CVE-2021-41183
ADVISORY - githubSummary
Impact
Accepting the value of various *Text options of the Datepicker widget from untrusted sources may execute untrusted code. For example, initializing the datepicker in the following way:
$( "#datepicker" ).datepicker( {
showButtonPanel: true,
showOn: "both",
closeText: "<script>doEvilThing( 'closeText XSS' )</script>",
currentText: "<script>doEvilThing( 'currentText XSS' )</script>",
prevText: "<script>doEvilThing( 'prevText XSS' )</script>",
nextText: "<script>doEvilThing( 'nextText XSS' )</script>",
buttonText: "<script>doEvilThing( 'buttonText XSS' )</script>",
appendText: "<script>doEvilThing( 'appendText XSS' )</script>",
} );
will call doEvilThing with 6 different parameters coming from all *Text options.
Patches
The issue is fixed in jQuery UI 1.13.0. The values passed to various *Text options are now always treated as pure text, not HTML.
Workarounds
A workaround is to not accept the value of the *Text options from untrusted sources.
For more information
If you have any questions or comments about this advisory, search for a relevant issue in the jQuery UI repo. If you don't find an answer, open a new issue.
Common Weakness Enumeration (CWE)
Improper Neutralization of Input During Web Page Generation ('Cross-site Scripting')
Improper Neutralization of Input During Web Page Generation ('Cross-site Scripting')
Improper Neutralization of Input During Web Page Generation ('Cross-site Scripting')
GitHub
2.8
CVSS SCORE
6.5medium| Package | Type | OS Name | OS Version | Affected Ranges | Fix Versions |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| jquery-ui | npm | - | - | <1.13.0 | 1.13.0 |
| jquery-ui-rails | gem | - | - | <7.0.0 | 7.0.0 |
| jquery.ui.combined | nuget | - | - | <1.13.0 | 1.13.0 |
| org.webjars.npm/jquery-ui | maven | - | - | <1.13.0 | 1.13.0 |
CVSS:3 Severity and metrics
The CVSS metrics represent different qualitative aspects of a vulnerability that impact the overall score, as defined by the CVSS Specification.
The vulnerable component is bound to the network stack, but the attack is limited at the protocol level to a logically adjacent topology. This can mean an attack must be launched from the same shared physical (e.g., Bluetooth or IEEE 802.11) or logical (e.g., local IP subnet) network, or from within a secure or otherwise limited administrative domain (e.g., MPLS, secure VPN to an administrative network zone). One example of an Adjacent attack would be an ARP (IPv4) or neighbor discovery (IPv6) flood leading to a denial of service on the local LAN segment (e.g., CVE-2013-6014).
Specialized access conditions or extenuating circumstances do not exist. An attacker can expect repeatable success when attacking the vulnerable component.
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.
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.
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.
There is no loss of confidentiality.
There is a total loss of integrity, or a complete loss of protection. For example, the attacker is able to modify any or all files protected by the impacted component. Alternatively, only some files can be modified, but malicious modification would present a direct, serious consequence to the impacted component.
There is no impact to availability within the impacted component.
NIST
2.8
CVSS SCORE
6.5mediumAlpine
-
Debian
-
Ubuntu
2.8
CVSS SCORE
6.1mediumBitnami
BIT-2021-41183
-
CVSS SCORE
N/AmediumBitnami
BIT-drupal-2021-41183
2.8
CVSS SCORE
6.1mediumRed Hat
2.8
CVSS SCORE
6.5mediumintheWild
-
-