CWE-1021
Improper Restriction of Rendered UI Layers or Frames
The web application does not restrict or incorrectly restricts frame objects or UI layers that belong to another application or domain.
Mitigation
Phase: Implementation
Description:
- The use of X-Frame-Options allows developers of web content to restrict the usage of their application within the form of overlays, frames, or iFrames. The developer can indicate from which domains can frame the content.
- The concept of X-Frame-Options is well documented, but implementation of this protection mechanism is in development to cover gaps. There is a need for allowing frames from multiple domains.
Mitigation
Phase: Implementation
Description:
- A developer can use a "frame-breaker" script in each page that should not be framed. This is very helpful for legacy browsers that do not support X-Frame-Options security feature previously mentioned.
- It is also important to note that this tactic has been circumvented or bypassed. Improper usage of frames can persist in the web application through nested frames. The "frame-breaking" script does not intuitively account for multiple nested frames that can be presented to the user.
Mitigation
Phase: Implementation
Description:
- This defense-in-depth technique can be used to prevent the improper usage of frames in web applications. It prioritizes the valid sources of data to be loaded into the application through the usage of declarative policies. Based on which implementation of Content Security Policy is in use, the developer should use the "frame-ancestors" directive or the "frame-src" directive to mitigate this weakness. Both directives allow for the placement of restrictions when it comes to allowing embedded content.
Mitigation
Phase: Implementation
Description:
- In addition to frames or iframes as previously mentioned, the web application is expected to place restrictions on whether it is allowed to be rendered within objects, embed, or applet elements.
CAPEC-103: Clickjacking
An adversary tricks a victim into unknowingly initiating some action in one system while interacting with the UI from a seemingly completely different, usually an adversary controlled or intended, system.
CAPEC-181: Flash File Overlay
An attacker creates a transparent overlay using flash in order to intercept user actions for the purpose of performing a clickjacking attack. In this technique, the Flash file provides a transparent overlay over HTML content. Because the Flash application is on top of the content, user actions, such as clicks, are caught by the Flash application rather than the underlying HTML. The action is then interpreted by the overlay to perform the actions the attacker wishes.
CAPEC-222: iFrame Overlay
In an iFrame overlay attack the victim is tricked into unknowingly initiating some action in one system while interacting with the UI from seemingly completely different system.
CAPEC-504: Task Impersonation
An adversary, through a previously installed malicious application, impersonates an expected or routine task in an attempt to steal sensitive information or leverage a user's privileges.
CAPEC-506: Tapjacking
An adversary, through a previously installed malicious application, displays an interface that misleads the user and convinces them to tap on an attacker desired location on the screen. This is often accomplished by overlaying one screen on top of another while giving the appearance of a single interface. There are two main techniques used to accomplish this. The first is to leverage transparent properties that allow taps on the screen to pass through the visible application to an application running in the background. The second is to strategically place a small object (e.g., a button or text field) on top of the visible screen and make it appear to be a part of the underlying application. In both cases, the user is convinced to tap on the screen but does not realize the application that they are interacting with.
CAPEC-587: Cross Frame Scripting (XFS)
This attack pattern combines malicious Javascript and a legitimate webpage loaded into a concealed iframe. The malicious Javascript is then able to interact with a legitimate webpage in a manner that is unknown to the user. This attack usually leverages some element of social engineering in that an attacker must convinces a user to visit a web page that the attacker controls.
CAPEC-654: Credential Prompt Impersonation
An adversary, through a previously installed malicious application, impersonates a credential prompt in an attempt to steal a user's credentials.