Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Exclude nimbus classes JCASupport and AESCBC using proGuard, Fixes AB#3042434 #2192

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: dev
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

p3dr0rv
Copy link
Collaborator

@p3dr0rv p3dr0rv commented Sep 26, 2024

https://portal.microsofticm.com/imp/v5/incidents/details/543093195/summary
#2164
Couple of customers have reported vulnerabilities on the nimbus lib using MobSF.
The vulnerabilities are:

WE: CWE-649: Reliance on Obfuscation or
Encryption of Security-Relevant Inputs without
Integrity Checking
OWASP Top 10: M5: Insufficient Cryptography
OWASP MASVS: MSTG-CRYPTO-3

com/nimbusds/jose/crypto/AESCBC.java
com/nimbusds/jose/jca/JCASupport.java
image

Nimbus already fix the padding issue, see https://bitbucket.org/connect2id/nimbus-jose-jwt/issues/516/insecure-encryption-mode-cbc-with-pkcs5
But they keep these libraries because the AES/CBC/HMAC mode is a current JOSE standard and as such it will be supported by the nimbus-jose-jwt lib, see https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc7519#section-8
So, they won't fix.

With this change we attempt to exclude these classes using ProGuard to exclude these classes.
Right now, we do not have MobSF setup to validate if this will work.
AB#3042434

@p3dr0rv p3dr0rv requested a review from a team as a code owner September 26, 2024 20:08
Copy link

✅ Work item link check complete. Description contains link AB#3042434 to an Azure Boards work item.

@github-actions github-actions bot added the msal label Sep 26, 2024
@github-actions github-actions bot changed the title Exclude nimbus classes JCASupport and AESCBC using proGuard Exclude nimbus classes JCASupport and AESCBC using proGuard, Fixes AB#3042434 Sep 26, 2024
@rpdome
Copy link
Member

rpdome commented Oct 17, 2024

Should we

  1. validate with MobSF ourselves before shipping/closing this
    or
  2. Generate a private build for customer to validate

?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants