CVE-2026-82898
22h14 +00:00
CVE 설명
Apache Wicket: A cross-origin listener invocation stopped by a login wall is replayed after the user signs in
Incorrect order of security checks in Apache Wicket. org.apache.wicket.protocol.http.ResourceIsolationRequestCycleListener obtains the page a request targets before it consults its resource isolation policies, because those policies are passed that page. Obtaining the page instantiates it, and instantiating a page runs the configured org.apache.wicket.authorization.IAuthorizationStrategy. An application that refuses an unauthenticated visitor by throwing org.apache.wicket.RestartResponseAtInterceptPageException therefore throws it from inside the isolation listener, before any policy has run. That exception replaces the request handler, so the policies are never consulted and a request that came from another origin is not refused. The exception's constructor stores the URL of the request it interrupted, so that Component#continueToOriginalDestination() can resume it once the visitor has signed in. The stored URL is the one the policies would have refused. On sign in Wicket redirects to it, and that redirect is same-origin, so the policies allow it and the listener runs in the newly authenticated session. The whole URL is stored, its query string included, so an ordinary org.apache.wicket.markup.html.form.Form is resumed with the field values the original request carried in its query string and Form#onSubmit() runs with values another origin chose. A form POST is not needed for this; a plain top-level navigation carries them. An application is affected where it registers ResourceIsolationRequestCycleListener, which is opt-in and is not registered by default, and where it refuses unauthorized access with RestartResponseAtInterceptPageException followed by continueToOriginalDestination(). No application override is involved on that path: IAuthorizationStrategy#isInstantiationAuthorized() documents throwing that exception, org.apache.wicket.authroles.authentication.AuthenticatedWebApplication throws it and org.apache.wicket.authroles.authentication.panel.UsernamePasswordPanel continues to the original destination, and org.apache.wicket.authorization.strategies.page.SimplePageAuthorizationStrategy in wicket-core installs the same pattern. A visitor who is already signed in is not affected, because no interception occurs. Request-body parameters stored alongside the intercepted URL are not applied to the resumed form: the resumption is a redirect, so the resumed request is a GET, and form components read their values from the query string on a GET. As a workaround, refuse unauthorized access with org.apache.wicket.RestartResponseException instead, which does not store the original destination; visitors are then not returned to the page they asked for after signing in. This issue affects Apache Wicket: from 9.1.0 through 9.24.0, from 10.0.0 through 10.11.0. Releases before 9.1.0, which is every 8.x release and 9.0.0, are not affected, because the resource isolation this issue concerns was introduced in 9.1.0. They are not protected either. Their only cross-origin defence is org.apache.wicket.protocol.http.CsrfPreventionRequestCycleListener, which works out where a request came from by reading its Origin header and falling back to its Referer header. Neither header need arrive: a browser does not send Origin on the plain GET a link uses, and the document on the other origin decides through its own referrer policy whether a Referer reaches the application at all. That mechanism therefore never made the guarantee the Fetch Metadata based policy makes, and on those releases a listener invocation from another origin is not reliably refused in the first place. Anyone on a release before 9.1.0 who wants this protection should upgrade to 9.x or 10.x and register ResourceIsolationRequestCycleListener. Users are recommended to upgrade to version 9.25.0 or 10.12.0, which fix the issue.CVE 정보
관련 약점
| 약점 이름 | 출처 | |
|---|---|---|
| Incorrect Behavior Order The product performs multiple related behaviors, but the behaviors are performed in the wrong order in ways that may produce resultant weaknesses. |
메트릭
| 메트릭 | 점수 | 심각도 | CVSS 벡터 | 출처 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| V4.0 | 2.1 | LOW |
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:N/UI:A/VC:N/VI:L/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N
추가 정보
Base: Exploitabilty MetricsThe Exploitability metrics reflect the characteristics of the “thing that is vulnerable”, which we refer to formally as the vulnerable system. Attack Vector This metric reflects the context by which vulnerability exploitation is possible. Network The vulnerable system 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 captures measurable actions that must be taken by the attacker to actively evade or circumvent existing built-in security-enhancing conditions in order to obtain a working exploit. Low The attacker must take no measurable action to exploit the vulnerability. The attack requires no target-specific circumvention to exploit the vulnerability. An attacker can expect repeatable success against the vulnerable system. Attack Requirements This metric captures the prerequisite deployment and execution conditions or variables of the vulnerable system that enable the attack. Present The successful attack depends on the presence of specific deployment and execution conditions of the vulnerable system that enable the attack. These include: A race condition must be won to successfully exploit the vulnerability. The successfulness of the attack is conditioned on execution conditions that are not under full control of the attacker. The attack may need to be launched multiple times against a single target before being successful. Network injection. The attacker must inject themselves into the logical network path between the target and the resource requested by the victim (e.g. vulnerabilities requiring an on-path attacker). Privileges Required This metric describes the level of privileges an attacker must possess prior to successfully exploiting the vulnerability. None The attacker is unauthenticated 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 system. Active Successful exploitation of this vulnerability requires a targeted user to perform specific, conscious interactions with the vulnerable system and the attacker’s payload, or the user’s interactions would actively subvert protection mechanisms which would lead to exploitation of the vulnerability. Examples include: importing a file into a vulnerable system in a specific manner placing files into a specific directory prior to executing code submitting a specific string into a web application (e.g. reflected or self XSS) dismiss or accept prompts or security warnings prior to taking an action (e.g. opening/editing a file, connecting a device). Base: Impact MetricsThe Impact metrics capture the effects of a successfully exploited vulnerability. 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 managed by the system due to a successfully exploited vulnerability. None There is no loss of confidentiality within the Vulnerable System. Integrity Impact This metric measures the impact to integrity of a successfully exploited vulnerability. 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 to the Vulnerable System. Availability Impact This metric measures the impact to the availability of the impacted system resulting from a successfully exploited vulnerability. None There is no impact to availability within the Vulnerable System. Sub Confidentiality Impact Negligible There is no loss of confidentiality within the Subsequent System or all confidentiality impact is constrained to the Vulnerable System. Sub Integrity Impact None There is no loss of integrity within the Subsequent System or all integrity impact is constrained to the Vulnerable System. Sub Availability Impact None There is no impact to availability within the Subsequent System or all availability impact is constrained to the Vulnerable System. Threat MetricsThe Threat metrics measure the current state of exploit techniques or code availability for a vulnerability. Environmental MetricsThese metrics enable the consumer analyst to customize the resulting score depending on the importance of the affected IT asset to a user’s organization, measured in terms of complementary/alternative security controls in place, Confidentiality, Integrity, and Availability. The metrics are the modified equivalent of Base metrics and are assigned values based on the system placement within organizational infrastructure. Supplemental MetricsSupplemental metric group provides new metrics that describe and measure additional extrinsic attributes of a vulnerability. While the assessment of Supplemental metrics is provisioned by the provider, the usage and response plan of each metric within the Supplemental metric group is determined by the consumer. |
