Base: Impact Metrics

The Impact metrics capture the effects of a successfully exploited vulnerability on the component that suffers the worst outcome that is most directly and predictably associated with the attack. Analysts should constrain impacts to a reasonable, final outcome which they are confident an attacker is able to achieve.

Confidentiality Impact

This metric measures the impact to the confidentiality of the information resources managed by a software component due to a successfully exploited vulnerability.

Low

There is some loss of confidentiality. Access to some restricted information is obtained, but the attacker does not have control over what information is obtained, or the amount or kind of loss is limited. The information disclosure does not cause a direct, serious loss to the impacted component.

Integrity Impact

This metric measures the impact to integrity of a successfully exploited vulnerability. Integrity refers to the trustworthiness and veracity of information.

Low

Modification of data is possible, but the attacker does not have control over the consequence of a modification, or the amount of modification is limited. The data modification does not have a direct, serious impact on the impacted component.

Availability Impact

This metric measures the impact to the availability of the impacted component resulting from a successfully exploited vulnerability.

None

There is no impact to availability within the impacted component.

Temporal Metrics

The Temporal metrics measure the current state of exploit techniques or code availability, the existence of any patches or workarounds, or the confidence in the description of a vulnerability.

Environmental Metrics

These metrics enable the analyst to customize the CVSS score depending on the importance of the affected IT asset to a user’s organization, measured in terms of Confidentiality, Integrity, and Availability.

EPSS

EPSSは脆弱性が悪用される可能性を予測するスコアリングモデルです。

EPSSスコア

EPSSモデルは0から1(0〜100%)の確率スコアを算出します。スコアが高いほど、脆弱性が悪用される可能性が高いことを示します。

EPSSパーセンタイル

パーセンタイルはCVEをEPSSスコアで順位付けするために使用されます。例えば、EPSSスコアで95パーセンタイルにあるCVEは、他の95%のCVEよりも悪用される可能性が高いことを意味します。パーセンタイルはCVEのEPSSスコアを他のCVEと比較するために使用されます。

参考資料