Django 1.4.6 and 1.5.2 were released to correct the following security flaw: A common pattern in Django applications is for a view to accept, via querystring parameter, a URL to redirect to upon successful completion of the view's processing. This pattern is used in code bundled with Django itself; for example, the login view in django.contrib.auth.views, which accepts such a parameter to determine where to send a user following successful login. A utility function -- django.utils.http.is_safe_url() -- is provided and used to validate that this URL is on the current host (either via fully-qualified or relative URL), so as to avoid potentially dangerous redirects from maliciously-constructed querystrings. The is_safe_url() function works as intended for HTTP and HTTPS URLs, but due to the manner in which it parses the URL, will permit redirects to other schemes, such as javascript:. While the Django project is unaware of any demonstrated ability to perform cross-site scripting attacks via this mechanism, the potential for such is sufficient to trigger a security response. To remedy this issue, the is_safe_url() function has been modified to properly recognize and reject URLs which specify a scheme other than HTTP or HTTPS. The upstream patches are here: https://github.com/django/django/commit/1a274ccd6bc1afbdac80344c9b6e5810c1162b5f (1.5) https://github.com/django/django/commit/ec67af0bd609c412b76eaa4cc89968a2a8e5ad6a (1.4) External References: https://www.djangoproject.com/weblog/2013/aug/13/security-releases-issued/
Created Django14 tracking bugs for this issue: Affects: epel-6 [bug 997128]
Created python-django14 tracking bugs for this issue: Affects: fedora-19 [bug 997127]
Created python-django tracking bugs for this issue: Affects: fedora-all [bug 997126]
This issue didn't get a CVE name as of yet as it's being possibly considered as a hardening, rather than fixing a flaw. http://www.openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2013/08/19/2
all dependeing bugs were fixed, so closing.
Not to be closed yet.
Ratul filed this as 1016394 which we referenced in errata so closing this one. *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 1016394 ***