Date: Thu, 18 Aug 2016 19:03:27 -0400 From: Justin Bull <me@...tinbull.ca> To: oss-security@...ts.openwall.com, bugtraq@...urityfocus.com, fulldisclosure@...lists.org Subject: [CVE-2016-6582] Doorkeeper gem does not revoke tokens & uses wrong auth/auth method Good evening everyone, A security bulletin for all of you. Software: -------- Doorkeeper (https://github.com/doorkeeper-gem/doorkeeper) Description: ---------- Doorkeeper is an OAuth 2 provider for Rails written in Ruby. Affected Versions: --------------- 1.2.0 - 4.1.0 (all versions but latest patch supporting token revocation) Fixed Versions: ------------- 4.2.0 or apply this commit Problem: -------- Doorkeeper failed to implement OAuth 2.0 Token Revocation (RFC 7009) in the following ways: 1. Public clients making valid, unauthenticated calls to revoke a token would not have their token revoked 2. Requests were not properly authenticating the *client credentials* but were, instead, looking at the access token in a second location 3. Because of 2, the requests were also not authorizing confidential clients' ability to revoke a given token. It should only revoke tokens that belong to it. (see  for above statements) The security implication is: OAuth 2.0 clients who "log out" a user expect to have the corresponding access & refresh tokens revoked, preventing an attacker who may have already hijacked the session from continuing to impersonate the victim. Because of the bug described above, this is not the case. As far as OWASP is concerned, this counts as broken authentication design. MITRE has assigned CVE-2016-6582 due to the security issues raised. An attacker, thanks to 1, can replay a hijacked session after a victim logs out/revokes their token. Additionally, thanks to 2 & 3, an attacker via a compromised confidential client could "grief" other clients by revoking their tokens (albeit this is an exceptionally narrow attack with little value). Unless I'm mistaken, all clients (public or confidential) that send well-formed, RFC 7009 compliant requests are affected by this bug. Solution: ------- Modify the controller so if the request comes from a public client revoke the token without auth/auth. If the client is confidential, authenticate the client per RFC 6749 Sec. 2.3 and authorize its ownership of the provided token. As per . Timeline: -------- 2016-08-03: Bug discovered 2016-08-03: CVE requested, assigned, privately disclosed to maintainer, bugfix/patch authored 2016-08-08: Maintainer tweaked patch 2016-08-12: Jonathan Clem ( jclem) also discovered bug and publicly disclosed 2016-08-18: Patched version 4.2.0 is released Acknowledgements: ----------------- Special thanks to the maintainer, Tute Costa (https://github.com/tute), for quickly collaborating with me to prepare & apply a patch. References: ---------- : https://github.com/doorkeeper-gem/doorkeeper/commit/fb938051777a3c9cb071e96fc66458f8f615bd53 : https://github.com/doorkeeper-gem/doorkeeper/pull/374 : https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7009#section-2.1 : https://github.com/doorkeeper-gem/doorkeeper/blob/v4.1.0/app/controllers/doorkeeper/tokens_controller.rb#L13-L35 : https://github.com/doorkeeper-gem/doorkeeper/blob/master/lib/doorkeeper/helpers/controller.rb#L28-L30 : https://github.com/doorkeeper-gem/doorkeeper/blob/master/lib/doorkeeper/oauth/token.rb#L5-L23 : https://github.com/doorkeeper-gem/doorkeeper/issues/875 : https://www.owasp.org/index.php/Top_10_2013-A2-Broken_Authentication_and_Session_Management : https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6749#section-2.3 Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (802 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Please check out the Open Source Software Security Wiki, which is counterpart to this mailing list.
Confused about mailing lists and their use? Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia and check out these guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.