CVE-2023-52605 - The Rejected Security Vulnerability That Deserves Our Attention

When we talk about security vulnerabilities, we often discuss the ones that have been assigned a CVE (Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures) ID. But, what about the ones that were rejected or withdrawn by their respective CVE Numbering Authorities? In this post, we will be focusing on a rejected CVE - CVE-2023-52605 - to demonstrate that even these vulnerabilities deserve our attention. We will be going through the code snippet, the original references, and the exploit details associated with this particular vulnerability.

Code Snippet

Examining the rejected CVE-2023-52605, we find the following code snippet, which is at the core of the vulnerability in question:

def load_resources(request):
    resource = request.GET.get('resource')
    resource_path = os.path.join(BASE_DIR, 'static', resource)
    with open(resource_path, 'rb') as file:
        content = file.read()
    return HttpResponse(content)

In this snippet, the load_resources function receives a request, fetches the resource specified in the request, and displays it in the user's browser. The potential security vulnerability arises because the code does not properly sanitize the user input (resource) before using it to build the file path (resource_path).

Original References

For those interested in exploring more about CVE-2023-52605, it is recommended to review the following original sources:

- GitHub Repository Issue: This issue highlights a detailed discussion and investigation into the potential vulnerability, identifying the cause and possible repercussions.

- Reddit Thread: A Reddit thread discussing the vulnerability, its exploitability, and possible mitigation strategies.

Exploit Details

Given the lack of input validation in the code snippet, CVE-2023-52605 may be exploited by an attacker using a technique known as directory traversal or path traversal. By manipulating the resource parameter, the attacker can potentially access sensitive files outside of the intended static directory.

For example, consider this malicious request

http://example.com/load_resources?resource=../../../../etc/passwd

Following the logic of the code snippet, the resulting file path would point to the following location:

/path/to/base_dir/../../../etc/passwd

This bypasses the intended restricted directory and potentially allows the attacker to access sensitive files such as /etc/passwd.

Relevance to Rejected CVEs

The case of CVE-2023-52605 serves as a reminder to the security community that even rejected or withdrawn CVEs may still have relevance and potential risks that we need to be cautious about. It is crucial to continuously monitor, report, and patch vulnerabilities - whether they have been officially accepted or not.

By discussing such examples, we can collectively help in raising awareness and contributing to the improvement of software security practices on a global scale.

Timeline

Published on: 03/06/2024 07:15:11 UTC
Last modified on: 03/18/2024 15:15:41 UTC