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鈥檒l occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Update dependency junit:junit to v4.13.1 [SECURITY] - autoclosed #451

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

ghost
Copy link

@ghost ghost commented Oct 14, 2020

This PR contains the following updates:

Package Update Change
junit:junit (source) patch 4.13 -> 4.13.1

GitHub Vulnerability Alerts

CVE-2020-15250

Vulnerability

The JUnit4 test rule TemporaryFolder contains a local information disclosure vulnerability.

Example of vulnerable code:

public static class HasTempFolder {
    @Rule
    public TemporaryFolder folder = new TemporaryFolder();

    @Test
    public void testUsingTempFolder() throws IOException {
        folder.getRoot(); // Previous file permissions: `drwxr-xr-x`; After fix:`drwx------`
        File createdFile= folder.newFile("myfile.txt"); // unchanged/irrelevant file permissions
        File createdFolder= folder.newFolder("subfolder"); // unchanged/irrelevant file permissions
        // ...
    }
}

Impact

On Unix like systems, the system's temporary directory is shared between all users on that system. Because of this, when files and directories are written into this directory they are, by default, readable by other users on that same system.

This vulnerability does not allow other users to overwrite the contents of these directories or files. This is purely an information disclosure vulnerability.

When analyzing the impact of this vulnerability, here are the important questions to ask:

  1. Do the JUnit tests write sensitive information, like API keys or passwords, into the temporary folder?
    • If yes, this vulnerability impacts you, but only if you also answer 'yes' to question 2.
    • If no, this vulnerability does not impact you.
  2. Do the JUnit tests ever execute in an environment where the OS has other untrusted users.
    This may apply in CI/CD environments but normally won't be 'yes' for personal developer machines.
    • If yes, and you answered 'yes' to question 1, this vulnerability impacts you.
    • If no, this vulnerability does not impact you.

Patches

Because certain JDK file system APIs were only added in JDK 1.7, this this fix is dependent upon the version of the JDK you are using.

  • Java 1.7 and higher users: this vulnerability is fixed in 4.13.1.
  • Java 1.6 and lower users: no patch is available, you must use the workaround below.

Workarounds

If you are unable to patch, or are stuck running on Java 1.6, specifying the java.io.tmpdir system environment variable to a directory that is exclusively owned by the executing user will fix this vulnerability.

References

Similar Vulnerabilities

For more information

If you have any questions or comments about this advisory, please pen an issue in junit-team/junit4.


Renovate configuration

馃搮 Schedule: "" in timezone America/Argentina/Buenos_Aires.

馃殾 Automerge: Disabled by config. Please merge this manually once you are satisfied.

鈾伙笍 Rebasing: Whenever PR becomes conflicted, or if you modify the PR title to begin with "rebase!".

馃敃 Ignore: Close this PR and you won't be reminded about this update again.


  • If you want to rebase/retry this PR, check this box

@ghost ghost force-pushed the renovate-maven-junit-junit-vulnerability branch from 59c612e to ce0084a Compare December 3, 2020 20:56
@ghost ghost changed the title Update dependency junit:junit to v4.13.1 [SECURITY] Update dependency junit:junit to v4.13.1 [SECURITY] - autoclosed Dec 17, 2020
@ghost ghost closed this Dec 17, 2020
@ghost ghost deleted the renovate-maven-junit-junit-vulnerability branch December 17, 2020 17:16
This pull request was closed.
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

1 participant