7.5 CVE-2024-10382
There exists a code execution vulnerability in the Car App Android Jetpack Library. In the CarAppService desrialization logic is used that allows for arbitrary java classes to be constructed. In combination with other gadgets, this can lead to arbitrary code execution. An attacker needs to have an app on a victims Android device that uses the CarAppService Class and the victim would need to install a malicious app alongside it. We recommend upgrading the library past version 1.7.0-beta02
https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-10382
Categories
CWE-502 : Deserialization of Untrusted Data
The product deserializes untrusted data without sufficiently ensuring that the resulting data will be valid. Marshaling and unmarshaling are effectively synonyms for serialization and deserialization, respectively. In Python, the "pickle" functionality is used to perform serialization and deserialization. Some PHP application researchers use this term when attacking unsafe use of the unserialize() function; but it is also used for CWE-915. Automated static analysis, commonly referred to as Static Application Security Testing (SAST), can find some instances of this weakness by analyzing source code (or binary/compiled code) without having to execute it. Typically, this is done by building a model of data flow and control flow, then searching for potentially-vulnerable patterns that connect "sources" (origins of input) with "sinks" (destinations where the data interacts with external components, a lower layer such as the OS, etc.) If available, use the signing/sealing features of the programming language to assure that deserialized data has not been tainted. For example, a hash-based message authentication code (HMAC) could be used to ensure that data has not been modified. When deserializing data, populate a new object rather than just deserializing. The result is that the data flows through safe input validation and that the functions are safe. Explicitly define a final object() to prevent deserialization. Avoid having unnecessary types or gadgets (a sequence of instances and method invocations that can self-execute during the deserialization process, often found in libraries) available that can be leveraged for malicious ends. This limits the potential for unintended or unauthorized types and gadgets to be leveraged by the attacker. Add only acceptable classes to an allowlist. Note: new gadgets are constantly being discovered, so this alone is not a sufficient mitigation. Employ cryptography of the data or code for protection. However, it's important to note that it would still be client-side security. This is risky because if the client is compromised then the security implemented on the client (the cryptography) can be bypassed. chain: bypass of untrusted deserialization issue (CWE-502) by using an assumed-trusted class (CWE-183) Deserialization issue in commonly-used Java library allows remote execution. Deserialization issue in commonly-used Java library allows remote execution. Use of PHP unserialize function on untrusted input allows attacker to modify application configuration. Use of PHP unserialize function on untrusted input in content management system might allow code execution. Use of PHP unserialize function on untrusted input in content management system allows code execution using a crafted cookie value. Content management system written in PHP allows unserialize of arbitrary objects, possibly allowing code execution. Python script allows local users to execute code via pickled data. Unsafe deserialization using pickle in a Python script. Web browser allows execution of native methods via a crafted string to a JavaScript function that deserializes the string.
CWE-94 : Improper Control of Generation of Code ('Code Injection')
The product constructs all or part of a code segment using externally-influenced input from an upstream component, but it does not neutralize or incorrectly neutralizes special elements that could modify the syntax or behavior of the intended code segment. Automated static analysis, commonly referred to as Static Application Security Testing (SAST), can find some instances of this weakness by analyzing source code (or binary/compiled code) without having to execute it. Typically, this is done by building a model of data flow and control flow, then searching for potentially-vulnerable patterns that connect "sources" (origins of input) with "sinks" (destinations where the data interacts with external components, a lower layer such as the OS, etc.) Refactor your program so that you do not have to dynamically generate code. Use automated static analysis tools that target this type of weakness. Many modern techniques use data flow analysis to minimize the number of false positives. This is not a perfect solution, since 100% accuracy and coverage are not feasible. Use dynamic tools and techniques that interact with the product using large test suites with many diverse inputs, such as fuzz testing (fuzzing), robustness testing, and fault injection. The product's operation may slow down, but it should not become unstable, crash, or generate incorrect results. Run the code in an environment that performs automatic taint propagation and prevents any command execution that uses tainted variables, such as Perl's "-T" switch. This will force the program to perform validation steps that remove the taint, although you must be careful to correctly validate your inputs so that you do not accidentally mark dangerous inputs as untainted (see CWE-183 and CWE-184). Run the code in an environment that performs automatic taint propagation and prevents any command execution that uses tainted variables, such as Perl's "-T" switch. This will force the program to perform validation steps that remove the taint, although you must be careful to correctly validate your inputs so that you do not accidentally mark dangerous inputs as untainted (see CWE-183 and CWE-184). Math component in an LLM framework translates user input into a Pythonexpression that is input into the Python exec() method, allowing codeexecution - one variant of a "prompt injection" attack. Python-based library uses an LLM prompt containing user input todynamically generate code that is then fed as input into the Pythonexec() method, allowing code execution - one variant of a "promptinjection" attack. Framework for LLM applications allows eval injection via a crafted response from a hosting provider. Python compiler uses eval() to execute malicious strings as Python code. Chain: regex in EXIF processor code does not correctly determine where a string ends (CWE-625), enabling eval injection (CWE-95), as exploited in the wild per CISA KEV. "Code injection" in VPN product, as exploited in the wild per CISA KEV. Eval injection in PHP program. Eval injection in Perl program. Eval injection in Perl program using an ID that should only contain hyphens and numbers. Direct code injection into Perl eval function. Eval injection in Perl program. Direct code injection into Perl eval function. Direct code injection into Perl eval function. MFV. code injection into PHP eval statement using nested constructs that should not be nested. MFV. code injection into PHP eval statement using nested constructs that should not be nested. Code injection into Python eval statement from a field in a formatted file. Eval injection in Python program. chain: Resultant eval injection. An invalid value prevents initialization of variables, which can be modified by attacker and later injected into PHP eval statement. Perl code directly injected into CGI library file from parameters to another CGI program. Direct PHP code injection into supporting template file. Direct code injection into PHP script that can be accessed by attacker. PHP code from User-Agent HTTP header directly inserted into log file implemented as PHP script.
References
cve-coordination@google.com
CPE
REMEDIATION
EXPLOITS
Exploit-db.com
| id |
description |
date |
|
| No known exploits |
POC Github
Other Nist (github, ...)
CAPEC
Common Attack Pattern Enumerations and Classifications
| id |
description |
severity |
| 586 |
Object Injection
An adversary attempts to exploit an application by injecting additional, malicious content during its processing of serialized objects. Developers leverage serialization in order to convert data or state into a static, binary format for saving to disk or transferring over a network. These objects are then deserialized when needed to recover the data/state. By injecting a malformed object into a vulnerable application, an adversary can potentially compromise the application by manipulating the deserialization process. This can result in a number of unwanted outcomes, including remote code execution. |
High |
| 242 |
Code Injection
An adversary exploits a weakness in input validation on the target to inject new code into that which is currently executing. This differs from code inclusion in that code inclusion involves the addition or replacement of a reference to a code file, which is subsequently loaded by the target and used as part of the code of some application. |
High |
| 35 |
Leverage Executable Code in Non-Executable Files
An attack of this type exploits a system's trust in configuration and resource files. When the executable loads the resource (such as an image file or configuration file) the attacker has modified the file to either execute malicious code directly or manipulate the target process (e.g. application server) to execute based on the malicious configuration parameters. Since systems are increasingly interrelated mashing up resources from local and remote sources the possibility of this attack occurring is high. |
Very High |
| 77 |
Manipulating User-Controlled Variables
This attack targets user controlled variables (DEBUG=1, PHP Globals, and So Forth). An adversary can override variables leveraging user-supplied, untrusted query variables directly used on the application server without any data sanitization. In extreme cases, the adversary can change variables controlling the business logic of the application. For instance, in languages like PHP, a number of poorly set default configurations may allow the user to override variables. [Probe target application] The adversary first probes the target application to determine important information about the target. This information could include types software used, software versions, what user input the application consumes, and so on. [Find user-controlled variables] Using the information found by probing the application, the adversary attempts to manipulate many user-controlled variables and observes the effects on the application. If the adversary notices any significant changes to the application, they will know that a certain variable is useful to the application. [Manipulate user-controlled variables] Once the adversary has found a user-controller variable(s) that is important to the application, they will manipulate it to change the normal behavior in a way that benefits the adversary. |
Very High |
MITRE
Techniques
| id |
description |
| T1027.006 |
Obfuscated Files or Information: HTML Smuggling |
| T1027.009 |
Obfuscated Files or Information: Embedded Payloads |
| T1564.009 |
Hide Artifacts: Resource Forking |
| © 2022 The MITRE Corporation. This work is reproduced and distributed with the permission of The MITRE Corporation. |
Mitigations
| id |
description |
| T1027.006 |
Browser sandboxes can be used to mitigate some of the impact of exploitation, but sandbox escapes may still exist.
|
| T1027.009 |
On Windows 10, enable Attack Surface Reduction (ASR) rules to prevent execution of potentially obfuscated scripts. |
| T1564.009 |
Configure applications to use the application bundle structure which leverages the <code>/Resources</code> folder location. |
| © 2022 The MITRE Corporation. Esta obra se reproduce y distribuye con el permiso de The MITRE Corporation. |
Cybersecurity needs ?
Strengthen software security from the outset with our DevSecOps expertise
Integrate security right from the start of the software development cycle for more robust applications and greater customer confidence.
Our team of DevSecOps experts can help you secure your APIs, data pipelines, CI/CD chains, Docker containers and Kubernetes deployments.
Discover this offer
