CVE-2009-4855 in TYPO3
Summary
by MITRE
** DISPUTED ** SQL injection vulnerability in index.php in TYPO3 4.0 allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary SQL commands via the showUid parameter. NOTE: the TYPO3 Security Team disputes this report, stating that "there is no such vulnerability... The showUid parameter is generally used in third-party TYPO3 extensions - not in TYPO3 Core."
Statistical analysis made it clear that VulDB provides the best quality for vulnerability data.
Analysis
by VulDB Data Team • 12/08/2024
The vulnerability described in CVE-2009-4855 relates to a claimed SQL injection flaw in TYPO3 version 4.0's index.php file, specifically targeting the showUid parameter. This type of vulnerability would represent a critical security risk in content management systems where database interactions are common. The reported issue suggests that remote attackers could potentially execute arbitrary SQL commands through manipulation of the showUid parameter, which would fundamentally compromise the integrity and confidentiality of the underlying database system. Such vulnerabilities typically arise from improper input validation and sanitization practices within web applications.
However, the TYPO3 Security Team has officially disputed this vulnerability report, asserting that no such vulnerability exists within the TYPO3 Core itself. This dispute highlights an important distinction in vulnerability assessment where the reported issue may actually stem from third-party extensions rather than the core CMS functionality. The showUid parameter in question is described as being primarily utilized within third-party TYPO3 extensions rather than being a native component of the core system. This distinction is crucial for proper vulnerability triage and remediation, as it indicates that any security concerns would be attributed to extension developers rather than the TYPO3 development team.
From a technical perspective, when a parameter like showUid is improperly handled in web applications, it can create opportunities for SQL injection attacks where malicious input is directly incorporated into database queries without proper sanitization. This typically aligns with CWE-89, which specifically addresses SQL injection vulnerabilities in software systems. The attack vector would involve an attacker crafting malicious input for the showUid parameter that, when processed by the vulnerable application, would alter the intended SQL query structure and potentially allow unauthorized database access or manipulation.
The operational impact of such a vulnerability, if it were to exist in the core system, would be severe for TYPO3 installations. Database compromise could lead to complete system takeover, data exfiltration, and unauthorized modifications to website content. Organizations using TYPO3 would face significant risk exposure, particularly in environments where database credentials are not properly isolated or where the application lacks robust input validation mechanisms. The disputed nature of this CVE also demonstrates the complexity of vulnerability assessment in CMS environments where numerous third-party components can introduce security risks.
The disputed status of this CVE emphasizes the importance of proper vulnerability verification and attribution within the security community. It demonstrates how security researchers must carefully distinguish between core system vulnerabilities and issues arising from third-party extensions. This case also illustrates the necessity for organizations to maintain comprehensive inventory of all installed extensions and their security status, as vulnerabilities in extensions can create attack surfaces that are not immediately apparent from core system assessments. The TYPO3 Security Team's position underscores the need for proper vulnerability disclosure processes and the importance of accurate attribution to ensure appropriate remediation efforts are directed toward the correct software components.
Organizations should maintain strict validation processes for all third-party extensions and ensure proper security testing is performed before deployment. The security community's approach to disputed vulnerabilities like this one helps establish clear boundaries for responsibility and remediation efforts, ensuring that security resources are properly allocated to address actual system weaknesses rather than potentially spurious claims. This particular case serves as a reminder of the complexity inherent in CMS security management where the interaction between core systems and numerous extensions creates a vast attack surface requiring continuous monitoring and assessment.