CWE-942 Variante Incomplet

Permissive Cross-domain Security Policy with Untrusted Domains

This vulnerability occurs when a web application's cross-domain security policy, like a Content Security Policy (CSP), explicitly allows communication with untrusted or overly permissive external…

Définition

What is CWE-942?

This vulnerability occurs when a web application's cross-domain security policy, like a Content Security Policy (CSP), explicitly allows communication with untrusted or overly permissive external domains.
A permissive cross-domain policy undermines a key web security control. By listing untrusted domains or using overly broad wildcards (e.g., *.example.com), you grant those external sites the ability to interact with your application's data and user session, effectively inviting potential attackers into a trusted context. Attackers hosted on these permitted domains can often launch exploits, such as data theft or session hijacking, without any visible warning to the end user. This makes the vulnerability particularly dangerous, as a compromise can occur silently during normal browsing, bypassing the intended protections of the security policy.
Impact réel

Real-world CVEs caused by CWE-942

  • Product has a Silverlight cross-domain policy that does not restrict access to another application, which allows remote attackers to bypass the Same Origin Policy.

  • The default Flash Cross Domain policies in a product allows remote attackers to access user files.

  • Chain: Adobe Flash Player does not sufficiently restrict the interpretation and usage of cross-domain policy files, which makes it easier for remote attackers to conduct cross-domain and cross-site scripting (XSS) attacks.

  • Chain: Adobe Flash Player and earlier does not properly interpret policy files, which allows remote attackers to bypass a non-root domain policy.

  • Chain: Adobe Flash Player does not properly handle unspecified encodings during the parsing of a cross-domain policy file, which allows remote web servers to bypass intended access restrictions via unknown vectors.

Comment les attaquants l'exploitent

Parcours de l'attaquant étape par étape

  1. 1

    These cross-domain policy files mean to allow Flash and Silverlight applications hosted on other domains to access its data:

  2. 2

    Flash crossdomain.xml :

  3. 3

    Silverlight clientaccesspolicy.xml :

  4. 4

    These entries are far too permissive, allowing any Flash or Silverlight application to send requests. A malicious application hosted on any other web site will be able to send requests on behalf of any user tricked into executing it.

Exemple de code vulnérable

Vulnerable XML

Flash crossdomain.xml :

Vulnérable XML
<cross-domain-policy xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance"
  xsi:noNamespaceSchemaLocation="http://www.adobe.com/xml/schemas/PolicyFile.xsd">
  <allow-access-from domain="*.example.com"/>
  <allow-access-from domain="*"/>
  </cross-domain-policy>
Exemple de code sécurisé

Secure pseudo

Sécurisé pseudo
// Validate, sanitize, or use a safe API before reaching the sink.
function handleRequest(input) {
  const safe = validateAndEscape(input);
  return executeWithGuards(safe);
}
What changed: the unsafe sink is replaced (or the input is validated/escaped) so the same payload no longer triggers the weakness.
Liste de contrôle de prévention

How to prevent CWE-942

  • Architecture and Design / Operation Define a restrictive Content Security Policy [REF-1486] or cross-domain policy file.
  • Architecture and Design / Operation Avoid using wildcards in the CSP / cross-domain policy file. Any domain matching the wildcard expression will be implicitly trusted, and can perform two-way interaction with the target server.
  • Architecture and Design / Operation For Flash, modify crossdomain.xml to use meta-policy options such as 'master-only' or 'none' to reduce the possibility of an attacker planting extraneous cross-domain policy files on a server.
Signaux de détection

How to detect CWE-942

Automated Static Analysis High

Automated static analysis, commonly referred to as Static Application Security Testing (SAST), can find some instances of this weakness by analyzing source code (or binary/compiled code) without having to execute it. Typically, this is done by building a model of data flow and control flow, then searching for potentially-vulnerable patterns that connect "sources" (origins of input) with "sinks" (destinations where the data interacts with external components, a lower layer such as the OS, etc.)

CWE-942

Don't catalog this weakness. Prove it's reachable.

Plexicus turns CWE catalogs into evidence: every CWE-pattern is matched against your real code graph, reach is proven on a sandbox clone, and verified findings ship as reviewed PRs.

Questions fréquentes

Frequently asked questions

Qu'est-ce que CWE-942 ?

This vulnerability occurs when a web application's cross-domain security policy, like a Content Security Policy (CSP), explicitly allows communication with untrusted or overly permissive external domains.

Quelle est la gravité de CWE-942 ?

MITRE n'a pas publié de note de probabilité d'exploitation pour cette faiblesse. Traitez-la comme un impact moyen jusqu'à ce que votre modèle de menace prouve le contraire.

Quels langages ou plateformes sont affectés par CWE-942 ?

MITRE lists the following affected platforms: Web Based.

Comment puis-je prévenir CWE-942 ?

Define a restrictive Content Security Policy [REF-1486] or cross-domain policy file. Avoid using wildcards in the CSP / cross-domain policy file. Any domain matching the wildcard expression will be implicitly trusted, and can perform two-way interaction with the target server.

Comment Plexicus détecte et corrige CWE-942 ?

Le moteur SAST de Plexicus reconnaît la signature de flux de données de CWE-942 à chaque commit. Lorsqu'une correspondance est trouvée, notre agent Codex Remedium ouvre une PR de correction avec le code corrigé, les tests et un résumé d'une ligne pour le relecteur.

Où puis-je en savoir plus sur CWE-942 ?

MITRE publie la définition canonique à https://cwe.mitre.org/data/definitions/942.html. Vous pouvez également consulter la documentation OWASP et NIST pour des conseils adjacents.

Prêt à valider l'essentiel ?

Prêt à valider ce qui compte.

Plexicus est Proof-Driven AppSec : findings validés, compréhension contextuelle et remédiation relue — ancrée dans la preuve, scopée avec vous.

Qualification

Vérifiez si l'AI Swarm Pentest convient à votre environnement.

Partagez le contexte minimum. Nous vérifierons le périmètre et indiquerons la prochaine étape commerciale.

Avant d'envoyer — vérifiez que vous correspondez

0 / 280

Sans engagement. Si vous ne correspondez pas, nous vous le dirons.

SAMPLE HANDOVER · ILLUSTRATIVE

Sample evidence handover

A trimmed view of what your team receives at the end of an AI Swarm Pentest engagement. Real engagements include full technical evidence, executive narrative, and a remediation plan.

VALIDATED FINDING Evidence attached

Server-Side Request Forgery in webhooks/receiver

demo-project/sample-app · src/webhooks/receiver.py:42

SeverityHigh CVSS 3.18.6 Priority79 Confirmedvia replay

Untrusted caller-supplied URLs reach an internal egress without an allowlist. Replayed in a sandbox against a fresh authorized target — the same control was validated to fail twice.

REVIEWER-READY REMEDIATION Merge-ready PR

Validate the target URL against an allowlist of permitted hostnames. Reject private/internal IP ranges. Enforce HTTPS only.

plexicus/remediation/webhooks-ssrf 3 changed · 0 new files
42resp = requests.get(target_url)
42+if not is_allowed_host(target_url):
43+  raise WebhookRejected(target_url)
44+resp = requests.get(target_url, timeout=5)
Every engagement hands over:
  • Executive briefing
  • Validated findings list
  • Merge-ready PRs
  • Compliance mapping (NIS2 · DORA · CRA)
Tour privé Pour les investisseurs