ghsa-q68w-fq74-6jp9
Vulnerability from github
Published
2022-12-22 21:30
Modified
2023-01-03 21:30
Severity ?
8.1 (High) - CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N
Details

If a Thunderbird user replied to a crafted HTML email containing a meta tag, with the meta tag having the http-equiv="refresh" attribute, and the content attribute specifying an URL, then Thunderbird started a network request to that URL, regardless of the configuration to block remote content. In combination with certain other HTML elements and attributes in the email, it was possible to execute JavaScript code included in the message in the context of the message compose document. The JavaScript code was able to perform actions including, but probably not limited to, read and modify the contents of the message compose document, including the quoted original message, which could potentially contain the decrypted plaintext of encrypted data in the crafted email. The contents could then be transmitted to the network, either to the URL specified in the META refresh tag, or to a different URL, as the JavaScript code could modify the URL specified in the document. This bug doesn't affect users who have changed the default Message Body display setting to 'simple html' or 'plain text'. This vulnerability affects Thunderbird < 102.2.1 and Thunderbird < 91.13.1.

Show details on source website

To clipboard 

{
   affected: [],
   aliases: [
      "CVE-2022-3033",
   ],
   database_specific: {
      cwe_ids: [
         "CWE-94",
      ],
      github_reviewed: false,
      github_reviewed_at: null,
      nvd_published_at: "2022-12-22T20:15:00Z",
      severity: "HIGH",
   },
   details: "If a Thunderbird user replied to a crafted HTML email containing a <code>meta</code> tag, with the <code>meta</code> tag having the <code>http-equiv=\"refresh\"</code> attribute, and the content attribute specifying an URL, then Thunderbird started a network request to that URL, regardless of the configuration to block remote content. In combination with certain other HTML elements and attributes in the email, it was possible to execute JavaScript code included in the message in the context of the message compose document. The JavaScript code was able to perform actions including, but probably not limited to, read and modify the contents of the message compose document, including the quoted original message, which could potentially contain the decrypted plaintext of encrypted data in the crafted email. The contents could then be transmitted to the network, either to the URL specified in the META refresh tag, or to a different URL, as the JavaScript code could modify the URL specified in the document. This bug doesn't affect users who have changed the default Message Body display setting to 'simple html' or 'plain text'. This vulnerability affects Thunderbird < 102.2.1 and Thunderbird < 91.13.1.",
   id: "GHSA-q68w-fq74-6jp9",
   modified: "2023-01-03T21:30:20Z",
   published: "2022-12-22T21:30:28Z",
   references: [
      {
         type: "ADVISORY",
         url: "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2022-3033",
      },
      {
         type: "WEB",
         url: "https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1784838",
      },
      {
         type: "WEB",
         url: "https://www.mozilla.org/security/advisories/mfsa2022-38",
      },
      {
         type: "WEB",
         url: "https://www.mozilla.org/security/advisories/mfsa2022-39",
      },
   ],
   schema_version: "1.4.0",
   severity: [
      {
         score: "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N",
         type: "CVSS_V3",
      },
   ],
}


Log in or create an account to share your comment.

Security Advisory comment format.

This schema specifies the format of a comment related to a security advisory.

UUIDv4 of the comment
UUIDv4 of the Vulnerability-Lookup instance
When the comment was created originally
When the comment was last updated
Title of the comment
Description of the comment
The identifier of the vulnerability (CVE ID, GHSA-ID, PYSEC ID, etc.).



Tags
Taxonomy of the tags.




Sightings

Author Source Type Date

Nomenclature

  • Seen: The vulnerability was mentioned, discussed, or seen somewhere by the user.
  • Confirmed: The vulnerability is confirmed from an analyst perspective.
  • Exploited: This vulnerability was exploited and seen by the user reporting the sighting.
  • Patched: This vulnerability was successfully patched by the user reporting the sighting.
  • Not exploited: This vulnerability was not exploited or seen by the user reporting the sighting.
  • Not confirmed: The user expresses doubt about the veracity of the vulnerability.
  • Not patched: This vulnerability was not successfully patched by the user reporting the sighting.