Bug 844312 (CVE-2013-6044) - VUL-0: CVE-2013-6044: python-django: xss in is_safe_url function
Summary: VUL-0: CVE-2013-6044: python-django: xss in is_safe_url function
Status: RESOLVED FIXED
Alias: CVE-2013-6044
Product: SUSE Security Incidents
Classification: Novell Products
Component: Incidents (show other bugs)
Version: unspecified
Hardware: Other Other
: P3 - Medium : Normal
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Sascha Peilicke
QA Contact: Security Team bot
URL:
Whiteboard:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2013-10-07 14:50 UTC by Marcus Meissner
Modified: 2013-11-28 12:49 UTC (History)
2 users (show)

See Also:
Found By: Security Response Team
Services Priority:
Business Priority:
Blocker: ---
Marketing QA Status: ---
IT Deployment: ---

Attachments
Add an attachment (proposed patch, testcase, etc.)

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Marcus Meissner 2013-10-07 14:50:40 UTC 
CVE-2013-6044


The is_safe_url function in utils/http.py in Django 1.4.x before 1.4.6, 1.5.x
before 1.5.2, and 1.6 before beta 2 treats a URL's scheme as safe even if it is
not HTTP or HTTPS, which might introduce cross-site scripting (XSS) or other
vulnerabilities into Django applications that use this function, as demonstrated
by "the login view in django.contrib.auth.views" and the javascript: scheme.

References:
http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/61777
http://xforce.iss.net/xforce/xfdb/86437
https://github.com/django/django/commit/1a274ccd6bc1afbdac80344c9b6e5810c1162b5f
https://github.com/django/django/commit/ae3535169af804352517b7fea94a42a1c9c4b762
https://github.com/django/django/commit/ec67af0bd609c412b76eaa4cc89968a2a8e5ad6a
http://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CVE-2013-6044
http://web.nvd.nist.gov/view/vuln/detail?vulnId=CVE-2013-6044
Comment 1 Swamp Workflow Management 2013-10-11 07:41:27 UTC 
bugbot adjusting priority
Comment 2 Vincent Untz 2013-11-21 14:46:03 UTC 
Sascha: here are the latest security issues we have.
Comment 3 Vincent Untz 2013-11-21 14:48:22 UTC 
AFAICT, we have 1.4.8 in the update channel, so we should be safe?
Comment 4 Sascha Peilicke 2013-11-28 12:49:47 UTC 
Yes. For Cloud-3 we submitted 1.5.4, which is ok too.