Skip to content

Token bruteforcing.

Moderate severity GitHub Reviewed Published Jun 14, 2022 in jupyter/notebook • Updated Jan 27, 2023

Package

pip notebook (pip)

Affected versions

< 6.4.12

Patched versions

6.4.12

Description

Impact

What kind of vulnerability is it? Who is impacted?

Authenticated requests to the notebook server with ContentsManager.allow_hidden = False only prevented listing the contents of hidden directories, not accessing individual hidden files or files in hidden directories (i.e. hidden files were 'hidden' but not 'inaccessible'). This could lead to notebook configurations allowing authenticated access to files that may reasonably be expected to be disallowed.

Because fully authenticated requests are required, this is of relatively low impact. But if a server's root directory contains sensitive files whose only protection from the server is being hidden (e.g. ~/.ssh while serving $HOME), then any authenticated requests could access files if their names are guessable. Such contexts also necessarily have full access to the server and therefore execution permissions, which also generally grants access to all the same files. So this does not generally result in any privilege escalation or increase in information access, only an additional, unintended means by which the files could be accessed.

Patches

Has the problem been patched? What versions should users upgrade to?

notebook 6.4.12

Workarounds

Is there a way for users to fix or remediate the vulnerability without upgrading?

  • Do not run the notebook server in a directory with hidden files, use subdirectories
  • Use a custom ContentsManager with additional checks for self.is_hidden(path) prior to completing actions

References

Are there any links users can visit to find out more?

For more information

If you have any questions or comments about this advisory:

References

@blink1073 blink1073 published to jupyter/notebook Jun 14, 2022
Published by the National Vulnerability Database Jun 14, 2022
Published to the GitHub Advisory Database Jun 16, 2022
Reviewed Jun 16, 2022
Last updated Jan 27, 2023

Severity

Moderate

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 v3 base metrics

Attack vector
Network
Attack complexity
Low
Privileges required
Low
User interaction
None
Scope
Unchanged
Confidentiality
Low
Integrity
None
Availability
None

CVSS v3 base metrics

Attack vector: More severe the more the remote (logically and physically) an attacker can be in order to exploit the vulnerability.
Attack complexity: More severe for the least complex attacks.
Privileges required: More severe if no privileges are required.
User interaction: More severe when no user interaction is required.
Scope: More severe when a scope change occurs, e.g. one vulnerable component impacts resources in components beyond its security scope.
Confidentiality: More severe when loss of data confidentiality is highest, measuring the level of data access available to an unauthorized user.
Integrity: More severe when loss of data integrity is the highest, measuring the consequence of data modification possible by an unauthorized user.
Availability: More severe when the loss of impacted component availability is highest.
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N

EPSS score

0.054%
(23rd percentile)

Weaknesses

CVE ID

CVE-2022-29238

GHSA ID

GHSA-v7vq-3x77-87vg

Source code

Credits

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