Skip to content

Untrusted Query Object Evaluation in RPC API

High severity GitHub Reviewed Published Sep 11, 2024 in surrealdb/surrealdb • Updated Sep 11, 2024

Package

cargo surrealdb (Rust)

Affected versions

< 1.5.5
>= 2.0.0-beta.1, < 2.0.0-beta.3

Patched versions

1.5.5
2.0.0-beta.3
cargo surrealdb-core (Rust)
< 1.5.2
1.5.2

Description

During the sign in and sign up operations through the SurrealDB RPC API, an arbitrary object would be accepted in order to support a wide array of types and structures that could contain user credentials. This arbitrary object could potentially contain any SurrealDB value, including an object representing a subquery. For this to materialize, this object would need to be encoded using the bincode serialization format instead of the default JSON serialization format or the additionally supported CBOR serialization format.

If a binary object containing a subquery were to be provided in this way, that subquery would be computed while executing the SIGNIN and SIGNUP queries defined by the database owner while defining a record access method. Since those queries are executed under a system user session with the editor role, an unauthenticated attacker may be able to leverage this behavior to select, create, update and delete non-IAM resources with permissions of a system user with the editor role.

Impact

If a record access method was defined with a SIGNIN or a SIGNUP query and the SurrealDB RPC API was exposed to untrusted users, an attacker could be able to craft a binary object containing a subquery to provide in place of valid credentials when calling the signin and signup operations via the RPC API with the bincode serialization format. The attacker could use that subquery to select, create, update and delete resources in SurrealDB, but they would not be able to directly view the results of the query. This method cannot be used to create, update or delete IAM resources, as access to those kind of resources requires the owner role.

Patches

Objects provided as variables to the sign in and sign up methods are now recursively validated to ensure that they do not contain any non-computed values, which include subqueries and other data types that could potentially result in query execution.

  • Version 1.5.5 and later are not affected by this issue.
  • Version 2.0.0-beta.3 and later are not affected by this issue.

Workarounds

Users unable to update may want to disallow access to the SurrealDB RPC API using the affected binary serialization formats by conservatively allowing only requests to the /rpc endpoint of the SurrealDB HTTP server with the application/json content type. If the RPC API is not used at all or only used by trusted clients, disallowing or restricting access to the /rpc endpoint of the SurrealDB HTTP server will also prevent exploitation. Alternatively, if filtering HTTP requests is not possible, record access methods that define SIGNIN and SIGNUP clauses may be temporarily removed to completely prevent potential attacks leveraging this issue.

References

References

@gguillemas gguillemas published to surrealdb/surrealdb Sep 11, 2024
Published to the GitHub Advisory Database Sep 11, 2024
Reviewed Sep 11, 2024
Last updated Sep 11, 2024

Severity

High

CVSS overall score

This score calculates overall vulnerability severity from 0 to 10 and is based on the Common Vulnerability Scoring System (CVSS).
/ 10

CVSS v4 base metrics

Exploitability Metrics
Attack Vector Network
Attack Complexity Low
Attack Requirements None
Privileges Required Low
User interaction None
Vulnerable System Impact Metrics
Confidentiality High
Integrity High
Availability High
Subsequent System Impact Metrics
Confidentiality None
Integrity None
Availability None

CVSS v4 base metrics

Exploitability Metrics
Attack Vector: This metric reflects the context by which vulnerability exploitation is possible. This metric value (and consequently the resulting severity) will be larger the more remote (logically, and physically) an attacker can be in order to exploit the vulnerable system. The assumption is that the number of potential attackers for a vulnerability that could be exploited from across a network is larger than the number of potential attackers that could exploit a vulnerability requiring physical access to a device, and therefore warrants a greater severity.
Attack Complexity: This metric captures measurable actions that must be taken by the attacker to actively evade or circumvent existing built-in security-enhancing conditions in order to obtain a working exploit. These are conditions whose primary purpose is to increase security and/or increase exploit engineering complexity. A vulnerability exploitable without a target-specific variable has a lower complexity than a vulnerability that would require non-trivial customization. This metric is meant to capture security mechanisms utilized by the vulnerable system.
Attack Requirements: This metric captures the prerequisite deployment and execution conditions or variables of the vulnerable system that enable the attack. These differ from security-enhancing techniques/technologies (ref Attack Complexity) as the primary purpose of these conditions is not to explicitly mitigate attacks, but rather, emerge naturally as a consequence of the deployment and execution of the vulnerable system.
Privileges Required: This metric describes the level of privileges an attacker must possess prior to successfully exploiting the vulnerability. The method by which the attacker obtains privileged credentials prior to the attack (e.g., free trial accounts), is outside the scope of this metric. Generally, self-service provisioned accounts do not constitute a privilege requirement if the attacker can grant themselves privileges as part of the attack.
User interaction: This metric captures the requirement for a human user, other than the attacker, to participate in the successful compromise of the vulnerable system. This metric determines whether the vulnerability can be exploited solely at the will of the attacker, or whether a separate user (or user-initiated process) must participate in some manner.
Vulnerable System Impact Metrics
Confidentiality: This metric measures the impact to the confidentiality of the information managed by the VULNERABLE SYSTEM due to a successfully exploited vulnerability. Confidentiality refers to limiting information access and disclosure to only authorized users, as well as preventing access by, or disclosure to, unauthorized ones.
Integrity: This metric measures the impact to integrity of a successfully exploited vulnerability. Integrity refers to the trustworthiness and veracity of information. Integrity of the VULNERABLE SYSTEM is impacted when an attacker makes unauthorized modification of system data. Integrity is also impacted when a system user can repudiate critical actions taken in the context of the system (e.g. due to insufficient logging).
Availability: This metric measures the impact to the availability of the VULNERABLE SYSTEM resulting from a successfully exploited vulnerability. While the Confidentiality and Integrity impact metrics apply to the loss of confidentiality or integrity of data (e.g., information, files) used by the system, this metric refers to the loss of availability of the impacted system itself, such as a networked service (e.g., web, database, email). Since availability refers to the accessibility of information resources, attacks that consume network bandwidth, processor cycles, or disk space all impact the availability of a system.
Subsequent System Impact Metrics
Confidentiality: This metric measures the impact to the confidentiality of the information managed by the SUBSEQUENT SYSTEM due to a successfully exploited vulnerability. Confidentiality refers to limiting information access and disclosure to only authorized users, as well as preventing access by, or disclosure to, unauthorized ones.
Integrity: This metric measures the impact to integrity of a successfully exploited vulnerability. Integrity refers to the trustworthiness and veracity of information. Integrity of the SUBSEQUENT SYSTEM is impacted when an attacker makes unauthorized modification of system data. Integrity is also impacted when a system user can repudiate critical actions taken in the context of the system (e.g. due to insufficient logging).
Availability: This metric measures the impact to the availability of the SUBSEQUENT SYSTEM resulting from a successfully exploited vulnerability. While the Confidentiality and Integrity impact metrics apply to the loss of confidentiality or integrity of data (e.g., information, files) used by the system, this metric refers to the loss of availability of the impacted system itself, such as a networked service (e.g., web, database, email). Since availability refers to the accessibility of information resources, attacks that consume network bandwidth, processor cycles, or disk space all impact the availability of a system.
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N

Weaknesses

CVE ID

No known CVE

GHSA ID

GHSA-64f8-pjgr-9wmr

Source code

Credits

Loading Checking history
See something to contribute? Suggest improvements for this vulnerability.