Weakness (CWE)
CWE-352: Cross-Site Request Forgery
The web application does not, or cannot, sufficiently verify whether a request was intentionally provided by the user who sent the request, which could have originated from an unauthorized actor.
How to prevent it (7 mitigations)
-
Architecture and Design
Use a vetted library or framework that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid [REF-1482].
For example, use anti-CSRF packages such as the OWASP CSRFGuard. [REF-330]
Another example is the ESAPI Session Management control, which includes a component for CSRF. [REF-45]
-
Implementation
Ensure that the application is free of cross-site scripting issues (CWE-79), because most CSRF defenses can be bypassed using attacker-controlled script.
-
Architecture and Design
Generate a unique nonce for each form, place the nonce into the form, and verify the nonce upon receipt of the form. Be sure that the nonce is not predictable (CWE-330). [REF-332]
-
Architecture and Design
Identify especially dangerous operations. When the user performs a dangerous operation, send a separate confirmation request to ensure that the user intended to perform that operation.
-
Architecture and Design
Use the "double-submitted cookie" method as described by Felten and Zeller:
When a user visits a site, the site should generate a pseudorandom value and set it as a cookie on the user's machine. The site should require every form submission to include this value as a form value and also as a cookie value. When a POST request is sent to the site, the request should only be considered valid if the form value and the cookie value are the same.
Because of the same-origin policy, an attacker cannot read or modify the value stored in the cookie. To successfully submit a form on behalf of the user, the attacker would have to correctly guess the pseudorandom value. If the pseudorandom value is cryptographically strong, this will be prohibitively difficult.
This technique requires Javascript, so it may not work for browsers that have Javascript disabled. [REF-331]
-
Architecture and Design
Do not use the GET method for any request that triggers a state change.
-
Implementation
Check the HTTP Referer header to see if the request originated from an expected page. This could break legitimate functionality, because users or proxies may have disabled sending the Referer for privacy reasons.
Source: MITRE CWE-352
135 results · Clear filters · Feed
-
Low 2.3
CSRF allows attacker to finalize/unfinalize order adjustments in solidus_backend
solidus_backend is the admin interface for the Solidus e-commerce framework. Versions prior to 3.1.6, 3.0.6, and 2.11.16 contain a cross-site request forgery (CSRF) vulnerability. The vulnerability allows attackers to change the state of an order's adjustment…
-
Low 2.3
This vulnerability arises because the application allows the user to perform some sensitive action without verifying th…
-
Low 3.1
On all versions of 16.1.x, 15.1.x, 14.1.x, 13.1.x, 12.1.x, and 11.6.x of F5 BIG-IP (fixed in 17.0.0), a cross-site requ…
-
Low 3.5CVE-2022-0088 Public exploit
Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) in yourls/yourls
Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) in GitHub repository yourls/yourls prior to 1.8.3.
-
Low 3.1
Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) in bookstackapp/bookstack
bookstack is vulnerable to Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF)
-
Low 3.5
Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) in firefly-iii/firefly-iii
firefly-iii is vulnerable to Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF)
-
Low 2.4
CSRF allowing modification of commands, modules, banphrases through hidden iFrames
Pajbot is a Twitch chat bot. Pajbot versions prior to 1.52 are vulnerable to cross-site request forgery (CSRF). Hosters of the bot should upgrade to `v1.52` or `stable` to install the patch or, as a workaround, can add one modern dependency.
-
Low —
CSRF Vuln can expose user's QRcode
### Impact When a user is setting up two-factor authentication using an authenticator app, a QRcode is generated and made available via a GET request to /tf-qrcode. Since GETs do not have any CSRF protection, it is possible a malicious 3rd party could access …
-
Low 3.3
OIDC Logout redirect in keycloak
A vulnerability was found in keycloak in the way that the OIDC logout endpoint does not have CSRF protection. Versions shipped with Red Hat Fuse 7, Red Hat Single Sign-on 7, and Red Hat Openshift Application Runtimes are believed to be vulnerable.
-
Low 3.5
OpenCart Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF)
Cross Site Request Forgery (CSRF) in CART option in OpenCart Ltd. Opencart CMS 3.0.3.6 allows attacker to add cart items via Add to cart.
-
Low 3.4
Philips Clinical Collaboration Platform Cross-site Request Forgery
Philips Clinical Collaboration Platform, Versions 12.2.1 and prior. The product receives input or data, but it does not validate or incorrectly validates that the input has the properties required to process the data safely and correctly.
-
Low 2.0
The vulnerability have been reported to affect earlier versions of Helpdesk. If exploited, this cross-site request forg…
-
Low 3.1
CSRF vulnerability in Amazon EC2 Plugin
A cross-site request forgery vulnerability in Jenkins Amazon EC2 Plugin 1.50.1 and earlier allows attackers to provision instances.
-
Low 3.1
CSRF vulnerability in Jenkins Amazon EC2 Plugin
A cross-site request forgery vulnerability in Jenkins Amazon EC2 Plugin 1.47 and earlier allows attackers to connect to an attacker-specified URL within the AWS region using attacker-specified credentials IDs obtained through another method.
-
Low —
Jenkins Vulnerable to Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) Attack
Jenkins before 1.638 and LTS before 1.625.2 uses a publicly accessible salt to generate CSRF protection tokens, which makes it easier for remote attackers to bypass the CSRF protection mechanism via a brute force attack.