Skip to main content

Hi Jamf Nation, 



On June 15, 2021, we were made aware of a URL redirect vulnerability, affecting Jamf Pro customers who host their environments on-premises and less than 1% of Jamf Cloud customer environments. We have not discovered any evidence of malicious use of the vulnerability.



CVE-2021-35037 has been reserved. Additional technical details will be included in the CVE once our on premises customers have had a reasonable interval to patch.



The vulnerability allows for arbitrary URL redirection using a very specifically-formatted Jamf Pro URL. This is assessed to be a CVSS 6-7 (medium - high) severity issue affecting Jamf Pro versions: 10.30 and earlier



We have pushed out a configuration change to all affected Jamf Cloud customers to address the vulnerability. No further action is required from these customers. For Jamf Pro customers who host their environments on-premises, Jamf Pro 10.30.1 has been made available and a notification has been sent to these customers. We strongly recommend they upgrade their environment to Jamf Pro 10.30.1 as soon as possible. No other customers are affected by this vulnerability.  If you have any questions, please reach out to Customer Success for more assistance or post a comment here. We will update this post with information as it becomes available.



How is the vulnerability exploited?



An attacker may craft a URL that appears to be for a customer's Jamf Pro instance, but when clicked will forward a user to an arbitrary URL that may be malicious. This is commonly used as part of a phishing campaign.



What is the potential impact of the vulnerability?



Your users may trust a URL due to the Jamf Pro context and provide an attacker with information, access or even install malware.
If your Jamf Pro instance uses https to communicate, note that any malicious URL being redirected to that does not have a valid certificate would result in warnings from common browsers to any users that may click an exploited URL.



Is it remotely exploitable?



An attacker can craft an exploited URL without any connection to your devices or services. They only need to have the URL to your Jamf Pro instance. Victims are exploitable if they can reach a Jamf Pro server and are presented with this malicious URL.



Does a device have to be enrolled in Jamf to be vulnerable?



Since the attacker only leverages a Jamf Pro instance as an intermediary to trick a user into visiting a malicious URL, the user and device do not have to be enrolled or associated with Jamf in any way. As long as the user has access to the Jamf Pro instance and clicks the exploited URL, they are vulnerable.



Important Notice: Upgrading from 10.28.x or earlier requires an incremental upgrade to 10.29.x before upgrading to 10.30.0 or later. Please reference this document on incremental-upgrade-scenarios for more details



We apologize that some customers experienced an issue accessing Jamf Account subpages. As of 9 am CST, June 21, this issue has been resolved and everyone should have access to all Jamf Account pages.



Aaron Kiemele
Chief Information Security Officer, Jamf

Are versions prior to 10.30.0 (eg: 10.29.1) susceptible to the exploit?


Is this affecting older versions of Jamf Pro On-Prem or strictly 10.30?


+1 please add affected versions of Jamf Pro


We really need to know if previous versions are affected. We haven't upgraded to 10.30.0 yet so it's important for me to know if our current version is vulnerable so I can prioritize the update.


Best thing is to put in an urgent support ticket. I just did. If they get enough of them, hopefully they'll update this post to let everyone know.


[Update] - Updated above to include the following: Affected Jamf Pro versions: 10.30 and earlier


Looks like description has been updated.
"affecting Jamf Pro versions: 10.30 and earlier"


@Aaron.Kiemele Please advise the severity of this vulnerability for Internet-facing nodes which are running in Limited Access. Thanks.


Just a heads up to any on-prem who need to upgrade, it appears there is an incremental dependency for going from 10.28 and lower, so anyone not yet on 10.29 be aware.



https://www.jamf.com/jamf-nation/articles/647/incremental-upgrade-scenarios-for-jamf-pro-10-0-0-or-later


So Should I upgrade to Jamf Pro 10.29.2 and then to 10.30.1 from 10.28?


Thats what the document says, and my own failed upgrade in test would confirm that.


Deleted


Any difference in upgrading to 10.25 or 10.26 before going to 10.29 the 10.30.x ?



  • If you're on 10.14-10.24, you must Upgrade to 10.25 before going to 10.26 due to a DB change.

  • Before going to 10.27, you must first upgrade to MySQL 5.7.8 or later (MySQL 8.0 is recommended).

  • Upgrading from 10.28.x or earlier requires an incremental upgrade to 10.29.x before upgrading to 10.30.0 or later due to a database change that may cause upgrades to fail.




Thanks.


@dan-snelson, The severity of this issue doesn't change for instances in Limited Access mode as this is a URL redirect and the goal is to bring you to some other URL other than your Jamf Pro server. Your Limited Access endpoint configuration of not allowing login to Jamf Pro would still be in place.


Thanks, Obi-@mike.paul!


Update - Updated above to include information on incremental upgrade scenarios for jamf pro 10.0.0 or later


Hi, We are able to upgrade our server from 10.26 - 10.29.2 - 10.30.1 . Upgrade was smooth . No issues during upgrade .


That's one way to get all of your user base to finally get around to upgrading their on-prem servers :)


Hop it's just me, but I see no assets in my account...


Jamf - not all of your users got an email about this. I put a ticket in on friday and pay for premium support and no response. not a great look.


Heads up for those of you who have to do incremental upgrade from before 10.29. You'll likely hit this if you use Computer Security and Privacy payload in your config profiles.


The Assets page (in fact the whole account.Jamf.com) is delivering a blank page (since three days!)! So no Download ist possible … It seems like a couple of things are going wrong at Jamf. Which is isn’t really trustworthy for a IT security company …


I’m just here to say thank you for the correct use of “premises.”


Reply