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

False positive: CVE-2017-17485 detected for fixed Jackson-databind #1088

Closed
runeflobakk opened this issue Feb 1, 2018 · 5 comments
Closed

Comments

@runeflobakk
Copy link

jackson-databind-2.7.9.2

False positive on library jackson-databind-2.7.9.2.jar - reported as cpe:/a:fasterxml:jackson:2.7.9.2, cpe:/a:fasterxml:jackson-databind:2.7.9.2, com.fasterxml.jackson.core:jackson-databind:2.7.9.2

<dependency>
    <groupId>com.fasterxml.jackson.core</groupId>
    <artifactId>jackson-databind</artifactId>
    <version>2.7.9.2</version>
</dependency>

The CVE-2017-17485 vulnerability is fixed in:

  • Jackson-databind version 2.9.3.1
  • Jackson-databind version 2.7.9.2
  • Jackson-databind version 2.8.11

https://blog.nsfocusglobal.com/threats/vulnerability-analysis/jackson-databind-rce-vulnerability-handling-guide-cve-2017-17485/

@jeremylong
Copy link
Owner

We use the data from the NVD which still states everything prior to 2.8.11 is vulnerable. You can see this in the NVD entry CVE-2017-17485. Additionally, take a look at one of jackson-databind developers comments on the issue FasterXML/jackson-databind#1855 (comment)...

@strackam
Copy link

Hello,
Using the maven plugin, no CVE are reported for jackson-databind version 2.9.3 or 2.9.2.
Nor CVE-2017-17485 or CVE-2018-5968 appears.
But they appears in jackson-databind is in v2.8.10.
Regarding these CVE details, it should also appears from 2.9.0 to 2.9.3, no ?

@jeremylong
Copy link
Owner

Unfortunately, we have been relying on the information in the XML data feeds from NIST. For CVE-2018-5968 they provide:

<entry id="CVE-2018-5968">
    <vuln:vulnerable-configuration id="http://nvd.nist.gov/">
      <cpe-lang:logical-test operator="OR" negate="false">
        <cpe-lang:fact-ref name="cpe:/a:fasterxml:jackson-databind:2.8.11"/>
      </cpe-lang:logical-test>
    </vuln:vulnerable-configuration>
    <vuln:vulnerable-software-list>
      <vuln:product>cpe:/a:fasterxml:jackson-databind:2.8.11</vuln:product>
    </vuln:vulnerable-software-list>
...

However, if you look at the JSON data feed the include the additional information:

    "configurations" : {
      "CVE_data_version" : "4.0",
      "nodes" : [ {
        "operator" : "OR",
        "cpe" : [ {
          "vulnerable" : true,
          "cpe22Uri" : "cpe:/a:fasterxml:jackson-databind",
          "cpe23Uri" : "cpe:2.3:a:fasterxml:jackson-databind:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*",
          "versionEndIncluding" : "2.8.11"
        }, {
          "vulnerable" : true,
          "cpe22Uri" : "cpe:/a:fasterxml:jackson-databind",
          "cpe23Uri" : "cpe:2.3:a:fasterxml:jackson-databind:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*",
          "versionStartIncluding" : "2.9.0",
          "versionEndIncluding" : "2.9.3"
        } ]
      } ]
    }

Switching to the JSON data feeds will require several updates - within dependency-check but appears imparative as the NVD data is much more robust in the JSON feed. I had previously been hesitant as the JSON feed is still labeled as beta and a change by the NVD could cause all instances of ODC to fail...

@stevespringett
Copy link
Collaborator

@jeremylong Dependency-Track has been using the beta JSON feed exclusively since May 2017. I've only had to make a single change (in August 2017) to fix the parser to work with changes made to the beta feed. Dependency-Track doesn't use the XML feeds.

For reference, this is the NvdParser that Dependency-Track uses.

@jeremylong
Copy link
Owner

With the switch to the json data feeds in 5.0.0-M1 this issue was resolved.

@jeremylong jeremylong added this to the 5.0.0-M3 milestone May 6, 2019
@lock lock bot locked and limited conversation to collaborators Jun 6, 2019
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants