CVE-2024-28849
ADVISORY - githubSummary
When using axios, its dependency follow-redirects only clears authorization header during cross-domain redirect, but allows the proxy-authentication header which contains credentials too.
Steps To Reproduce & PoC
Test code:
const axios = require('axios');
axios.get('http://127.0.0.1:10081/', {
headers: {
'AuThorization': 'Rear Test',
'ProXy-AuthoriZation': 'Rear Test',
'coOkie': 't=1'
}
})
.then((response) => {
console.log(response);
})
When I meet the cross-domain redirect, the sensitive headers like authorization and cookie are cleared, but proxy-authentication header is kept.
Impact
This vulnerability may lead to credentials leak.
Recommendations
Remove proxy-authentication header during cross-domain redirect
Recommended Patch
- removeMatchingHeaders(/^(?:authorization|cookie)$/i, this._options.headers);
+ removeMatchingHeaders(/^(?:authorization|proxy-authorization|cookie)$/i, this._options.headers);
Common Weakness Enumeration (CWE)
Exposure of Sensitive Information to an Unauthorized Actor
Exposure of Sensitive Information to an Unauthorized Actor
Exposure of Sensitive Information to an Unauthorized Actor
GitHub
2.8
CVSS SCORE
6.5medium| Package | Type | OS Name | OS Version | Affected Ranges | Fix Versions |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| follow-redirects | npm | - | - | <=1.15.5 | 1.15.6 |
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 requires privileges that provide basic user capabilities that could normally affect only settings and files owned by a user. Alternatively, an attacker with Low privileges has the ability to access only non-sensitive resources.
The vulnerable system can be exploited without interaction from any user.
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 a total loss of confidentiality, resulting in all resources within the impacted component being divulged to the attacker. Alternatively, access to only some restricted information is obtained, but the disclosed information presents a direct, serious impact. For example, an attacker steals the administrator's password, or private encryption keys of a web server.
There is no loss of trust or accuracy within the impacted component.
There is no impact to availability within the impacted component.
NIST
2.8
CVSS SCORE
6.5mediumDebian
-
Ubuntu
-
CVSS SCORE
N/AmediumRed Hat
2.8
CVSS SCORE
6.5mediumChainguard
CGA-3qpx-2jp6-8w3m
-
Chainguard
CGA-7g4q-75vq-228c
-
Chainguard
CGA-896m-v6ff-2q96
-
Chainguard
CGA-8m86-gww5-8pm9
-
Chainguard
CGA-fp6h-638c-5c69
-
Chainguard
CGA-r834-rj47-cfj9
-
Chainguard
CGA-w43g-68f9-2mqp
-