CWE-80 Web页面中脚本相关HTML标签转义处理不恰当(基本跨站脚本)

结构: Simple

Abstraction: Variant

状态: Incomplete

被利用可能性: High

基本描述

The software receives input from an upstream component, but it does not neutralize or incorrectly neutralizes special characters such as "<", ">", and "&" that could be interpreted as web-scripting elements when they are sent to a downstream component that processes web pages.

扩展描述

This may allow such characters to be treated as control characters, which are executed client-side in the context of the user's session. Although this can be classified as an injection problem, the more pertinent issue is the improper conversion of such special characters to respective context-appropriate entities before displaying them to the user.

相关缺陷

  • cwe_Nature: ChildOf cwe_CWE_ID: 79 cwe_View_ID: 1000 cwe_Ordinal: Primary

  • cwe_Nature: ChildOf cwe_CWE_ID: 79 cwe_View_ID: 699 cwe_Ordinal: Primary

适用平台

Language: {'cwe_Class': 'Language-Independent', 'cwe_Prevalence': 'Undetermined'}

常见的影响

范围 影响 注释
['Confidentiality', 'Integrity', 'Availability'] ['Read Application Data', 'Execute Unauthorized Code or Commands']

可能的缓解方案

Implementation

策略:

Carefully check each input parameter against a rigorous positive specification (whitelist) defining the specific characters and format allowed. All input should be neutralized, not just parameters that the user is supposed to specify, but all data in the request, including hidden fields, cookies, headers, the URL itself, and so forth. A common mistake that leads to continuing XSS vulnerabilities is to validate only fields that are expected to be redisplayed by the site. We often encounter data from the request that is reflected by the application server or the application that the development team did not anticipate. Also, a field that is not currently reflected may be used by a future developer. Therefore, validating ALL parts of the HTTP request is recommended.

MIT-30.1 Implementation

策略: Output Encoding

Use and specify an output encoding that can be handled by the downstream component that is reading the output. Common encodings include ISO-8859-1, UTF-7, and UTF-8. When an encoding is not specified, a downstream component may choose a different encoding, either by assuming a default encoding or automatically inferring which encoding is being used, which can be erroneous. When the encodings are inconsistent, the downstream component might treat some character or byte sequences as special, even if they are not special in the original encoding. Attackers might then be able to exploit this discrepancy and conduct injection attacks; they even might be able to bypass protection mechanisms that assume the original encoding is also being used by the downstream component. The problem of inconsistent output encodings often arises in web pages. If an encoding is not specified in an HTTP header, web browsers often guess about which encoding is being used. This can open up the browser to subtle XSS attacks.

MIT-43 Implementation

策略:

With Struts, write all data from form beans with the bean's filter attribute set to true.

MIT-31 Implementation

策略: Attack Surface Reduction

To help mitigate XSS attacks against the user's session cookie, set the session cookie to be HttpOnly. In browsers that support the HttpOnly feature (such as more recent versions of Internet Explorer and Firefox), this attribute can prevent the user's session cookie from being accessible to malicious client-side scripts that use document.cookie. This is not a complete solution, since HttpOnly is not supported by all browsers. More importantly, XMLHTTPRequest and other powerful browser technologies provide read access to HTTP headers, including the Set-Cookie header in which the HttpOnly flag is set.

示例代码

In the following example, a guestbook comment isn't properly encoded, filtered, or otherwise neutralized for script-related tags before being displayed in a client browser.

bad JSP

<% for (Iterator i = guestbook.iterator(); i.hasNext(); ) {
Entry e = (Entry) i.next(); %>
<p>Entry #<%= e.getId() %></p>
<p><%= e.getText() %></p>
<%
} %>

分析过的案例

标识 说明 链接
CVE-2002-0938 XSS in parameter in a link. https://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CVE-2002-0938
CVE-2002-1495 XSS in web-based email product via attachment filenames. https://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CVE-2002-1495
CVE-2003-1136 HTML injection in posted message. https://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CVE-2003-1136
CVE-2004-2171 XSS not quoted in error page. https://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CVE-2004-2171

分类映射

映射的分类名 ImNode ID Fit Mapped Node Name
PLOVER Basic XSS
Software Fault Patterns SFP24 Tainted input to command

相关攻击模式

  • CAPEC-18
  • CAPEC-193
  • CAPEC-32
  • CAPEC-86