Channel Accessible by Non-Endpoint

Opis

The product does not adequately verify the identity of actors at both ends of a communication channel, or does not adequately ensure the integrity of the channel, in a way that allows the channel to be accessed or influenced by an actor that is not an endpoint.

In order to establish secure communication between two parties, it is often important to adequately verify the identity of entities at each end of the communication channel. Inadequate or inconsistent verification may result in insufficient or incorrect identification of either communicating entity. This can have negative consequences such as misplaced trust in the entity at the other end of the channel. An attacker can leverage this by interposing between the communicating entities and masquerading as the original entity. In the absence of sufficient verification of identity, such an attacker can eavesdrop and potentially modify the communication between the original entities.

Inne nazwy

Adversary-in-the-Middle / AITM

Attacker-in-the-Middle / AITM

Man-in-the-Middle / MITM

Person-in-the-Middle / PITM

Monkey-in-the-Middle

Monster-in-the-Middle

Manipulator-in-the-Middle

On-path attack

Interception attack

Skutki

• Confidentiality, Integrity, Access Control

  Read Application Data; Modify Application Data; Gain Privileges or Assume Identity

  An attacker could pose as one of the entities and read or possibly modify the communication.

Zapobieganie

• Implementation

  Always fully authenticate both ends of any communications channel.

• Architecture and Design

  Adhere to the principle of complete mediation.

• Implementation

  A certificate binds an identity to a cryptographic key to authenticate a communicating party. Often, the certificate takes the encrypted form of the hash of the identity of the subject, the public key, and information such as time of issue or expiration using the issuer's private key. The certificate can be validated by deciphering the certificate with the issuer's public key. See also X.509 certificate signature chains and the PGP certification structure.

Przykłady podatności

• CVE-2014-1266 Chain: incorrect "goto" in Apple SSL product bypasses certificate validation, allowing Adversary-in-the-Middle (AITM) attack (Apple "goto fail" bug). CWE-705 (Incorrect Control Flow Scoping) -> CWE-561 (Dead Code) -> CWE-295 (Improper Certificate Validation) -> CWE-393 (Return of Wrong Status Code) -> CWE-300 (Channel Accessible by Non-Endpoint). The code's whitespace indentation did not reflect the actual control flow (CWE-1114) and did not explicitly delimit the block (CWE-483), which could have made it more difficult for human code auditors to detect the vulnerability.

Słabość nadrzędna

• CWE-923 Improper Restriction of Communication Channel to Intended Endpoints

Kiedy powstaje

• Architecture and Design — REALIZATION: This weakness is caused during implementation of an architectural security tactic.

Dotyczy

Not Language-Specific

Uwagi

The summary identifies multiple distinct possibilities, suggesting that this is a category that must be broken into more specific weaknesses.

Źródła

1. Computer Security: Art and Science — M. Bishop, Addison-Wesley, 2003