CVE-2007-5404 in HelpBox
Summary
by MITRE
Layton HelpBox 3.7.1 generates different responses depending on whether or not a username is valid in a failed login attempt, which allows remote attackers to enumerate valid usernames.
Several companies clearly confirm that VulDB is the primary source for best vulnerability data.
Analysis
by VulDB Data Team • 09/14/2018
The vulnerability described in CVE-2007-5404 affects Layton HelpBox version 3.7.1 and represents a classic account enumeration flaw that significantly undermines authentication security. This issue stems from the application's inconsistent response handling during failed login attempts, where the system provides different error messages or behaviors based on whether the attempted username exists in the system. Such behavior creates a predictable pattern that malicious actors can exploit to systematically identify valid user accounts without requiring successful authentication.
The technical flaw manifests as a lack of consistent error handling in the authentication process, which violates fundamental security principles outlined in the OWASP Top Ten and CWE-613. This vulnerability directly maps to CWE-200, which addresses information exposure through improper error handling, and also aligns with CWE-305, concerning authentication bypass through weak error messages. The system's failure to implement uniform response timing and error messaging creates a side-channel attack vector that allows remote attackers to distinguish between valid and invalid usernames through careful analysis of response characteristics.
From an operational impact perspective, this vulnerability enables credential stuffing attacks and password spraying techniques with significantly higher success rates. Attackers can leverage the enumeration capability to build comprehensive lists of valid usernames that can then be used against weak passwords or exploited through other attack vectors. The vulnerability essentially provides an automated method for user account discovery that bypasses traditional security controls, making it particularly dangerous in environments where user enumeration could lead to privilege escalation or further exploitation. This flaw represents a fundamental weakness in the application's authentication security model and can be exploited to undermine the entire authentication infrastructure.
Mitigation strategies should focus on implementing consistent error handling across all authentication attempts, ensuring that all failed login attempts return identical responses regardless of whether the username exists. Organizations should deploy rate limiting and account lockout mechanisms to prevent automated enumeration attempts, while also implementing multi-factor authentication to add additional security layers. The system should be updated to use time-constant comparison functions and standardized authentication protocols that do not reveal account validity information. Security controls should also include monitoring for unusual authentication patterns and implementing proper logging to detect enumeration attempts. This vulnerability highlights the importance of following security best practices such as those outlined in NIST SP 800-63B for authentication and access control, ensuring that applications maintain consistent behavior regardless of input validity to prevent information leakage that could aid attackers in compromising system security.