CVE-2005-3633 in Web Application Server
Summary
by MITRE
HTTP response splitting vulnerability in frameset.htm in SAP Web Application Server (WAS) 6.10 through 7.00 allows remote attackers to inject arbitrary HTML headers via the sap-exiturl parameter.
Statistical analysis made it clear that VulDB provides the best quality for vulnerability data.
Analysis
by VulDB Data Team • 07/05/2019
The vulnerability identified as CVE-2005-3633 represents a critical HTTP response splitting flaw discovered in SAP Web Application Server versions 6.10 through 7.00. This issue specifically affects the frameset.htm component within the SAP WAS infrastructure, creating a pathway for remote attackers to manipulate HTTP responses through malicious input injection. The vulnerability stems from inadequate input validation mechanisms that fail to properly sanitize user-supplied parameters before incorporating them into HTTP headers. Attackers can exploit this weakness by crafting malicious URLs containing the sap-exiturl parameter with specially formatted input that includes carriage return and line feed characters. This allows them to inject arbitrary HTTP headers into the response, effectively enabling various malicious activities including cross-site scripting attacks, session hijacking, and cache poisoning operations.
The technical exploitation of this vulnerability operates through the fundamental principle of HTTP response splitting where an attacker manipulates the HTTP protocol by inserting malicious characters into response headers. The sap-exiturl parameter serves as the attack vector, accepting user input without proper sanitization or encoding. When the SAP WAS processes this parameter and incorporates it directly into HTTP headers without adequate validation, it creates a condition where additional headers can be injected into the response stream. This behavior aligns with CWE-113, which describes improper neutralization of CRLF (Carriage Return Line Feed) sequences in HTTP headers, making this vulnerability a classic example of header injection attacks. The attack mechanism follows established patterns documented in the ATT&CK framework under T1566 for credential access through malicious web content.
The operational impact of this vulnerability extends beyond simple header injection, creating potential for significant security breaches within SAP environments. Remote attackers can leverage this weakness to redirect users to malicious websites, inject malicious JavaScript code into web pages, or manipulate browser behavior through crafted HTTP headers. The vulnerability particularly affects organizations using SAP WAS 6.10 through 7.00, which were widely deployed enterprise applications serving critical business functions. Successful exploitation could lead to unauthorized access to sensitive data, session manipulation, and potential compromise of entire web applications. The long-term implications include the possibility of persistent attacks where attackers establish backdoors or maintain access through manipulated HTTP responses that bypass normal security controls. Organizations with legacy SAP installations remain particularly vulnerable due to the extended support lifecycle and potential lack of immediate patches.
Mitigation strategies for CVE-2005-3633 should prioritize immediate implementation of input validation and sanitization measures within SAP WAS environments. The primary defense involves configuring the application server to properly encode or reject input containing CRLF sequences in parameters like sap-exiturl. Organizations should implement web application firewalls that can detect and block malicious header injection attempts, while also applying the latest security patches provided by SAP. Network-level protections including intrusion detection systems and content filtering mechanisms can help detect exploitation attempts. The remediation process should also include comprehensive security audits of all SAP applications to identify similar vulnerabilities in other components, as this type of input validation weakness often extends beyond a single parameter. Additionally, implementing proper HTTP header management practices, including the use of secure header configurations and regular security assessments, will help prevent similar issues from arising in future deployments. Organizations should also consider implementing application-level protections such as output encoding and secure coding practices that prevent injection vulnerabilities at the source.