oss-sec mailing list archives
Re: Possible CVE Requests: several issues fixed in Jenkins (Advisory 2014-02-14)
From: cve-assign () mitre org
Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2014 22:39:46 -0500 (EST)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
SECURITY-105 | In some places, Jenkins XML API uses XStream to deserialize arbitrary | content, which is affected by CVE-2013-7285 reported against XStream. | This allows malicious users of Jenkins with a limited set of permissions | to execute arbitrary code inside Jenkins master. https://github.com/jenkinsci/jenkins/commit/d030fbbaeeb5ee8980b5680b26217930834387f4
MITRE may be making a CVE assignment for SECURITY-105, but it won't be immediate because we need to discuss that one internally within our team more. This is related to: http://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CVE-2013-7285 not existing yet.
where for SECURITY-76 and SECURITY-88 CVE-2013-5573 was assigned
SECURITY-76 & SECURITY-88 / CVE-2013-5573 | Restrictions of HTML tags for user-editable contents are too lax. This | allows malicious users of Jenkins to trick other unsuspecting users into | providing sensitive information. https://github.com/jenkinsci/jenkins/commit/7541e83cc9812afc2b464f0a3254a2453da53f4c https://github.com/jenkinsci/jenkins/commit/535c1115bbf07f8a57d509f2d00598d6e21870d4
The vendor says "SECURITY-76 & SECURITY-88 / CVE-2013-5573" on that "Jenkins Security Advisory 2014-02-14" page, but the originally intended scope of CVE-2013-5573 is only the issue involving FORM elements (aka SECURITY-88), not the issue involving IFRAME elements (aka SECURITY-76). This may be just a parsing difference. We believe it's: SECURITY-76 & ( SECURITY-88 / CVE-2013-5573 ) not: ( SECURITY-76 & SECURITY-88 ) / CVE-2013-5573 The commit that you didn't list is: https://github.com/jenkinsci/jenkins/commit/788b7d7a067fad4972fefaaa527141847bfeff55 The IFRAME issue wasn't part of the original disclosures such as http://www.exploit-db.com/exploits/30408/ so we normally can't change the scope of CVE-2013-5573 to include it later. https://issues.jenkins-ci.org/browse/SECURITY-76 and https://issues.jenkins-ci.org/browse/SECURITY-88 apparently are not public, and could possibly have clarifying information (e.g., if there were a later finding that only FORM is exploitable, and IFRAME isn't actually exploitable). Unless that information becomes available and suggests a different course of action, we will proceed to assign a new CVE-2013-#### ID for SECURITY-76 soon.
SECURITY-55 https://github.com/jenkinsci/jenkins/commit/36342d71e29e0620f803a7470ce96c61761648d8
Use CVE-2013-7330.
SECURITY-109 | Plugging a hole in the earlier fix to SECURITY-55. Under some | circumstances, a malicious user of Jenkins can configure job X to | trigger another job Y that the user has no access to. https://github.com/jenkinsci/jenkins/commit/b6b2a367a7976be80a799c6a49fa6c58d778b50e
Use CVE-2014-2058.
SECURITY-108 | CLI job creation had a directory traversal vulnerability. This allows a | malicious user of Jenkins with a limited set of permissions to overwrite | files in the Jenkins master and escalate privileges. https://github.com/jenkinsci/jenkins/commit/ad38d8480f20ce3cbf8fec3e2003bc83efda4f7d
Use CVE-2014-2059.
SECURITY-106 | The embedded Winstone servlet container is susceptible to session | hijacking attack. https://github.com/jenkinsci/jenkins/commit/29351af4bd01f61715418916fc12c52be46bd9b0 (issue in jenkins-winstone?)
Use CVE-2014-2060.
SECURITY-93 | The password input control in the password parameter definition in the | Jenkins UI was serving the actual value of the password in HTML, not an | encrypted one. If a sensitive value is set as the default value of such | a parameter definition, it can be exposed to unintended audience. https://github.com/jenkinsci/jenkins/commit/bf539198564a1108b7b71a973bf7de963a6213ef
Use CVE-2014-2061.
SECURITY-89 | Deleting the user was not invalidating the API token, allowing users to | access Jenkins when they shouldn't be allowed to do so. https://github.com/jenkinsci/jenkins/commit/5548b5220cfd496831b5721124189ff18fbb12a3
Use CVE-2014-2062.
SECURITY-80 | Jenkins UI was vulnerable to click jacking attacks. https://github.com/jenkinsci/jenkins/commit/16931bd7bf7560e26ef98328b8e95e803d0e90f6
Use CVE-2014-2063.
SECURITY-79 | "Jenkins' own user database" was revealing the presence/absence of users | when login attempts fail. https://github.com/jenkinsci/jenkins/commit/fbf96734470caba9364f04e0b77b0bae7293a1ec
Use CVE-2014-2064.
SECURITY-77 | Jenkins had a cross-site scripting vulnerability in one of its cookies. | If Jenkins is deployed in an environment that allows an attacker to | override Jenkins cookies in victim's browser, this vulnerability can be | exploited. https://github.com/jenkinsci/jenkins/commit/a0b00508eeb74d7033dc4100eb382df4e8fa72e7
Use CVE-2014-2065. This is an input-validation issue but perhaps shouldn't be categorized as a standard XSS issue because of the unusual threat model.
SECURITY-75 | Jenkins was vulnerable to session fixation attack. If Jenkins is | deployed in an environment that allows an attacker to override Jenkins | cookies in victim's browser, this vulnerability can be exploited. https://github.com/jenkinsci/jenkins/commit/8ac74c350779921598f9d5edfed39dd35de8842a
Use CVE-2014-2066. Again, the unusual threat model might limit the practical relevance of this.
SECURITY-74 | Stored XSS vulnerability. A malicious user of Jenkins with a certain set | of permissions can cause Jenkins to store arbitrary HTML fragment. https://github.com/jenkinsci/jenkins/commit/5d57c855f3147bfc5e7fda9252317b428a700014
Use CVE-2014-2067.
SECURITY-73 | Some of the system diagnostic functionalities were checking a lesser | permission than it should have. In a very limited circumstances, this | can cause an attacker to gain information that he shouldn't have | access to. https://github.com/jenkinsci/jenkins/commit/0530a6645aac10fec005614211660e98db44b5eb
Use CVE-2014-2068. - -- CVE assignment team, MITRE CVE Numbering Authority M/S M300 202 Burlington Road, Bedford, MA 01730 USA [ PGP key available through http://cve.mitre.org/cve/request_id.html ] -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.14 (SunOS) iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJTBsmDAAoJEKllVAevmvms5NkH/RDlkoZIC6ktfTQtnYRRff4E JwTVhINZ+fQTpcag3zCivHKzUxcxFOZL1aOntywuWdPDmNVSDorpuN1JDS6nQNgj gai7aRx+g6ngg+phyAO06oNiAU4NzZm2B84KOtoOccuZWPFw1GOPgkoOT+IyDRes NvYUgFB9ikcl8fJHroIZr14pwPUnSbVnb1xA3pOvReCdT9HfjYxMvl0Ax6i9g6ok QLd56C8ARKBmjfHpWCYwVj00GiUshN9jv4rv9h+QdrdRoLvah5PAvMoLY6BoojFB XVd5dg99XRV/+J/Izz3v1ooeSllncKri48NFSHq8cbJlMxj5YKuTWU2akT/FUC8= =aoN1 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Current thread:
- Possible CVE Requests: several issues fixed in Jenkins (Advisory 2014-02-14) Salvatore Bonaccorso (Feb 16)
- Re: Possible CVE Requests: several issues fixed in Jenkins (Advisory 2014-02-14) David Jorm (Feb 19)
- Re: Possible CVE Requests: several issues fixed in Jenkins (Advisory 2014-02-14) Garth Mollett (Feb 20)
- Re: Possible CVE Requests: several issues fixed in Jenkins (Advisory 2014-02-14) cve-assign (Feb 20)
- Re: Possible CVE Requests: several issues fixed in Jenkins (Advisory 2014-02-14) David Jorm (Feb 19)