Return-Path: X-Original-To: archive-asf-public-internal@cust-asf2.ponee.io Delivered-To: archive-asf-public-internal@cust-asf2.ponee.io Received: from cust-asf.ponee.io (cust-asf.ponee.io [163.172.22.183]) by cust-asf2.ponee.io (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7EC71200D11 for ; Mon, 2 Oct 2017 13:13:33 +0200 (CEST) Received: by cust-asf.ponee.io (Postfix) id 7D442160BCB; Mon, 2 Oct 2017 11:13:33 +0000 (UTC) Delivered-To: archive-asf-public@cust-asf.ponee.io Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by cust-asf.ponee.io (Postfix) with SMTP id 813E81609DE for ; Mon, 2 Oct 2017 13:13:27 +0200 (CEST) Received: (qmail 76858 invoked by uid 500); 2 Oct 2017 11:13:26 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@tomcat.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: "Tomcat Developers List" Delivered-To: mailing list dev@tomcat.apache.org Received: (qmail 76846 invoked by uid 99); 2 Oct 2017 11:13:26 -0000 Received: from Unknown (HELO svn01-us-west.apache.org) (209.188.14.144) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 02 Oct 2017 11:13:26 +0000 Received: from svn01-us-west.apache.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by svn01-us-west.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at svn01-us-west.apache.org) with ESMTP id 5B8643A0220 for ; Mon, 2 Oct 2017 11:13:23 +0000 (UTC) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: svn commit: r1810336 [2/4] - in /tomcat/site/trunk: docs/security-7.html docs/security-8.html docs/security-9.html xdocs/security-7.xml xdocs/security-8.xml xdocs/security-9.xml Date: Mon, 02 Oct 2017 11:13:19 -0000 To: dev@tomcat.apache.org From: markt@apache.org X-Mailer: svnmailer-1.0.9 Message-Id: <20171002111323.5B8643A0220@svn01-us-west.apache.org> archived-at: Mon, 02 Oct 2017 11:13:33 -0000 Modified: tomcat/site/trunk/docs/security-7.html URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/tomcat/site/trunk/docs/security-7.html?rev=1810336&r1=1810335&r2=1810336&view=diff ============================================================================== --- tomcat/site/trunk/docs/security-7.html (original) +++ tomcat/site/trunk/docs/security-7.html Mon Oct 2 11:13:19 2017 @@ -1,364 +1,361 @@ - - - - Apache Tomcat® - Apache Tomcat 7 vulnerabilities - - - -
-
- -
-
-
-
-
- -
-
-
-
-

Content

-

Table of Contents

-
- - - -
-

Apache Tomcat 7.x vulnerabilities

-
- -

- This page lists all security vulnerabilities fixed in released versions + + + +Apache Tomcat® - Apache Tomcat 7 vulnerabilities + + + +

+
+ +
+
+
+
+
+ +
+
+
+
+

Content

+

Table of Contents

+
+ + + +
+

Apache Tomcat 7.x vulnerabilities

+
+ +

This page lists all security vulnerabilities fixed in released versions of Apache Tomcat 7.x. Each vulnerability is given a security impact rating by the Apache Tomcat security team — please note that this rating may vary from platform to platform. We also list the versions of Apache Tomcat the flaw is known to affect, and where a flaw has not been verified list the - version with a question mark. -

- -

- Note: Vulnerabilities that are not Tomcat vulnerabilities + version with a question mark.

+ + +

+Note: Vulnerabilities that are not Tomcat vulnerabilities but have either been incorrectly reported against Tomcat or where Tomcat - provides a workaround are listed at the end of this page. -

- -

- Please note that binary patches are never provided. If you need to + provides a workaround are listed at the end of this page.

+ + +

Please note that binary patches are never provided. If you need to apply a source code patch, use the building instructions for the Apache Tomcat version that you are using. For Tomcat 7.0 those are building.html and @@ -366,490 +363,532 @@ Both files can be found in the webapps/docs subdirectory of a binary distributive. You may also want to review the Security Considerations - page in the documentation. -

- -

- If you need help on building or configuring Tomcat or other help on + page in the documentation.

+ + +

If you need help on building or configuring Tomcat or other help on following the instructions to mitigate the known vulnerabilities listed here, please send your questions to the public Tomcat Users mailing list -

- -

- If you have encountered an unlisted security vulnerability or other +

+ + +

If you have encountered an unlisted security vulnerability or other unexpected behaviour that has security impact, or if the descriptions here are incomplete, please report them privately to the Tomcat Security Team. Thank you. +

+ + +
+

+TBD October 2017 Fixed in Apache Tomcat 7.0.82

+
+ -

- -
-

- TBD October 2017 Fixed in Apache Tomcat 7.0.82 -

-
- -

- Important: Remote Code Execution +

+Important: Remote Code Execution CVE-2017-12617 -

- -

- When running with HTTP PUTs enabled (e.g. via setting the - readonly initialisation parameter of the Default to false) - it was possible to upload a JSP file to the server via a specially +

+ + +

When running with HTTP PUTs enabled (e.g. via setting the + readonly initialisation parameter of the Default servlet to + false) it was possible to upload a JSP file to the server via a specially crafted request. This JSP could then be requested and any code it - contained would be executed by the server. -

- -

- This was fixed in revisions 1809978, + contained would be executed by the server.

+ + +

This was fixed in revisions 1809978, 1809992, 1810014 and - 1810026. -

- -

This issue was first reported publicly followed by multiple reports to + 1810026.

+ + +

This issue was first reported publicly followed by multiple reports to the Apache Tomcat Security Team on 20 September 2017.

- -

Affects: 7.0.0 to 7.0.81

- -
-

- 16 August 2017 Fixed in Apache Tomcat 7.0.81 -

-
- -

- Important: Information Disclosure + + +

Affects: 7.0.0 to 7.0.81

+ + +
+

+16 August 2017 Fixed in Apache Tomcat 7.0.81

+
+ + +

+Important: Information Disclosure CVE-2017-12616 -

- -

When using a VirtualDirContext it was possible to bypass security +

+ + +

When using a VirtualDirContext it was possible to bypass security constraints and/or view the source code of JSPs for resources served by the VirtualDirContext using a specially crafted request.

- -

- This was fixed in revision 1804729. -

- -

This issue was identified by the Tomcat Security Team on 10 August 2017 + + +

This was fixed in revision 1804729.

+ + +

This issue was identified by the Tomcat Security Team on 10 August 2017 and made public on 19 September 2017.

- -

Affects: 7.0.0 to 7.0.80

- -

- Important: Remote Code Execution + + +

Affects: 7.0.0 to 7.0.80

+ + +

+Important: Remote Code Execution CVE-2017-12615 -

- -

- Note: The issue below was fixed in Apache Tomcat 7.0.80 but the +

+ + +

+Note: The issue below was fixed in Apache Tomcat 7.0.80 but the release vote for the 7.0.81 release candidate did not pass. Therefore, although users must download 7.0.81 to obtain a version that includes the fix for this issue, version 7.0.80 is not included in the list of affected versions. -

- -

- When running on Windows with HTTP PUTs enabled (e.g. via setting the +

+ + +

When running on Windows with HTTP PUTs enabled (e.g. via setting the readonly initialisation parameter of the Default to false) it was possible to upload a JSP file to the server via a specially crafted request. This JSP could then be requested and any code it - contained would be executed by the server. -

- -

- This was fixed in revisions 1804604 and - 1804729. -

- -

This issue was reported responsibly to the Apache Tomcat Security Team by + contained would be executed by the server.

+ + +

This was fixed in revisions 1804604 and + 1804729.

+ + +

This issue was reported responsibly to the Apache Tomcat Security Team by iswin from 360-sg-lab (360观星实验室) on 26 July 2017 and made public on 19 September 2017.

- -

Affects: 7.0.0 to 7.0.79

- -
-

- 1 July 2017 Fixed in Apache Tomcat 7.0.79 -

-
- -

- Moderate: Cache Poisoning + + +

Affects: 7.0.0 to 7.0.79

+ + +
+

+1 July 2017 Fixed in Apache Tomcat 7.0.79

+
+ + +

+Moderate: Cache Poisoning CVE-2017-7674 -

- -

The CORS Filter did not add an HTTP Vary header indicating that the +

+ + +

The CORS Filter did not add an HTTP Vary header indicating that the response varies depending on Origin. This permitted client and server side cache poisoning in some circumstances.

- -

- This was fixed in revision 1795816. -

- -

- The issue was reported as bug 61101 on 16 May 2017. The full + + +

This was fixed in revision 1795816.

+ + +

The issue was reported as bug 61101 on 16 May 2017. The full implications of this issue were identified by the Tomcat Security Team - the same day. This issue was made public on 10 August 2017. -

- -

Affects: 7.0.41 to 7.0.78

- -
-

- 16 May 2017 Fixed in Apache Tomcat 7.0.78 -

-
- + the same day. This issue was made public on 10 August 2017.

+ -

- Important: Security Constraint Bypass +

Affects: 7.0.41 to 7.0.78

+ + +
+

+16 May 2017 Fixed in Apache Tomcat 7.0.78

+
+ + +

+Important: Security Constraint Bypass CVE-2017-5664 -

- -

The error page mechanism of the Java Servlet Specification requires that, +

+ + +

The error page mechanism of the Java Servlet Specification requires that, when an error occurs and an error page is configured for the error that occurred, the original request and response are forwarded to the error page. This means that the request is presented to the error page with the original HTTP method.

- -

If the error page is a static file, expected behaviour is to serve content + + +

If the error page is a static file, expected behaviour is to serve content of the file as if processing a GET request, regardless of the actual HTTP method. Tomcat's Default Servlet did not do this. Depending on the original request this could lead to unexpected and undesirable results for static error pages including, if the DefaultServlet is configured to permit writes, the replacement or removal of the custom error page.

- -

Notes for other user provided error pages:

- -
    - -
  • Unless explicitly coded otherwise, JSPs ignore the HTTP method. + + +

    Notes for other user provided error pages:

    + +
      + +
    • Unless explicitly coded otherwise, JSPs ignore the HTTP method. JSPs used as error pages must ensure that they handle any error dispatch as a GET request, regardless of the actual method.
      • - -
    • By default, the response generated by a Servlet does depend on the + +
    • By default, the response generated by a Servlet does depend on the HTTP method. Custom Servlets used as error pages must ensure that they handle any error dispatch as a GET request, regardless of the actual method.
      • - -
    - -

    - This was fixed in revisions 1793471 and - 1793491. -

    - -

    This issue was reported responsibly to the Apache Tomcat Security Team by + +

+ + +

This was fixed in revisions 1793471 and + 1793491.

+ + +

This issue was reported responsibly to the Apache Tomcat Security Team by Aniket Nandkishor Kulkarni from Tata Consultancy Services Ltd, Mumbai, India as a vulnerability that allowed the restrictions on OPTIONS and TRACE requests to be bypassed on 21 April 2017. The full implications of this issue were identified by the Tomcat Security Team on 24 April 2017. This issue was made public on 6 June 2017.

- -

Affects: 7.0.0 to 7.0.77

- -
-

- 2 April 2017 Fixed in Apache Tomcat 7.0.77 -

-
- -

- Important: Information Disclosure + + +

Affects: 7.0.0 to 7.0.77

+ + +
+

+2 April 2017 Fixed in Apache Tomcat 7.0.77

+
+ + +

+Important: Information Disclosure CVE-2017-5647 -

- -

A bug in the handling of the pipelined requests when send file was used +

+ + +

A bug in the handling of the pipelined requests when send file was used resulted in the pipelined request being lost when send file processing of the previous request completed. This could result in responses appearing to be sent for the wrong request. For example, a user agent that sent requests A, B and C could see the correct response for request A, the response for request C for request B and no response for request C.

- -

- This was fixed in revision 1789008. -

- -

This issue was identified by the Apache Tomcat Security Team on 20 + + +

This was fixed in revision 1789008.

+ + +

This issue was identified by the Apache Tomcat Security Team on 20 March 2017 and made public on 10 April 2017.

- -

Affects: 7.0.0 to 7.0.76

- -
-

- 16 March 2017 Fixed in Apache Tomcat 7.0.76 -

-
- -

- Low: Information Disclosure + + +

Affects: 7.0.0 to 7.0.76

+ + +
+

+16 March 2017 Fixed in Apache Tomcat 7.0.76

+
+ + +

+Low: Information Disclosure CVE-2017-5648 -

- -

While investigating bug 60718, it was noticed that some calls to +

+ + +

While investigating bug 60718, it was noticed that some calls to application listeners did not use the appropriate facade object. When running an untrusted application under a SecurityManager, it was therefore possible for that untrusted application to retain a reference to the request or response object and thereby access and/or modify information associated with another web application.

- -

- This was fixed in revision 1785777. -

- -

This issue was identified by the Apache Tomcat Security Team on 20 + + +

This was fixed in revision 1785777.

+ + +

This issue was identified by the Apache Tomcat Security Team on 20 March 2017 and made public on 10 April 2017.

- -

Affects: 7.0.0 to 7.0.75

- -
-

- 24 January 2017 Fixed in Apache Tomcat 7.0.75 -

-
- -

- Important: Information Disclosure + + +

Affects: 7.0.0 to 7.0.75

+ + +
+

+24 January 2017 Fixed in Apache Tomcat 7.0.75

+
+ + +

+Important: Information Disclosure CVE-2016-8745 -

- -

- Note: The issue below was fixed in Apache Tomcat 7.0.74 but the +

+ + +

+Note: The issue below was fixed in Apache Tomcat 7.0.74 but the release vote for the 7.0.74 release candidate did not pass. Therefore, although users must download 7.0.75 to obtain a version that includes the fix for this issue, version 7.0.74 is not included in the list of affected versions. -

- -

A bug in the error handling of the send file code for the NIO HTTP +

+ + +

A bug in the error handling of the send file code for the NIO HTTP connector resulted in the current Processor object being added to the Processor cache multiple times. This in turn meant that the same Processor could be used for concurrent requests. Sharing a Processor can result in information leakage between requests including, but not limited to, session ID and the response body.

- -

- This was fixed in revision 1777471. -

- -

This issue was identified as affecting 7.0.x by the Apache Tomcat Security + + +

This was fixed in revision 1777471.

+ + +

This issue was identified as affecting 7.0.x by the Apache Tomcat Security Team on 3 January 2016 and made public on 5 January 2017.

- -

Affects: 7.0.0 to 7.0.73

- -
-

- 14 November 2016 Fixed in Apache Tomcat 7.0.73 -

-
- -

- Important: Remote Code Execution + + +

Affects: 7.0.0 to 7.0.73

+ + +
+

+14 November 2016 Fixed in Apache Tomcat 7.0.73

+
+ + +

+Important: Remote Code Execution CVE-2016-8735 -

- -

- The JmxRemoteLifecycleListener was not updated to take +

+ + +

The JmxRemoteLifecycleListener was not updated to take account of Oracle's fix for CVE-2016-3427. Therefore, Tomcat installations using this listener remained vulnerable to a similar remote code execution vulnerability. This issue has been rated as important rather than critical due to the small number of installations using this listener and that it would be highly unusual for the JMX ports to be - accessible to an attacker even when the listener is used. -

- -

- This was fixed in revision 1767676. -

- -

This issue was reported to the Apache Tomcat Security Team on 19 October + accessible to an attacker even when the listener is used.

+ + +

This was fixed in revision 1767676.

+ + +

This issue was reported to the Apache Tomcat Security Team on 19 October 2016 and made public on 22 November 2016.

- -

Affects: 7.0.0 to 7.0.72

- -

- Important: Information Disclosure + + +

Affects: 7.0.0 to 7.0.72

+ + +

+Important: Information Disclosure CVE-2016-6816 -

- -

The code that parsed the HTTP request line permitted invalid characters. +

+ + +

The code that parsed the HTTP request line permitted invalid characters. This could be exploited, in conjunction with a proxy that also permitted the invalid characters but with a different interpretation, to inject data into the HTTP response. By manipulating the HTTP response the attacker could poison a web-cache, perform an XSS attack and/or obtain sensitive information from requests other then their own.

- -

- This was fixed in revision 1767675. -

- -

This issue was reported to the Apache Tomcat Security Team on 11 + + +

This was fixed in revision 1767675.

+ + +

This issue was reported to the Apache Tomcat Security Team on 11 October 2016 and made public on 22 November 2016.

- -

Affects: 7.0.0 to 7.0.72

- -
-

- 19 September 2016 Fixed in Apache Tomcat 7.0.72 -

-
- + -

- Note: The issues below were fixed in Apache Tomcat 7.0.71 but the +

Affects: 7.0.0 to 7.0.72

+ + +
+

+19 September 2016 Fixed in Apache Tomcat 7.0.72

+
+ + +

+Note: The issues below were fixed in Apache Tomcat 7.0.71 but the release vote for the 7.0.71 release candidate did not pass. Therefore, although users must download 7.0.72 to obtain a version that includes fixes for these issues, version 7.0.71 is not included in the list of affected versions. -

- -

- Low: Unrestricted Access to Global Resources +

+ + +

+Low: Unrestricted Access to Global Resources CVE-2016-6797 -

- -

The ResourceLinkFactory did not limit web application access to global +

+ + +

The ResourceLinkFactory did not limit web application access to global JNDI resources to those resources explicitly linked to the web application. Therefore, it was possible for a web application to access any global JNDI resource whether an explicit ResourceLink had been configured or not.

- -

- This was fixed in revision 1757275. -

- -

This issue was identified by the Apache Tomcat Security Team on 18 + + +

This was fixed in revision 1757275.

+ + +

This issue was identified by the Apache Tomcat Security Team on 18 January 2016 and made public on 27 October 2016.

- -

Affects: 7.0.0 to 7.0.70

- -

- Low: Security Manager Bypass + + +

Affects: 7.0.0 to 7.0.70

+ + +

+Low: Security Manager Bypass CVE-2016-6796 -

- -

A malicious web application was able to bypass a configured +

+ + +

A malicious web application was able to bypass a configured SecurityManager via manipulation of the configuration parameters for the JSP Servlet.

- -

- This was fixed in revisions 1758495 and - 1763236. -

- -

This issue was identified by the Apache Tomcat Security Team on 27 + + +

This was fixed in revisions 1758495 and + 1763236.

+ + +

This issue was identified by the Apache Tomcat Security Team on 27 December 2015 and made public on 27 October 2016.

- -

Affects: 7.0.0 to 7.0.70

- -

- Low: System Property Disclosure + + +

Affects: 7.0.0 to 7.0.70

+ + +

+Low: System Property Disclosure CVE-2016-6794 -

- -

When a SecurityManager is configured, a web application's ability to read +

+ + +

When a SecurityManager is configured, a web application's ability to read system properties should be controlled by the SecurityManager. Tomcat's system property replacement feature for configuration files could be used by a malicious web application to bypass the SecurityManager and read system properties that should not be visible.

- -

- This was fixed in revision 1754728. -

- -

This issue was identified by the Apache Tomcat Security Team on 27 + + +

This was fixed in revision 1754728.

+ + +

This issue was identified by the Apache Tomcat Security Team on 27 December 2015 and made public on 27 October 2016.

- -

Affects: 7.0.0 to 7.0.70

- -

- Low: Security Manager Bypass + + +

Affects: 7.0.0 to 7.0.70

+ + +

+Low: Security Manager Bypass CVE-2016-5018 -

- -

A malicious web application was able to bypass a configured +

+ + +

A malicious web application was able to bypass a configured SecurityManager via a Tomcat utility method that was accessible to web applications.

- -

- This was fixed in revisions 1754902 and - 1760309. -

- -

This issue was discovered by Alvaro Munoz and Alexander Mirosh of the HP + + +

This was fixed in revisions 1754902 and + 1760309.

+ + +

This issue was discovered by Alvaro Munoz and Alexander Mirosh of the HP Enterprise Security Team and reported to the Apache Tomcat Security Team on 5 July 2016. It was made public on 27 October 2016.

- -

Affects: 7.0.0 to 7.0.70

- -

- Low: Timing Attack + + +

Affects: 7.0.0 to 7.0.70

+ + +

+Low: Timing Attack CVE-2016-0762 -

- -

The Realm implementations did not process the supplied password if the +

+ + +

The Realm implementations did not process the supplied password if the supplied user name did not exist. This made a timing attack possible to determine valid user names. Note that the default configuration includes the LockOutRealm which makes exploitation of this vulnerability harder.

- -

- This was fixed in revision 1758502. -

- -

This issue was identified by the Apache Tomcat Security Team on 1 January + + +

This was fixed in revision 1758502.

+ + +

This issue was identified by the Apache Tomcat Security Team on 1 January 2016 and made public on 27 October 2016.

- -

Affects: 7.0.0 to 7.0.70

- -
-

- 20 June 2016 Fixed in Apache Tomcat 7.0.70 -

-
- + -

- Moderate: Denial of Service +

Affects: 7.0.0 to 7.0.70

+ + +
+

+20 June 2016 Fixed in Apache Tomcat 7.0.70

+
+ + +

+Moderate: Denial of Service CVE-2016-3092 -

- -

Apache Tomcat uses a package renamed copy of Apache Commons FileUpload to +

+ + +

Apache Tomcat uses a package renamed copy of Apache Commons FileUpload to implement the file upload requirements of the Servlet specification. A denial of service vulnerability was identified in Commons FileUpload that occurred when the length of the multipart boundary was just below the size of the buffer (4096 bytes) used to read the uploaded file. This caused the file upload process to take several orders of magnitude longer than if the boundary was the typical tens of bytes long.

- -

- This was fixed in revision 1743742. -

- -

This issue was identified by the TERASOLUNA Framework Development Team + + +

This was fixed in revision 1743742.

+ + +

This issue was identified by the TERASOLUNA Framework Development Team and reported to the Apache Commons team via JPCERT on 9 May 2016. It was made public on 21 June 2016.

- -

Affects: 7.0.0 to 7.0.69

- -
-

- 16 February 2016 Fixed in Apache Tomcat 7.0.68 -

-
- -

- Low: Directory disclosure + + +

Affects: 7.0.0 to 7.0.69

+ + +
+

+16 February 2016 Fixed in Apache Tomcat 7.0.68

+
+ + +

+Low: Directory disclosure CVE-2015-5345 -

- -

When accessing a directory protected by a security constraint with a URL +

+ + +

When accessing a directory protected by a security constraint with a URL that did not end in a slash, Tomcat would redirect to the URL with the trailing slash thereby confirming the presence of the directory before processing the security constraint. It was therefore possible for a user @@ -857,9 +896,9 @@ permitted to view the directory. The issue also occurred at the root of a web application in which case the presence of the web application was confirmed, even if a user did not have access.

- -

- The solution was to implement the redirect in the DefaultServlet so that + + +

The solution was to implement the redirect in the DefaultServlet so that any security constraints and/or security enforcing Filters were processed before the redirect. The Tomcat team recognised that moving the redirect could cause regressions so two new Context configuration options @@ -871,80 +910,87 @@ 58765 the default for mapperContextRootRedirectEnabled was later changed to true since it was viewed that the regression was more serious than the security risk associated with being able to - determine if a web application was deployed at a given path. -

- -

- This was fixed in revisions 1715213, + determine if a web application was deployed at a given path.

+ + +

This was fixed in revisions 1715213, 1716860 and - 1717212. -

- -

This issue was identified by Mark Koek of QCSec on 12 October 2015 and + 1717212.

+ + +

This issue was identified by Mark Koek of QCSec on 12 October 2015 and made public on 22 February 2016.

- -

Affects: 7.0.0 to 7.0.67

- -

- Moderate: CSRF token leak + + +

Affects: 7.0.0 to 7.0.67

+ + +

+Moderate: CSRF token leak CVE-2015-5351 -

- -

The index page of the Manager and Host Manager applications included a +

+ + +

The index page of the Manager and Host Manager applications included a valid CSRF token when issuing a redirect as a result of an unauthenticated request to the root of the web application. If an attacker had access to the Manager or Host Manager applications (typically these applications are only accessible to internal users, not exposed to the Internet), this token could then be used by the attacker to construct a CSRF attack.

- -

- This was fixed in revisions 1720661 and - 1720663. -

- -

This issue was identified by the Tomcat security team on 8 December 2015 + + +

This was fixed in revisions 1720661 and + 1720663.

+ + +

This issue was identified by the Tomcat security team on 8 December 2015 and made public on 22 February 2016.

- -

Affects: 7.0.1 to 7.0.67

- -

- Low: Security Manager bypass + + +

Affects: 7.0.1 to 7.0.67

+ + +

+Low: Security Manager bypass CVE-2016-0706 -

- -

This issue only affects users running untrusted web applications under a +

+ + +

This issue only affects users running untrusted web applications under a security manager.

- + -

The internal StatusManagerServlet could be loaded by a malicious web +

The internal StatusManagerServlet could be loaded by a malicious web application when a security manager was configured. This servlet could then provide the malicious web application with a list of all deployed applications and a list of the HTTP request lines for all requests currently being processed. This could have exposed sensitive information from other web applications, such as session IDs, to the web application.

- -

- This was fixed in revision 1722801. -

- -

This issue was identified by the Tomcat security team on 27 December 2015 + + +

This was fixed in revision 1722801.

+ + +

This issue was identified by the Tomcat security team on 27 December 2015 and made public on 22 February 2016.

- -

Affects: 7.0.0 to 7.0.67

- -

- Moderate: Security Manager bypass + + +

Affects: 7.0.0 to 7.0.67

+ + +

+Moderate: Security Manager bypass CVE-2016-0714 -

- -

This issue only affects users running untrusted web applications under a +

+ + +

This issue only affects users running untrusted web applications under a security manager.

- + -

- Tomcat provides several session persistence mechanisms. The +

Tomcat provides several session persistence mechanisms. The StandardManager persists session over a restart. The PersistentManager is able to persist sessions to files, a database or a custom Store. The cluster implementation @@ -953,68 +999,71 @@ persistence is performed by Tomcat code with the permissions assigned to Tomcat internal code. By placing a carefully crafted object into a session, a malicious web application could trigger the execution of - arbitrary code. -

- -

- This was fixed in revisions 1726923 and - 1727034. -

- -

This issue was identified by the Tomcat security team on 12 November 2015 + arbitrary code.

+ + +

This was fixed in revisions 1726923 and + 1727034.

+ + +

This issue was identified by the Tomcat security team on 12 November 2015 and made public on 22 February 2016.

- -

Affects: 7.0.0 to 7.0.67

- -

- Moderate: Security Manager bypass + + +

Affects: 7.0.0 to 7.0.67

+ + +

+Moderate: Security Manager bypass CVE-2016-0763 -

- -

This issue only affects users running untrusted web applications under a +

+ + +

This issue only affects users running untrusted web applications under a security manager.

- + -

- ResourceLinkFactory.setGlobalContext() is a public method +

+ResourceLinkFactory.setGlobalContext() is a public method and was accessible to web applications even when running under a security manager. This allowed a malicious web application to inject a malicious global context that could in turn be used to disrupt other web applications and/or read and write data owned by other web - applications. -

- -

- This was fixed in revision 1725931. -

- -

This issue was identified by the Tomcat security team on 18 January 2016 + applications.

+ + +

This was fixed in revision 1725931.

+ + +

This issue was identified by the Tomcat security team on 18 January 2016 and made public on 22 February 2016.

- -

Affects: 7.0.0 to 7.0.67

- -
-

- 10 December 2015 Fixed in Apache Tomcat 7.0.67 -

-
- + + +

Affects: 7.0.0 to 7.0.67

+ + +
+

+10 December 2015 Fixed in Apache Tomcat 7.0.67

+
+ -

- Note: The issue below was fixed in Apache Tomcat 7.0.66 but the +

+Note: The issue below was fixed in Apache Tomcat 7.0.66 but the release vote for the 7.0.66 release candidate did not pass. Therefore, although users must download 7.0.67 to obtain a version that includes a fix for this issue, version 7.0.66 is not included in the list of affected versions. -

- -

- Low: Session Fixation +

+ + +

+Low: Session Fixation CVE-2015-5346 -

- -

- When recycling the Request object to use for a new request, +

+ + +

When recycling the Request object to use for a new request, the requestedSessionSSL field was not recycled. This meant that a session ID provided in the next request to be processed using the recycled Request object could be used when it should not have been. This @@ -1023,35 +1072,36 @@ hard to achieve as the attacker would not have been able to force the victim to use the 'correct' Request object. It was also necessary for at least one web application to be configured to use the SSL session ID as - the HTTP session ID. This is not a common configuration. -

- -

- This was fixed in revision 1713187. -

- -

This issue was identified by the Tomcat security team on 22 June 2014 + the HTTP session ID. This is not a common configuration.

+ + +

This was fixed in revision 1713187.

+ + +

This issue was identified by the Tomcat security team on 22 June 2014 and made public on 22 February 2016.

- -

Affects: 7.0.5 to 7.0.65

- -
-

- 19 October 2015 Fixed in Apache Tomcat 7.0.65 -

-
- -

- Low: Limited directory traversal + + +

Affects: 7.0.5 to 7.0.65

+ + +
+

+19 October 2015 Fixed in Apache Tomcat 7.0.65

+
+ + +

+Low: Limited directory traversal CVE-2015-5174 -

- -

This issue only affects users running untrusted web applications under a +

+ + +

This issue only affects users running untrusted web applications under a security manager.

- + -

- When accessing resources via the ServletContext methods +

When accessing resources via the ServletContext methods getResource() getResourceAsStream() and getResourcePaths() the paths should be limited to the current web application. The validation was not correct and paths of the @@ -1062,335 +1112,372 @@ This should not be possible when running under a security manager. Typically, the directory listing that would be exposed would be for $CATALINA_BASE/webapps. -

- -

- This was fixed in revisions 1696284 and - 1700898. -

- -

This issue was identified by the Tomcat security team on 12 August 2015 +

+ + +

This was fixed in revisions 1696284 and + 1700898.

+ + +

This issue was identified by the Tomcat security team on 12 August 2015 and made public on 22 February 2016.

- -

Affects: 7.0.0 to 7.0.64

- - -
-

- 4 February 2015 Fixed in Apache Tomcat 7.0.59 -

-
- -

- Note: The issue below was fixed in Apache Tomcat 7.0.58 but the + + +

Affects: 7.0.0 to 7.0.64

+ + +
+

+4 February 2015 Fixed in Apache Tomcat 7.0.59

+
+ + +

+Note: The issue below was fixed in Apache Tomcat 7.0.58 but the release vote for the 7.0.58 release candidate did not pass. Therefore, although users must download 7.0.59 to obtain a version that includes a fix for this issue, versions 7.0.58 is not included in the list of [... 2589 lines stripped ...] --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@tomcat.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@tomcat.apache.org