| Name |
Application API Message Manipulation via Man-in-the-Middle |
|
| Likelyhood of attack |
Typical severity |
| High |
Low |
|
| Summary |
An attacker manipulates either egress or ingress data from a client within an application framework in order to change the content of messages. Performing this attack can allow the attacker to gain unauthorized privileges within the application, or conduct attacks such as phishing, deceptive strategies to spread malware, or traditional web-application attacks. The techniques require use of specialized software that allow the attacker to man-in-the-middle communications between the web browser and the remote system. Despite the use of MITM software, the attack is actually directed at the server, as the client is one node in a series of content brokers that pass information along to the application framework. Additionally, it is not true "Man-in-the-Middle" attack at the network layer, but an application-layer attack the root cause of which is the master applications trust in the integrity of code supplied by the client. |
| Prerequisites |
Targeted software is utilizing application framework APIs |
| Solutions | |
| Related Weaknesses |
|
CWE ID
|
Description
|
| CWE-311 |
Missing Encryption of Sensitive Data |
| CWE-345 |
Insufficient Verification of Data Authenticity |
| CWE-346 |
Origin Validation Error |
| CWE-471 |
Modification of Assumed-Immutable Data (MAID) |
| CWE-602 |
Client-Side Enforcement of Server-Side Security |
|
| Related CAPECS |
|
CAPEC ID
|
Description
|
| CAPEC-94 |
This type of attack targets the communication between two components (typically client and server). The attacker places themself in the communication channel between the two components. Whenever one component attempts to communicate with the other (data flow, authentication challenges, etc.), the data first goes to the attacker, who has the opportunity to observe or alter it, and it is then passed on to the other component as if it was never observed. This interposition is transparent leaving the two compromised components unaware of the potential corruption or leakage of their communications. The potential for Man-in-the-Middle attacks yields an implicit lack of trust in communication or identify between two components. MITM attacks differ from sniffing attacks since they often modify the communications prior to delivering it to the intended recipient. These attacks also differ from interception attacks since they may forward the sender's original unmodified data, after copying it, instead of keeping it for themselves. |
|