In certain situations it is possible for an unmanaged rule to exist on the target system that…
CVE-2022-0675 is a critical-severity improper input validation vulnerability in Firewall Module from Puppet, with a CVSS 3.1 base score of 9.8 out of 10. It can be exploited remotely over the network by an unauthenticated attacker, without any action from a user. The record lists version 3.4.0 as the first without the flaw, so updating Firewall Module to that release or later removes the exposure. There is no confirmed exploitation so far. EPSS estimates a 0.92% chance of exploitation within 30 days, higher than 61% of scored CVEs.
Critical severity: a successful attack would have severe impact.
What to do
- Update Firewall Module to 3.4.0 or a later version.
- Update Firewall to 3.4.0 or a later version.
- Read the advisory on puppet.com for workarounds and exact fixed builds.
- Until you can update, restrict network access to the affected service so it is not reachable from untrusted networks.
Affected products and versions
| Vendor | Product | Affected versions | Fixed in |
|---|---|---|---|
| Puppet | Firewall Module | prior to 3.4.0 up to, but not including, 3.4.0 | 3.4.0 |
| Puppet | Firewall | before 3.4.0 | 3.4.0 |
Version data comes from the organisation that assigned the CVE. Confirm against the vendor advisory before deciding you are unaffected.
How the severity score breaks down
- Attack vector
- NetworkCan be exploited remotely over a network, including the internet.
- Attack complexity
- LowNo special conditions are needed; the attack works reliably.
- Privileges required
- NoneNo account or login is needed.
- User interaction
- NoneNo action by a victim is required.
- Scope
- UnchangedImpact stays within the vulnerable component.
- Confidentiality
- HighAll data handled by the component can be read.
- Integrity
- HighData or code can be modified at will.
- Availability
- HighThe component can be taken down completely.
Vector: CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H. Scored by NVD.
| Scoring system | Score | Severity | Scored by |
|---|---|---|---|
| CVSS 3.1 | 5.6 | Medium | CNA (puppet.com) |
| CVSS 3.1 | 9.8 | Critical | NVD |
| CVSS 2.0 | 6.8 | Medium | NVD |
Official description
In certain situations it is possible for an unmanaged rule to exist on the target system that has the same comment as the rule specified in the manifest. This could allow for unmanaged rules to exist on the target system and leave the system in an unsafe state.
Source: the CVE record as published by its numbering authority, via NVD and CVE.org.
The underlying weakness: Improper Input Validation
The product receives input or data, but it does not validate or incorrectly validates that the input has the properties that are required to process the data safely and correctly.
How developers prevent this class of flaw
- Consider using language-theoretic security (LangSec) techniques that characterize inputs using a formal language and build recognizers for that language. This effectively requires parsing to be a distinct layer that effectively enforces a boundary between raw input and internal data representations, instead of allowing parser code to be scattered throughout the program, where it could be subject to errors or inconsistencies that create weaknesses.
- Use an input validation framework such as Struts or the OWASP ESAPI Validation API. Note that using a framework does not automatically address all input validation problems; be mindful of weaknesses that could arise from misusing the framework itself (CWE-1173).
- Understand all the potential areas where untrusted inputs can enter the product, including but not limited to: 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.
Timeline
- CVE record published.
- Record last changed materially (score, affected products, status or references).
References
Advisories
Recent Improper Input Validation vulnerabilities
- 9.8 Critical severity
- 9.8 Critical severity
- 7.5 High severity
- 7.5 High severity
- 7.5 High severity
- 10.0 High severity
Spotted an error? Tell us.