ID CVE-2011-0447
Summary Ruby on Rails 2.1.x, 2.2.x, and 2.3.x before 2.3.11, and 3.x before 3.0.4, does not properly validate HTTP requests that contain an X-Requested-With header, which makes it easier for remote attackers to conduct cross-site request forgery (CSRF) attacks via forged (1) AJAX or (2) API requests that leverage "combinations of browser plugins and HTTP redirects," a related issue to CVE-2011-0696.
References
Vulnerable Configurations
  • Ruby on Rails 2.1
    cpe:2.3:a:rubyonrails:ruby_on_rails:2.1
  • Ruby on Rails 2.1.0
    cpe:2.3:a:rubyonrails:ruby_on_rails:2.1.0
  • Ruby on Rails 2.1.1
    cpe:2.3:a:rubyonrails:ruby_on_rails:2.1.1
  • Ruby on Rails 2.1.2
    cpe:2.3:a:rubyonrails:ruby_on_rails:2.1.2
  • Ruby on Rails 2.2.0
    cpe:2.3:a:rubyonrails:ruby_on_rails:2.2.0
  • Ruby on Rails 2.2.1
    cpe:2.3:a:rubyonrails:ruby_on_rails:2.2.1
  • Ruby on Rails 2.2.2
    cpe:2.3:a:rubyonrails:ruby_on_rails:2.2.2
  • Ruby on Rails 2.3.2
    cpe:2.3:a:rubyonrails:ruby_on_rails:2.3.2
  • Ruby on Rails 2.3.3
    cpe:2.3:a:rubyonrails:ruby_on_rails:2.3.3
  • Ruby on Rails 2.3.4
    cpe:2.3:a:rubyonrails:ruby_on_rails:2.3.4
  • Ruby on Rails 2.3.9
    cpe:2.3:a:rubyonrails:ruby_on_rails:2.3.9
  • Ruby on Rails 2.3.10
    cpe:2.3:a:rubyonrails:ruby_on_rails:2.3.10
  • Ruby on Rails 3.0.0
    cpe:2.3:a:rubyonrails:ruby_on_rails:3.0.0
  • Ruby on Rails 3.0.0 beta
    cpe:2.3:a:rubyonrails:ruby_on_rails:3.0.0:beta
  • Ruby on Rails 3.0.0 beta2
    cpe:2.3:a:rubyonrails:ruby_on_rails:3.0.0:beta2
  • Ruby on Rails 3.0.0 beta3
    cpe:2.3:a:rubyonrails:ruby_on_rails:3.0.0:beta3
  • Ruby on Rails 3.0.0 beta4
    cpe:2.3:a:rubyonrails:ruby_on_rails:3.0.0:beta4
  • Ruby on Rails 3.0.0 release candidate
    cpe:2.3:a:rubyonrails:ruby_on_rails:3.0.0:rc
  • Ruby on Rails 3.0.0 release candidate 2
    cpe:2.3:a:rubyonrails:ruby_on_rails:3.0.0:rc2
  • Ruby on Rails 3.0.1
    cpe:2.3:a:rubyonrails:ruby_on_rails:3.0.1
  • Ruby on Rails 3.0.1 pre
    cpe:2.3:a:rubyonrails:ruby_on_rails:3.0.1:pre
  • Ruby on Rails 3.0.2
    cpe:2.3:a:rubyonrails:ruby_on_rails:3.0.2
  • Ruby on Rails 3.0.2 pre
    cpe:2.3:a:rubyonrails:ruby_on_rails:3.0.2:pre
  • Ruby on Rails 3.0.3
    cpe:2.3:a:rubyonrails:ruby_on_rails:3.0.3
  • Ruby on Rails 3.0.4 release candidate
    cpe:2.3:a:rubyonrails:ruby_on_rails:3.0.4:rc
  • Ruby on Rails 3.0.4 release candidate 1
    cpe:2.3:a:rubyonrails:ruby_on_rails:3.0.4:rc1
CVSS
Base: 6.8 (as of 15-02-2011 - 08:36)
Impact:
Exploitability:
CWE CWE-352
CAPEC
  • JSON Hijacking (aka JavaScript Hijacking)
    An attacker targets a system that uses JavaScript Object Notation (JSON) as a transport mechanism between the client and the server (common in Web 2.0 systems using AJAX) to steal possibly confidential information transmitted from the server back to the client inside the JSON object by taking advantage of the loophole in the browser's Same Origin Policy that does not prohibit JavaScript from one website to be included and executed in the context of another website. An attacker gets the victim to visit his or her malicious page that contains a script tag whose source points to the vulnerable system with a URL that requests a response from the server containing a JSON object with possibly confidential information. The malicious page also contains malicious code to capture the JSON object returned by the server before any other processing on it can take place, typically by overriding the JavaScript function used to create new objects. This hook allows the malicious code to get access to the creation of each object and transmit the possibly sensitive contents of the captured JSON object to the attackers' server. There is nothing in the browser's security model to prevent the attackers' malicious JavaScript code (originating from attacker's domain) to set up an environment (as described above) to intercept a JSON object response (coming from the vulnerable target system's domain), read its contents and transmit to the attackers' controlled site. The same origin policy protects the domain object model (DOM), but not the JSON.
  • Cross-Domain Search Timing
    An attacker initiates cross domain HTTP / GET requests and times the server responses. The timing of these responses may leak important information on what is happening on the server. Browser's same origin policy prevents the attacker from directly reading the server responses (in the absence of any other weaknesses), but does not prevent the attacker from timing the responses to requests that the attacker issued cross domain. For GET requests an attacker could for instance leverage the "img" tag in conjunction with "onload() / onerror()" javascript events. For the POST requests, an attacker could leverage the "iframe" element and leverage the "onload()" event. There is nothing in the current browser security model that prevents an attacker to use these methods to time responses to the attackers' cross domain requests. The timing for these responses leaks information. For instance, if a victim has an active session with their online e-mail account, an attacker could issue search requests in the victim's mailbox. While the attacker is not able to view the responses, based on the timings of the responses, the attacker could ask yes / no questions as to the content of victim's e-mails, who the victim e-mailed, when, etc. This is but one example; There are other scenarios where an attacker could infer potentially sensitive information from cross domain requests by timing the responses while asking the right questions that leak information.
  • Cross Site Identification
    An attacker harvests identifying information about a victim via an active session that the victim's browser has with a social networking site. A victim may have the social networking site open in one tab or perhaps is simply using the "remember me" feature to keep his or her session with the social networking site active. An attacker induces a payload to execute in the victim's browser that transparently to the victim initiates a request to the social networking site (e.g., via available social network site APIs) to retrieve identifying information about a victim. While some of this information may be public, the attacker is able to harvest this information in context and may use it for further attacks on the user (e.g., spear phishing). In one example of an attack, an attacker may post a malicious posting that contains an image with an embedded link. The link actually requests identifying information from the social networking site. A victim who views the malicious posting in his or her browser will have sent identifying information to the attacker, as long as the victim had an active session with the social networking site. There are many other ways in which the attacker may get the payload to execute in the victim's browser mainly by finding a way to hide it in some reputable site that the victim visits. The attacker could also send the link to the victim in an e-mail and trick the victim into clicking on the link. This attack is basically a cross site request forgery attack with two main differences. First, there is no action that is performed on behalf of the user aside from harvesting information. So standard CSRF protection may not work in this situation. Second, what is important in this attack pattern is the nature of the data being harvested, which is identifying information that can be obtained and used in context. This real time harvesting of identifying information can be used as a prelude for launching real time targeted social engineering attacks on the victim.
  • Cross Site Request Forgery (aka Session Riding)
    An attacker crafts malicious web links and distributes them (via web pages, email, etc.), typically in a targeted manner, hoping to induce users to click on the link and execute the malicious action against some third-party application. If successful, the action embedded in the malicious link will be processed and accepted by the targeted application with the users' privilege level. This type of attack leverages the persistence and implicit trust placed in user session cookies by many web applications today. In such an architecture, once the user authenticates to an application and a session cookie is created on the user's system, all following transactions for that session are authenticated using that cookie including potential actions initiated by an attacker and simply "riding" the existing session cookie.
Access
VectorComplexityAuthentication
NETWORK MEDIUM NONE
Impact
ConfidentialityIntegrityAvailability
PARTIAL PARTIAL PARTIAL
nessus via4
  • NASL family Debian Local Security Checks
    NASL id DEBIAN_DSA-2247.NASL
    description Several vulnerabilities have been discovered in Rails, the Ruby web application framework. The Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures project identifies the following problems : - CVE-2011-0446 Multiple cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerabilities when JavaScript encoding is used, allow remote attackers to inject arbitrary web script or HTML. - CVE-2011-0447 Rails does not properly validate HTTP requests that contain an X-Requested-With header, which makes it easier for remote attackers to conduct cross-site request forgery (CSRF) attacks.
    last seen 2019-02-21
    modified 2018-11-10
    plugin id 55035
    published 2011-06-10
    reporter Tenable
    source https://www.tenable.com/plugins/index.php?view=single&id=55035
    title Debian DSA-2247-1 : rails - several vulnerabilities
  • NASL family Fedora Local Security Checks
    NASL id FEDORA_2011-2138.NASL
    description Security fixes (CVE-2011-0446, CVE-2011-0447). Note that Tenable Network Security has extracted the preceding description block directly from the Fedora security advisory. Tenable has attempted to automatically clean and format it as much as possible without introducing additional issues.
    last seen 2019-02-21
    modified 2018-07-12
    plugin id 52557
    published 2011-03-07
    reporter Tenable
    source https://www.tenable.com/plugins/index.php?view=single&id=52557
    title Fedora 13 : rubygem-actionpack-2.3.5-4.fc13 (2011-2138)
  • NASL family SuSE Local Security Checks
    NASL id SUSE_11_3_RUBYGEM-ACTIONMAILER-111116.NASL
    description This update of rails fixes the following security issues : CVE-2011-2930 - SQL-injection in quote_table_name function via specially crafted column names (bnc#712062) CVE-2011-2931 - Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) in the strip_tags helper (bnc#712057) CVE-2011-3186 - Response Splitting (bnc#712058) CVE-2010-3933 - Arbitrary modification of records via specially crafted form parameters (bnc#712058) CVE-2011-0446 - Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) in the mail_to helper (bnc#668817) CVE-2011-0447 - Improper validation of 'X-Requested-With' header (bnc#668817) CVE-2011-0448 - SQL-injection caused by improperly sanitized arguments to the limit function (bnc#668817) CVE-2011-0449 - Bypass of access restrictions via specially crafted action names (bnc#668817)
    last seen 2019-02-21
    modified 2018-11-10
    plugin id 75730
    published 2014-06-13
    reporter Tenable
    source https://www.tenable.com/plugins/index.php?view=single&id=75730
    title openSUSE Security Update : rubygem-actionmailer (openSUSE-SU-2011:1305-1)
  • NASL family SuSE Local Security Checks
    NASL id SUSE_11_4_RUBYGEM-ACTIONMAILER-111116.NASL
    description This update of rails fixes the following security issues : CVE-2011-2930 - SQL-injection in quote_table_name function via specially crafted column names (bnc#712062) CVE-2011-2931 - Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) in the strip_tags helper (bnc#712057) CVE-2011-3186 - Response Splitting (bnc#712058) CVE-2010-3933 - Arbitrary modification of records via specially crafted form parameters (bnc#712058) CVE-2011-0446 - Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) in the mail_to helper (bnc#668817) CVE-2011-0447 - Improper validation of 'X-Requested-With' header (bnc#668817) CVE-2011-0448 - SQL-injection caused by improperly sanitized arguments to the limit function (bnc#668817) CVE-2011-0449 - Bypass of access restrictions via specially crafted action names (bnc#668817)
    last seen 2019-02-21
    modified 2018-11-10
    plugin id 76016
    published 2014-06-13
    reporter Tenable
    source https://www.tenable.com/plugins/index.php?view=single&id=76016
    title openSUSE Security Update : rubygem-actionmailer (openSUSE-SU-2011:1305-1)
  • NASL family Gentoo Local Security Checks
    NASL id GENTOO_GLSA-201412-28.NASL
    description The remote host is affected by the vulnerability described in GLSA-201412-28 (Ruby on Rails: Multiple vulnerabilities) Multiple vulnerabilities have been discovered in Ruby on Rails. Please review the CVE identifiers referenced below for details. Impact : A remote attacker could execute arbitrary code or cause a Denial of Service condition. Furthermore, a remote attacker may be able to execute arbitrary SQL commands, change parameter names for form inputs and make changes to arbitrary records in the system, bypass intended access restrictions, render arbitrary views, inject arbitrary web script or HTML, or conduct cross-site request forgery (CSRF) attacks. Workaround : There is no known workaround at this time.
    last seen 2019-02-21
    modified 2018-12-05
    plugin id 79981
    published 2014-12-15
    reporter Tenable
    source https://www.tenable.com/plugins/index.php?view=single&id=79981
    title GLSA-201412-28 : Ruby on Rails: Multiple vulnerabilities
  • NASL family Fedora Local Security Checks
    NASL id FEDORA_2011-4358.NASL
    description Update to the Rails 3.0.5 Note that Tenable Network Security has extracted the preceding description block directly from the Fedora security advisory. Tenable has attempted to automatically clean and format it as much as possible without introducing additional issues.
    last seen 2019-02-21
    modified 2015-10-20
    plugin id 53299
    published 2011-04-06
    reporter Tenable
    source https://www.tenable.com/plugins/index.php?view=single&id=53299
    title Fedora 15 : rubygem-actionmailer-3.0.5-1.fc15 / rubygem-actionpack-3.0.5-1.fc15 / etc (2011-4358)
  • NASL family Fedora Local Security Checks
    NASL id FEDORA_2011-2133.NASL
    description Security fixes (CVE-2011-0446, CVE-2011-0447). Note that Tenable Network Security has extracted the preceding description block directly from the Fedora security advisory. Tenable has attempted to automatically clean and format it as much as possible without introducing additional issues.
    last seen 2019-02-21
    modified 2018-07-12
    plugin id 52556
    published 2011-03-07
    reporter Tenable
    source https://www.tenable.com/plugins/index.php?view=single&id=52556
    title Fedora 14 : rubygem-actionpack-2.3.8-3.fc14 (2011-2133)
refmap via4
bid 46291
confirm http://weblog.rubyonrails.org/2011/2/8/csrf-protection-bypass-in-ruby-on-rails
debian DSA-2247
fedora
  • FEDORA-2011-2133
  • FEDORA-2011-2138
  • FEDORA-2011-4358
mlist [rubyonrails-security] 20110209 CSRF Protection Bypass in Ruby on Rails
sectrack 1025060
secunia
  • 43274
  • 43666
vupen
  • ADV-2011-0587
  • ADV-2011-0877
Last major update 06-07-2012 - 00:00
Published 14-02-2011 - 16:00
Back to Top