CERTA-2011-AVI-258

Vulnerability from certfr_avis - Published: - Updated:

Plusieurs vulnérabilités affectent BestPractical RT permettant des injections de code et la lecture sans droit de données sensibles.

Description

Plusieurs vulnérabilités affectent BestPractical RT :

  • quand l'option CustomFieldValuesSources est activée, un utilisateur malveillant peut réaliser des injections de requêtes illégitime par rebond ;
  • des injections de requêtes SQL sont possibles ;
  • l'interface de recherche permet d'obtenir des informations sensibles, comme des mots de passe ;
  • un utilisateur malveillant peut lire n'importe quel fichier du serveur par le biais d'une requête HTTP spécialement formée ;
  • plusieurs vulnérabilités (XSS) permettent à un utilisateur malveillant de réaliser de l'injection de code indirecte ;
  • il est possible de transmettre les informations de connexion des utilisateurs sur un serveur externe, de manière illégitime.

Solution

Les versions 3.6.11, 3.8.10 et 4.0.0rc8 de BestPractical RT corrigent ces problèmes.

Se référer aux bulletins de sécurité de l'éditeur pour l'obtention des correctifs (cf. section Documentation).

BestPractical RT (Request Tracker) 2.0.x, 3.6.x, 3.8.x, 4.0.0rcx.

Impacted products
Vendor Product Description
References

Show details on source website
To clipboard 

{
  "$ref": "https://www.cert.ssi.gouv.fr/openapi.json",
  "affected_systems": [],
  "affected_systems_content": "\u003cp\u003eBestPractical RT (Request Tracker)  2.0.x, 3.6.x, 3.8.x, 4.0.0rcx.\u003c/p\u003e",
  "content": "## Description\n\nPlusieurs vuln\u00e9rabilit\u00e9s affectent BestPractical RT :\n\n-   quand l\u0027option CustomFieldValuesSources est activ\u00e9e, un utilisateur\n    malveillant peut r\u00e9aliser des injections de requ\u00eates ill\u00e9gitime par\n    rebond\u00a0;\n-   des injections de requ\u00eates SQL sont possibles\u00a0;\n-   l\u0027interface de recherche permet d\u0027obtenir des informations\n    sensibles, comme des mots de passe\u00a0;\n-   un utilisateur malveillant peut lire n\u0027importe quel fichier du\n    serveur par le biais d\u0027une requ\u00eate HTTP sp\u00e9cialement form\u00e9e\u00a0;\n-   plusieurs vuln\u00e9rabilit\u00e9s (XSS) permettent \u00e0 un utilisateur\n    malveillant de r\u00e9aliser de l\u0027injection de code indirecte\u00a0;\n-   il est possible de transmettre les informations de connexion des\n    utilisateurs sur un serveur externe, de mani\u00e8re ill\u00e9gitime.\n\n## Solution\n\nLes versions 3.6.11, 3.8.10 et 4.0.0rc8 de BestPractical RT corrigent\nces probl\u00e8mes.\n\nSe r\u00e9f\u00e9rer aux bulletins de s\u00e9curit\u00e9 de l\u0027\u00e9diteur pour l\u0027obtention des\ncorrectifs (cf. section Documentation).\n",
  "cves": [
    {
      "name": "CVE-2011-1690",
      "url": "https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2011-1690"
    },
    {
      "name": "CVE-2011-1685",
      "url": "https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2011-1685"
    },
    {
      "name": "CVE-2011-1686",
      "url": "https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2011-1686"
    },
    {
      "name": "CVE-2011-1687",
      "url": "https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2011-1687"
    },
    {
      "name": "CVE-2011-1689",
      "url": "https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2011-1689"
    },
    {
      "name": "CVE-2011-1688",
      "url": "https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2011-1688"
    }
  ],
  "links": [],
  "reference": "CERTA-2011-AVI-258",
  "revisions": [
    {
      "description": "version initiale.",
      "revision_date": "2011-04-27T00:00:00.000000"
    }
  ],
  "risks": [
    {
      "description": "Injection de requ\u00eates ill\u00e9gitimes par rebond (CSRF)"
    },
    {
      "description": "Injection de code indirecte \u00e0 distance"
    },
    {
      "description": "Contournement de la politique de s\u00e9curit\u00e9"
    },
    {
      "description": "Atteinte \u00e0 la confidentialit\u00e9 des donn\u00e9es"
    }
  ],
  "summary": "Plusieurs vuln\u00e9rabilit\u00e9s affectent BestPractical RT permettant des\ninjections de code et la lecture sans droit de donn\u00e9es sensibles.\n",
  "title": "Vuln\u00e9rabilit\u00e9s dans BestPractical RT",
  "vendor_advisories": [
    {
      "published_at": null,
      "title": "Bulletins de s\u00e9curit\u00e9 BestPractical du 14 avril 2011",
      "url": "http://lists.bestpractical.com/pipermail/rt-announce/2011-April/000189.html"
    }
  ]
}



Log in or create an account to share your comment.




Tags
Taxonomy of the tags.




Drag nodes to arrange them. Double-click a related vulnerability to open it, or a source to visit its link. The Physics button on the left tunes the layout and the simulation; the legend at the bottom left hides or shows nodes by kind and by sighting type.

Forecast uses a logistic model when the trend is rising, or an exponential decay model when the trend is falling. Fitted via linearized least squares.

Sightings

Author Source Type Date Other

Nomenclature

  • Seen: The vulnerability was mentioned, discussed, or observed by the user.
  • Confirmed: The vulnerability has been validated from an analyst's perspective.
  • Published Proof of Concept: A public proof of concept is available for this vulnerability.
  • Exploited: The vulnerability was observed as exploited by the user who reported the sighting.
  • Patched: The vulnerability was observed as successfully patched by the user who reported the sighting.
  • Not exploited: The vulnerability was not observed as exploited by the user who reported the sighting.
  • Not confirmed: The user expressed doubt about the validity of the vulnerability.
  • Not patched: The vulnerability was not observed as successfully patched by the user who reported the sighting.
Vulnerability timeline

Sightings and recorded dates, grouped by day · UTC

JSON
How durations are calculated

Following the VTEM framework (Black Hat USA 2015), time to patch starts when the vendor or a coordinator was informed, total time to patch at discovery, and disclosure to patch at public disclosure; vendor response time runs from the report to its acknowledgement. Time to exploit and time unpatched start at the earliest discovery or report, falling back to public disclosure. Unpatched time ends at the first recorded patch, or the calculation time when no patch is recorded. Exploitation to patch shows the interval between those two events; a published proof of concept is a public exploit, not exploitation.

Each result shows its source dates. A negative interval means the end event came first; when date-only inputs leave the order open, the result says so. Date-only inputs are approximate. The earliest evidence wins: KEV report dates and sightings are labelled as such. Records describing another vulnerability are listed but never calculated from, and a PoC alone does not establish exploitation. Missing patch evidence does not prove that no patch exists. Filters below change the event list only.

Loading timeline…




    Related by attack behaviour

    Vulnerabilities whose description is nearest to this one in the vector space of the CIRCL/vulnerability-attack-technique-biencoder model. This is a similarity search over the bi-encoder space (plain cosine), not a classification, and it has no measured accuracy.