Common Weakness Enumeration

CWE-20

Discouraged

Improper Input Validation

Abstraction: Class · Status: Stable

The product receives input or data, but it does not validate or incorrectly validates that the input has the properties that are required to process the data safely and correctly.

17690 vulnerabilities reference this CWE, most recent first.

CVE-2026-103389 (GCVE-0-2026-103389)

Vulnerability from cvelistv5 – Published: 2026-09-30 14:25 – Updated: 2026-09-30 15:28

Title

MISP Stored Cross-Site Scripting via Unvalidated Galaxy Icon Field in Correlation Graph

Summary

MISP contains a stored cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability in the galaxy icon handling path. The icon field of a galaxy object was persisted without any server-side validation through the galaxy add, edit, and sync/import capture endpoints. The stored value was subsequently concatenated directly into HTML markup by the D3-based correlation graph rendering scripts (both the default and Overmind themes) using the .html() method. A user holding the perm_galaxy_editor permission, which is granted to the stock User role, could store arbitrary HTML or JavaScript in the icon field. Any other user who opened the correlation graph of an event containing a cluster belonging to that galaxy would have the injected script executed in their browser session. Impact: - Arbitrary script execution in the context of the victim's MISP session - Potential theft of session credentials, manipulation of displayed data, or initiation of actions on behalf of the victim - Affects both the default and Overmind UI themes Affected versions: <2.5.48

Severity

6.2 (Medium)


                        
                          CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:A/VC:N/VI:N/VA:N/SC:H/SI:H/SA:N

SSVC

Exploitation: none Automatable: no Technical Impact: partial

CISA Coordinator · CISA-ADP (v2.0.3)

Decision recorded 2026-09-30 14:58 UTC

CWE

CWE-79 - Improper Neutralization of Input During Web Page Generation ('Cross-site Scripting')
CWE-20 - Improper Input Validation

Assigner

CIRCL ENISA root Scorecard

References

1 reference

URL	Tags
https://github.com/MISP/MISP/commit/8ea5783dd	patch

Impacted products

1 product

Vendor	Product	Version
MISP	MISP	Affected: 0 , < 2.5.48 (semver) cpe:2.3:a:misp:misp::::::::

Credits

Jeroen Pinoy iglocska Claude Fable 5.1

GCVE extensions

AI-generated Human-reviewed Confidence: high Model qwen3.8:27b advisory bcp-05-x-01bcp-05-x-02

AI involvement GCVE-BCP-05-X-01

Whole record AI-generated Human-reviewed GNA-1

Draft vulnerability metadata was generated from a git-format patch using an Ollama-hosted language model. Human validation is required before publication.

ai-computer-assisted:llm-generatedai-computer-assisted:classification

Model	Source	Identifier
qwen3.8:27b	ollama	`qwen3.8:27b`

Patch provenance GCVE-BCP-05-X-02

Generator: patch2vuln.py on 2026-09-30 14:24
Model: qwen3.8:27b
Input: https://github.com/MISP/MISP/commit/8ea5783dd.patch 382869c811e8…
Confidence: high

Commit	Subject	Patch SHA-256
`8ea5783ddcfe`	fix: [security] Galaxy icons are icon names, and the	`382869c811e8…`

Fix summary

The vulnerability is remediated by enforcing strict input validation on the galaxy icon field so that only valid Font Awesome icon names (lowercase alphanumeric characters and dashes) are accepted at write time. The sync/import capture path discards any icon value that does not conform. The correlation graph JSON generation falls back to a safe default icon for any previously stored invalid value. On the client side, both correlation graph scripts now set the icon as a CSS class attribute rather than injecting it as raw HTML, and apply an additional regex sanitization pass. The asset cache-busting version is incremented to ensure browsers load the corrected scripts.

Patch summary

Added a static isValidIconName() method and a regex constant (ICON_NAME_PATTERN) to the Galaxy model, plus a model-level validation rule restricting the icon field to lowercase letters, digits, and dashes. The captureGalaxy() method now blanks out any icon value that fails validation before persistence. CorrelationGraphTool::__createNode() now checks the icon against the validator and substitutes 'globe' for invalid stored values. Both correlation-graph.js and correlation-graphOvermind.js were changed from .html() string concatenation to .attr('class', ...) with a regex strip of non-conforming characters. AppController asset query version bumped from 225 to 226. A new PHPUnit test file (GalaxyIconNameTest.php) validates the icon name rule against known-good and known-bad payloads including the originally reported XSS vector.

CVSS rationale

AV:N: exploited over the network via the MISP web interface. AC:L: no race conditions or special timing; simply set the icon field and wait for a victim to view the graph. AT:N: no manipulation of the attack target required. PR:L: requires an authenticated user with perm_galaxy_editor, which is the default stock User role. UI:A: the victim must actively open the correlation graph of an event containing the affected galaxy cluster. VC/VI/VA:N: the server-side application is not directly compromised; the impact is on the victim's browser session. SC:H: script execution in the victim's session can read cookies, tokens, and sensitive page data. SI:H: the attacker can modify the victim's view, inject content, or trigger actions. SA:N: no availability impact on the system.

Weakness rationale

CWE-79 The galaxy icon field was stored without validation and later rendered into the DOM via D3 .html(), allowing an attacker to inject and execute arbitrary script in the victim's browser. This is a textbook stored XSS.
CWE-20 The root enabler is the absence of any server-side validation on the icon field at write time (add, edit, capture). The field accepted arbitrary strings including HTML markup, which was the precondition for the XSS.

Attack pattern rationale

CAPEC-1 The attack pattern is a stored XSS: an authenticated user with galaxy editor permission injects a script payload into a persistent data field (galaxy icon), which is later rendered unsanitized in another user's browser via the correlation graph. CAPEC-1 is the closest and most direct match. No more specific CAPEC entry for stored XSS via a data field rendered by a graphing library exists in the CAPEC catalog, so CAPEC-1 is the best available mapping.

Assumptions to verify

The affected version boundary is inferred from the tag_version_boundary metadata indicating the fix commit precedes v2.5.48 by 20 commits; no explicit 'fixed in' version is stated in the patch itself.
The perm_galaxy_editor permission is assumed to be granted to the stock User role as stated in the commit message; the exact role-permission mapping was not independently verified from the patch.
CAPEC-1 is the closest available mapping; no CAPEC entry specifically describes stored XSS via a graph-rendering library data field, so the general Cross Site Scripting pattern is used.
CVSS UI:A assumes the victim must navigate to the correlation graph view of a specific event; if the graph is auto-loaded on a commonly visited page, UI could be lowered to Passive.
The Co-Authored-By line references an AI assistant (Claude Fable 5.1); it is recorded as a tool credit rather than a human remediation developer.

Model comparison

Selected qwen3.8:27b by deterministic-consensus-v1
The selected result is closest to model consensus; this heuristic does not establish factual correctness and human review remains required.

Model	Score	Agreement	Confidence	Assumptions
`qwen3.8:27b`	6	9	high	5

Show details on NVD website

JSON

To clipboard

{
  "containers": {
    "adp": [
      {
        "metrics": [
          {
            "other": {
              "content": {
                "id": "CVE-2026-103389",
                "options": [
                  {
                    "Exploitation": "none"
                  },
                  {
                    "Automatable": "no"
                  },
                  {
                    "Technical Impact": "partial"
                  }
                ],
                "role": "CISA Coordinator",
                "timestamp": "2026-09-30T14:58:27.715153Z",
                "version": "2.0.3"
              },
              "type": "ssvc"
            }
          }
        ],
        "providerMetadata": {
          "dateUpdated": "2026-09-30T15:28:06.728Z",
          "orgId": "134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0",
          "shortName": "CISA-ADP"
        },
        "title": "CISA ADP Vulnrichment"
      }
    ],
    "cna": {
      "affected": [
        {
          "cpes": [
            "cpe:2.3:a:misp:misp:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*"
          ],
          "modules": [
            "Galaxy model",
            "Correlation Graph (default theme)",
            "Correlation Graph (Overmind theme)",
            "Galaxy sync/import capture"
          ],
          "product": "MISP",
          "programFiles": [
            "app/Model/Galaxy.php",
            "app/Lib/Tools/CorrelationGraphTool.php",
            "app/webroot/js/correlation-graph.js",
            "app/webroot/js/correlation-graphOvermind.js"
          ],
          "repo": "https://github.com/MISP/MISP",
          "vendor": "MISP",
          "versions": [
            {
              "lessThan": "2.5.48",
              "status": "affected",
              "version": "0",
              "versionType": "semver"
            }
          ]
        }
      ],
      "credits": [
        {
          "lang": "en",
          "type": "reporter",
          "value": "Jeroen Pinoy"
        },
        {
          "lang": "en",
          "type": "remediation developer",
          "value": "iglocska"
        },
        {
          "lang": "en",
          "type": "remediation developer",
          "value": "Claude Fable 5.1"
        }
      ],
      "descriptions": [
        {
          "lang": "en",
          "supportingMedia": [
            {
              "base64": false,
              "type": "text/html",
              "value": "\u003cp\u003eMISP contains a stored cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability in the galaxy icon handling path. The icon field of a galaxy object was persisted without any server-side validation through the galaxy add, edit, and sync/import capture endpoints. The stored value was subsequently concatenated directly into HTML markup by the D3-based correlation graph rendering scripts (both the default and Overmind themes) using the .html() method.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eA user holding the perm_galaxy_editor permission, which is granted to the stock User role, could store arbitrary HTML or JavaScript in the icon field. Any other user who opened the correlation graph of an event containing a cluster belonging to that galaxy would have the injected script executed in their browser session.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eImpact:\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e- Arbitrary script execution in the context of the victim\u0027s MISP session\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e- Potential theft of session credentials, manipulation of displayed data, or initiation of actions on behalf of the victim\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e- Affects both the default and Overmind UI themes\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eAffected versions: \u0026lt;2.5.48\u003c/p\u003e"
            }
          ],
          "value": "MISP contains a stored cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability in the galaxy icon handling path. The icon field of a galaxy object was persisted without any server-side validation through the galaxy add, edit, and sync/import capture endpoints. The stored value was subsequently concatenated directly into HTML markup by the D3-based correlation graph rendering scripts (both the default and Overmind themes) using the .html() method.\n\nA user holding the perm_galaxy_editor permission, which is granted to the stock User role, could store arbitrary HTML or JavaScript in the icon field. Any other user who opened the correlation graph of an event containing a cluster belonging to that galaxy would have the injected script executed in their browser session.\n\nImpact:\n\n- Arbitrary script execution in the context of the victim\u0027s MISP session\n\n- Potential theft of session credentials, manipulation of displayed data, or initiation of actions on behalf of the victim\n\n- Affects both the default and Overmind UI themes\n\nAffected versions: \u003c2.5.48"
        }
      ],
      "impacts": [
        {
          "capecId": "CAPEC-1",
          "descriptions": [
            {
              "lang": "en",
              "value": "CAPEC-1 Cross Site Scripting"
            }
          ]
        }
      ],
      "metrics": [
        {
          "cvssV4_0": {
            "Automatable": "NOT_DEFINED",
            "Recovery": "NOT_DEFINED",
            "Safety": "NOT_DEFINED",
            "attackComplexity": "LOW",
            "attackRequirements": "NONE",
            "attackVector": "NETWORK",
            "baseScore": 6.2,
            "baseSeverity": "MEDIUM",
            "privilegesRequired": "LOW",
            "providerUrgency": "NOT_DEFINED",
            "subAvailabilityImpact": "NONE",
            "subConfidentialityImpact": "HIGH",
            "subIntegrityImpact": "HIGH",
            "userInteraction": "ACTIVE",
            "valueDensity": "NOT_DEFINED",
            "vectorString": "CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:A/VC:N/VI:N/VA:N/SC:H/SI:H/SA:N",
            "version": "4.0",
            "vulnAvailabilityImpact": "NONE",
            "vulnConfidentialityImpact": "NONE",
            "vulnIntegrityImpact": "NONE",
            "vulnerabilityResponseEffort": "NOT_DEFINED"
          },
          "format": "CVSS",
          "scenarios": [
            {
              "lang": "en",
              "value": "GENERAL"
            }
          ]
        }
      ],
      "problemTypes": [
        {
          "descriptions": [
            {
              "cweId": "CWE-79",
              "description": "CWE-79 Improper Neutralization of Input During Web Page Generation (\u0027Cross-site Scripting\u0027)",
              "lang": "en",
              "type": "CWE"
            }
          ]
        },
        {
          "descriptions": [
            {
              "cweId": "CWE-20",
              "description": "CWE-20 Improper Input Validation",
              "lang": "en",
              "type": "CWE"
            }
          ]
        }
      ],
      "providerMetadata": {
        "dateUpdated": "2026-09-30T14:25:59.230Z",
        "orgId": "5a6e4751-2f3f-4070-9419-94fb35b644e8",
        "shortName": "CIRCL"
      },
      "references": [
        {
          "name": "Security patch",
          "tags": [
            "patch"
          ],
          "url": "https://github.com/MISP/MISP/commit/8ea5783dd"
        }
      ],
      "solutions": [
        {
          "lang": "en",
          "supportingMedia": [
            {
              "base64": false,
              "type": "text/html",
              "value": "\u003cp\u003eThe vulnerability is remediated by enforcing strict input validation on the galaxy icon field so that only valid Font Awesome icon names (lowercase alphanumeric characters and dashes) are accepted at write time. The sync/import capture path discards any icon value that does not conform. The correlation graph JSON generation falls back to a safe default icon for any previously stored invalid value. On the client side, both correlation graph scripts now set the icon as a CSS class attribute rather than injecting it as raw HTML, and apply an additional regex sanitization pass. The asset cache-busting version is incremented to ensure browsers load the corrected scripts.\u003c/p\u003e"
            }
          ],
          "value": "The vulnerability is remediated by enforcing strict input validation on the galaxy icon field so that only valid Font Awesome icon names (lowercase alphanumeric characters and dashes) are accepted at write time. The sync/import capture path discards any icon value that does not conform. The correlation graph JSON generation falls back to a safe default icon for any previously stored invalid value. On the client side, both correlation graph scripts now set the icon as a CSS class attribute rather than injecting it as raw HTML, and apply an additional regex sanitization pass. The asset cache-busting version is incremented to ensure browsers load the corrected scripts."
        }
      ],
      "title": "MISP Stored Cross-Site Scripting via Unvalidated Galaxy Icon Field in Correlation Graph",
      "x_gcve": [
        {
          "extensions": {
            "bcp-05-x-01": {
              "ai_annotations": [
                {
                  "ai_level": "generated",
                  "description": "Draft vulnerability metadata was generated from a git-format patch using an Ollama-hosted language model. Human validation is required before publication.",
                  "gna_source": 1,
                  "models": [
                    {
                      "gna_source": 1,
                      "identifier": "qwen3.8:27b",
                      "name": "qwen3.8:27b",
                      "source": "ollama"
                    }
                  ],
                  "review_status": "full",
                  "scope": "record",
                  "tags": [
                    "ai-computer-assisted:llm-generated",
                    "ai-computer-assisted:classification"
                  ]
                }
              ]
            },
            "bcp-05-x-02": {
              "x_patch2vuln": {
                "assumptions": [
                  "The affected version boundary is inferred from the tag_version_boundary metadata indicating the fix commit precedes v2.5.48 by 20 commits; no explicit \u0027fixed in\u0027 version is stated in the patch itself.",
                  "The perm_galaxy_editor permission is assumed to be granted to the stock User role as stated in the commit message; the exact role-permission mapping was not independently verified from the patch.",
                  "CAPEC-1 is the closest available mapping; no CAPEC entry specifically describes stored XSS via a graph-rendering library data field, so the general Cross Site Scripting pattern is used.",
                  "CVSS UI:A assumes the victim must navigate to the correlation graph view of a specific event; if the graph is auto-loaded on a commonly visited page, UI could be lowered to Passive.",
                  "The Co-Authored-By line references an AI assistant (Claude Fable 5.1); it is recorded as a tool credit rather than a human remediation developer."
                ],
                "capecRationale": [
                  {
                    "capecId": "CAPEC-1",
                    "rationale": "The attack pattern is a stored XSS: an authenticated user with galaxy editor permission injects a script payload into a persistent data field (galaxy icon), which is later rendered unsanitized in another user\u0027s browser via the correlation graph. CAPEC-1 is the closest and most direct match. No more specific CAPEC entry for stored XSS via a data field rendered by a graphing library exists in the CAPEC catalog, so CAPEC-1 is the best available mapping."
                  }
                ],
                "commit": "8ea5783ddcfe69be6013337a0d6732ac75a862e6",
                "confidence": "high",
                "credits": [
                  {
                    "lang": "en",
                    "type": "reporter",
                    "value": "Jeroen Pinoy"
                  },
                  {
                    "lang": "en",
                    "type": "remediation developer",
                    "value": "iglocska"
                  },
                  {
                    "lang": "en",
                    "type": "remediation developer",
                    "value": "Claude Fable 5.1"
                  },
                  {
                    "lang": "en",
                    "type": "tool",
                    "value": "Claude Fable 5.1"
                  }
                ],
                "cvssRationale": "AV:N: exploited over the network via the MISP web interface. AC:L: no race conditions or special timing; simply set the icon field and wait for a victim to view the graph. AT:N: no manipulation of the attack target required. PR:L: requires an authenticated user with perm_galaxy_editor, which is the default stock User role. UI:A: the victim must actively open the correlation graph of an event containing the affected galaxy cluster. VC/VI/VA:N: the server-side application is not directly compromised; the impact is on the victim\u0027s browser session. SC:H: script execution in the victim\u0027s session can read cookies, tokens, and sensitive page data. SI:H: the attacker can modify the victim\u0027s view, inject content, or trigger actions. SA:N: no availability impact on the system.",
                "fixSummary": "The vulnerability is remediated by enforcing strict input validation on the galaxy icon field so that only valid Font Awesome icon names (lowercase alphanumeric characters and dashes) are accepted at write time. The sync/import capture path discards any icon value that does not conform. The correlation graph JSON generation falls back to a safe default icon for any previously stored invalid value. On the client side, both correlation graph scripts now set the icon as a CSS class attribute rather than injecting it as raw HTML, and apply an additional regex sanitization pass. The asset cache-busting version is incremented to ensure browsers load the corrected scripts.",
                "generatedAt": "2026-09-30T14:24:01.890608Z",
                "generator": "patch2vuln.py",
                "model": "qwen3.8:27b",
                "modelComparison": {
                  "rankings": [
                    {
                      "agreementScore": 9,
                      "assumptionCount": 5,
                      "confidence": "high",
                      "model": "qwen3.8:27b",
                      "score": 6
                    }
                  ],
                  "selectedModel": "qwen3.8:27b",
                  "selectionMethod": "deterministic-consensus-v1",
                  "selectionNotice": "The selected result is closest to model consensus; this heuristic does not establish factual correctness and human review remains required."
                },
                "patchSha256": "382869c811e8df5875a463c4b6275f754f4969445196f08d708cfee926528b0f",
                "patchSummary": "Added a static isValidIconName() method and a regex constant (ICON_NAME_PATTERN) to the Galaxy model, plus a model-level validation rule restricting the icon field to lowercase letters, digits, and dashes. The captureGalaxy() method now blanks out any icon value that fails validation before persistence. CorrelationGraphTool::__createNode() now checks the icon against the validator and substitutes \u0027globe\u0027 for invalid stored values. Both correlation-graph.js and correlation-graphOvermind.js were changed from .html() string concatenation to .attr(\u0027class\u0027, ...) with a regex strip of non-conforming characters. AppController asset query version bumped from 225 to 226. A new PHPUnit test file (GalaxyIconNameTest.php) validates the icon name rule against known-good and known-bad payloads including the originally reported XSS vector.",
                "patchTruncated": false,
                "patches": [
                  {
                    "commit": "8ea5783ddcfe69be6013337a0d6732ac75a862e6",
                    "patchSha256": "382869c811e8df5875a463c4b6275f754f4969445196f08d708cfee926528b0f",
                    "source": "https://github.com/MISP/MISP/commit/8ea5783dd.patch",
                    "sourceUrl": "https://github.com/MISP/MISP/commit/8ea5783dd.patch",
                    "subject": "fix: [security] Galaxy icons are icon names, and the"
                  }
                ],
                "source": "https://github.com/MISP/MISP/commit/8ea5783dd.patch",
                "subject": "fix: [security] Galaxy icons are icon names, and the",
                "tagVersionBoundary": {
                  "commits_after_fix": 20,
                  "repository": "https://github.com/MISP/MISP",
                  "tag": "v2.5.48",
                  "version": "2.5.48",
                  "version_type": "semver"
                },
                "weaknessRationale": [
                  {
                    "cweId": "CWE-79",
                    "rationale": "The galaxy icon field was stored without validation and later rendered into the DOM via D3 .html(), allowing an attacker to inject and execute arbitrary script in the victim\u0027s browser. This is a textbook stored XSS."
                  },
                  {
                    "cweId": "CWE-20",
                    "rationale": "The root enabler is the absence of any server-side validation on the icon field at write time (add, edit, capture). The field accepted arbitrary strings including HTML markup, which was the precondition for the XSS."
                  }
                ]
              }
            }
          },
          "recordType": "advisory",
          "vulnId": "GCVE-1-2026-20142"
        }
      ]
    }
  },
  "cveMetadata": {
    "assignerOrgId": "5a6e4751-2f3f-4070-9419-94fb35b644e8",
    "assignerShortName": "CIRCL",
    "cveId": "CVE-2026-103389",
    "datePublished": "2026-09-30T14:25:59.230Z",
    "dateReserved": "2026-09-30T14:25:56.802Z",
    "dateUpdated": "2026-09-30T15:28:06.728Z",
    "state": "PUBLISHED"
  },
  "dataType": "CVE_RECORD",
  "dataVersion": "5.2"
}

CVE-2026-103321 (GCVE-0-2026-103321)

Vulnerability from cvelistv5 – Published: 2026-09-30 12:19 – Updated: 2026-09-30 12:44

Title

MISP Stored Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) via Unvalidated Event Graph Preview Image

Summary

MISP contains a stored cross-site script (XSS) vulnerability in the event graph preview feature. The event graph preview image field was accepted and stored without server-side validation. On the client side, the stored value was rendered into an HTML img element's src attribute via string concatenation, allowing a crafted value to break out of the attribute context and inject arbitrary script. Preconditions: - An authenticated MISP user with the ability to create or modify an event graph entry. - A second user (the victim) who views the event graph and triggers the preview popover. Impact: - Execution of arbitrary JavaScript in the victim's browser within the MISP application context. - Potential theft of session tokens, cookies, or sensitive data accessible to the victim's browser. - Potential for performing actions on behalf of the victim within the MISP application. Affected: MISP versions prior to the fix (commit applied after v2.5.48).

Severity

8.3 (High)


                        
                          CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:P/VC:N/VI:H/VA:N/SC:H/SI:H/SA:N

SSVC

Exploitation: none Automatable: no Technical Impact: partial

CISA Coordinator · CISA-ADP (v2.0.3)

Decision recorded 2026-09-30 12:44 UTC

CWE

CWE-79 - Improper Neutralization of Input During Web Page Generation ('Cross-site Scripting')
CWE-20 - Improper Input Validation

Assigner

CIRCL ENISA root Scorecard

References

1 reference

URL	Tags
https://github.com/MISP/MISP/commit/92c7ccc43	patch

Impacted products

1 product

Vendor	Product	Version
MISP	MISP	Affected: 0 , < 2.5.48 (semver) cpe:2.3:a:misp:misp::::::::

Credits

Bastien Bossiroy of NCIA iglocska Claude Opus 4.8

GCVE extensions

AI-generated Human-reviewed Confidence: high Model qwen3.8:27b advisory bcp-05-x-01bcp-05-x-02

AI involvement GCVE-BCP-05-X-01

Whole record AI-generated Human-reviewed GNA-1

Draft vulnerability metadata was generated from a git-format patch using an Ollama-hosted language model. Human validation is required before publication.

ai-computer-assisted:llm-generatedai-computer-assisted:classification

Model	Source	Identifier
qwen3.8:27b	ollama	`qwen3.8:27b`

Patch provenance GCVE-BCP-05-X-02

Generator: patch2vuln.py on 2026-09-30 11:21
Model: qwen3.8:27b
Input: https://github.com/MISP/MISP/commit/92c7ccc43.patch 0ecb893de300…
Confidence: high

Commit	Subject	Patch SHA-256
`92c7ccc4398a`	fix: [security] Validate the event graph preview and stop	`0ecb893de300…`

Fix summary

The vulnerability is remediated by enforcing strict server-side validation of the preview image field, restricting it to a well-formed base64-encoded PNG data URL, and by replacing the client-side string-concatenation rendering with DOM-based attribute assignment that does not interpret the value as HTML.

Patch summary

In app/Model/EventGraph.php, a new validation rule is added for the preview_img field requiring it to match the regex /^data:image\/png;base64,[A-Za-z0-9+\/]*={0,2}$/ (allowing empty). In app/webroot/js/event-graph.js, two occurrences of string-concatenated img tag construction (return '<img ... src="' + value + '" />') are replaced with jQuery DOM construction using $('<img ...>').prop('src', value), which sets the attribute safely without HTML parsing.

CVSS rationale

AV:N: exploited over the network via the MISP web interface. AC:L: no race conditions or special conditions required; storing a crafted value and viewing the graph is straightforward. AT:N: no manipulation of the attack target needed. PR:L: attacker needs a low-privilege authenticated MISP account to create/modify an event graph. UI:P: the victim passively triggers the XSS by viewing the event graph preview (hovering a button), a normal workflow action. VC/VI/VA:N: the MISP server itself is not compromised; the impact is in the victim's browser. SC:H: the attacker can read cookies, tokens, and data in the victim's session. SI:H: the attacker can perform authenticated actions as the victim. SA:N: no availability impact on the victim's system.

Weakness rationale

CWE-79 The stored preview_img value was rendered into an HTML attribute via string concatenation without sufficient neutralization, enabling script injection in the victim's browser. This is a textbook stored XSS.
CWE-20 The server accepted and persisted the preview_img field without any format validation, allowing arbitrary content to be stored and later rendered. The fix adds a strict regex validation rule.

Attack pattern rationale

CAPEC-1 The patch directly addresses a stored XSS where attacker-controlled data is rendered into a web page without proper encoding or validation. CAPEC-1 is the canonical attack pattern for XSS and is the closest match. No uncertainty in this mapping; the commit message explicitly identifies the issue as stored XSS.

Assumptions to verify

The affected version range is inferred from the tag_version_boundary (v2.5.48 with 43 commits after the fix); the exact fixed release version is not stated in the patch metadata.
PR:L assumes the attacker needs at least a basic authenticated MISP account to create or modify an event graph entry; the patch does not specify the exact permission level required.
UI:P assumes the victim triggers the XSS by viewing the event graph preview as part of normal workflow (hovering the plot button), which is a passive interaction rather than an active click on a crafted link.
The CAPEC-1 mapping is direct and unambiguous given the explicit stored XSS identification in the commit message.
The Co-Authored-By line referencing Claude Opus 4.8 is treated as a tool credit per the commit metadata; it is not a human contributor.

Model comparison

Selected qwen3.8:27b by deterministic-consensus-v1
The selected result is closest to model consensus; this heuristic does not establish factual correctness and human review remains required.

Model	Score	Agreement	Confidence	Assumptions
`qwen3.8:27b`	6	9	high	5

Show details on NVD website

JSON

To clipboard

{
  "containers": {
    "adp": [
      {
        "metrics": [
          {
            "other": {
              "content": {
                "id": "CVE-2026-103321",
                "options": [
                  {
                    "Exploitation": "none"
                  },
                  {
                    "Automatable": "no"
                  },
                  {
                    "Technical Impact": "partial"
                  }
                ],
                "role": "CISA Coordinator",
                "timestamp": "2026-09-30T12:44:13.205587Z",
                "version": "2.0.3"
              },
              "type": "ssvc"
            }
          }
        ],
        "providerMetadata": {
          "dateUpdated": "2026-09-30T12:44:22.064Z",
          "orgId": "134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0",
          "shortName": "CISA-ADP"
        },
        "title": "CISA ADP Vulnrichment"
      }
    ],
    "cna": {
      "affected": [
        {
          "cpes": [
            "cpe:2.3:a:misp:misp:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*"
          ],
          "modules": [
            "EventGraph model",
            "event-graph.js client-side rendering"
          ],
          "product": "MISP",
          "programFiles": [
            "app/Model/EventGraph.php",
            "app/webroot/js/event-graph.js"
          ],
          "repo": "https://github.com/MISP/MISP",
          "vendor": "MISP",
          "versions": [
            {
              "lessThan": "2.5.48",
              "status": "affected",
              "version": "0",
              "versionType": "semver"
            }
          ]
        }
      ],
      "credits": [
        {
          "lang": "en",
          "type": "reporter",
          "value": "Bastien Bossiroy of NCIA"
        },
        {
          "lang": "en",
          "type": "remediation developer",
          "value": "iglocska"
        },
        {
          "lang": "en",
          "type": "remediation developer",
          "value": "Claude Opus 4.8"
        }
      ],
      "descriptions": [
        {
          "lang": "en",
          "supportingMedia": [
            {
              "base64": false,
              "type": "text/html",
              "value": "\u003cp\u003eMISP contains a stored cross-site script (XSS) vulnerability in the event graph preview feature.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe event graph preview image field was accepted and stored without server-side validation. On the client side, the stored value was rendered into an HTML img element\u0027s src attribute via string concatenation, allowing a crafted value to break out of the attribute context and inject arbitrary script.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003ePreconditions:\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e- An authenticated MISP user with the ability to create or modify an event graph entry.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e- A second user (the victim) who views the event graph and triggers the preview popover.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eImpact:\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e- Execution of arbitrary JavaScript in the victim\u0027s browser within the MISP application context.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e- Potential theft of session tokens, cookies, or sensitive data accessible to the victim\u0027s browser.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e- Potential for performing actions on behalf of the victim within the MISP application.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eAffected: MISP versions prior to the fix (commit applied after v2.5.48).\u003c/p\u003e"
            }
          ],
          "value": "MISP contains a stored cross-site script (XSS) vulnerability in the event graph preview feature.\n\nThe event graph preview image field was accepted and stored without server-side validation. On the client side, the stored value was rendered into an HTML img element\u0027s src attribute via string concatenation, allowing a crafted value to break out of the attribute context and inject arbitrary script.\n\nPreconditions:\n\n- An authenticated MISP user with the ability to create or modify an event graph entry.\n\n- A second user (the victim) who views the event graph and triggers the preview popover.\n\nImpact:\n\n- Execution of arbitrary JavaScript in the victim\u0027s browser within the MISP application context.\n\n- Potential theft of session tokens, cookies, or sensitive data accessible to the victim\u0027s browser.\n\n- Potential for performing actions on behalf of the victim within the MISP application.\n\nAffected: MISP versions prior to the fix (commit applied after v2.5.48)."
        }
      ],
      "impacts": [
        {
          "capecId": "CAPEC-1",
          "descriptions": [
            {
              "lang": "en",
              "value": "CAPEC-1 Cross Site Scripting (XSS)"
            }
          ]
        }
      ],
      "metrics": [
        {
          "cvssV4_0": {
            "Automatable": "NOT_DEFINED",
            "Recovery": "NOT_DEFINED",
            "Safety": "NOT_DEFINED",
            "attackComplexity": "LOW",
            "attackRequirements": "NONE",
            "attackVector": "NETWORK",
            "baseScore": 8.3,
            "baseSeverity": "HIGH",
            "privilegesRequired": "LOW",
            "providerUrgency": "NOT_DEFINED",
            "subAvailabilityImpact": "NONE",
            "subConfidentialityImpact": "HIGH",
            "subIntegrityImpact": "HIGH",
            "userInteraction": "PASSIVE",
            "valueDensity": "NOT_DEFINED",
            "vectorString": "CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:P/VC:N/VI:H/VA:N/SC:H/SI:H/SA:N",
            "version": "4.0",
            "vulnAvailabilityImpact": "NONE",
            "vulnConfidentialityImpact": "NONE",
            "vulnIntegrityImpact": "HIGH",
            "vulnerabilityResponseEffort": "NOT_DEFINED"
          },
          "format": "CVSS",
          "scenarios": [
            {
              "lang": "en",
              "value": "GENERAL"
            }
          ]
        }
      ],
      "problemTypes": [
        {
          "descriptions": [
            {
              "cweId": "CWE-79",
              "description": "CWE-79 Improper Neutralization of Input During Web Page Generation (\u0027Cross-site Scripting\u0027)",
              "lang": "en",
              "type": "CWE"
            }
          ]
        },
        {
          "descriptions": [
            {
              "cweId": "CWE-20",
              "description": "CWE-20 Improper Input Validation",
              "lang": "en",
              "type": "CWE"
            }
          ]
        }
      ],
      "providerMetadata": {
        "dateUpdated": "2026-09-30T12:19:01.829Z",
        "orgId": "5a6e4751-2f3f-4070-9419-94fb35b644e8",
        "shortName": "CIRCL"
      },
      "references": [
        {
          "name": "Security patch",
          "tags": [
            "patch"
          ],
          "url": "https://github.com/MISP/MISP/commit/92c7ccc43"
        }
      ],
      "solutions": [
        {
          "lang": "en",
          "supportingMedia": [
            {
              "base64": false,
              "type": "text/html",
              "value": "\u003cp\u003eThe vulnerability is remediated by enforcing strict server-side validation of the preview image field, restricting it to a well-formed base64-encoded PNG data URL, and by replacing the client-side string-concatenation rendering with DOM-based attribute assignment that does not interpret the value as HTML.\u003c/p\u003e"
            }
          ],
          "value": "The vulnerability is remediated by enforcing strict server-side validation of the preview image field, restricting it to a well-formed base64-encoded PNG data URL, and by replacing the client-side string-concatenation rendering with DOM-based attribute assignment that does not interpret the value as HTML."
        }
      ],
      "title": "MISP Stored Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) via Unvalidated Event Graph Preview Image",
      "x_gcve": [
        {
          "extensions": {
            "bcp-05-x-01": {
              "ai_annotations": [
                {
                  "ai_level": "generated",
                  "description": "Draft vulnerability metadata was generated from a git-format patch using an Ollama-hosted language model. Human validation is required before publication.",
                  "gna_source": 1,
                  "models": [
                    {
                      "gna_source": 1,
                      "identifier": "qwen3.8:27b",
                      "name": "qwen3.8:27b",
                      "source": "ollama"
                    }
                  ],
                  "review_status": "full",
                  "scope": "record",
                  "tags": [
                    "ai-computer-assisted:llm-generated",
                    "ai-computer-assisted:classification"
                  ]
                }
              ]
            },
            "bcp-05-x-02": {
              "x_patch2vuln": {
                "assumptions": [
                  "The affected version range is inferred from the tag_version_boundary (v2.5.48 with 43 commits after the fix); the exact fixed release version is not stated in the patch metadata.",
                  "PR:L assumes the attacker needs at least a basic authenticated MISP account to create or modify an event graph entry; the patch does not specify the exact permission level required.",
                  "UI:P assumes the victim triggers the XSS by viewing the event graph preview as part of normal workflow (hovering the plot button), which is a passive interaction rather than an active click on a crafted link.",
                  "The CAPEC-1 mapping is direct and unambiguous given the explicit stored XSS identification in the commit message.",
                  "The Co-Authored-By line referencing Claude Opus 4.8 is treated as a tool credit per the commit metadata; it is not a human contributor."
                ],
                "capecRationale": [
                  {
                    "capecId": "CAPEC-1",
                    "rationale": "The patch directly addresses a stored XSS where attacker-controlled data is rendered into a web page without proper encoding or validation. CAPEC-1 is the canonical attack pattern for XSS and is the closest match. No uncertainty in this mapping; the commit message explicitly identifies the issue as stored XSS."
                  }
                ],
                "commit": "92c7ccc4398a64e61699bd79fb4010703616fc59",
                "confidence": "high",
                "credits": [
                  {
                    "lang": "en",
                    "type": "reporter",
                    "value": "Bastien Bossiroy of NCIA"
                  },
                  {
                    "lang": "en",
                    "type": "remediation developer",
                    "value": "iglocska"
                  },
                  {
                    "lang": "en",
                    "type": "remediation developer",
                    "value": "Claude Opus 4.8"
                  }
                ],
                "cvssRationale": "AV:N: exploited over the network via the MISP web interface. AC:L: no race conditions or special conditions required; storing a crafted value and viewing the graph is straightforward. AT:N: no manipulation of the attack target needed. PR:L: attacker needs a low-privilege authenticated MISP account to create/modify an event graph. UI:P: the victim passively triggers the XSS by viewing the event graph preview (hovering a button), a normal workflow action. VC/VI/VA:N: the MISP server itself is not compromised; the impact is in the victim\u0027s browser. SC:H: the attacker can read cookies, tokens, and data in the victim\u0027s session. SI:H: the attacker can perform authenticated actions as the victim. SA:N: no availability impact on the victim\u0027s system.",
                "fixSummary": "The vulnerability is remediated by enforcing strict server-side validation of the preview image field, restricting it to a well-formed base64-encoded PNG data URL, and by replacing the client-side string-concatenation rendering with DOM-based attribute assignment that does not interpret the value as HTML.",
                "generatedAt": "2026-09-30T11:21:27.655462Z",
                "generator": "patch2vuln.py",
                "model": "qwen3.8:27b",
                "modelComparison": {
                  "rankings": [
                    {
                      "agreementScore": 9,
                      "assumptionCount": 5,
                      "confidence": "high",
                      "model": "qwen3.8:27b",
                      "score": 6
                    }
                  ],
                  "selectedModel": "qwen3.8:27b",
                  "selectionMethod": "deterministic-consensus-v1",
                  "selectionNotice": "The selected result is closest to model consensus; this heuristic does not establish factual correctness and human review remains required."
                },
                "patchSha256": "0ecb893de30056bc3f9609fcb8de43d60b1cedd6a1eea7d6aa53ef6d351d642a",
                "patchSummary": "In app/Model/EventGraph.php, a new validation rule is added for the preview_img field requiring it to match the regex /^data:image\\/png;base64,[A-Za-z0-9+\\/]*={0,2}$/ (allowing empty). In app/webroot/js/event-graph.js, two occurrences of string-concatenated img tag construction (return \u0027\u003cimg ... src=\"\u0027 + value + \u0027\" /\u003e\u0027) are replaced with jQuery DOM construction using $(\u0027\u003cimg ...\u003e\u0027).prop(\u0027src\u0027, value), which sets the attribute safely without HTML parsing.",
                "patchTruncated": false,
                "patches": [
                  {
                    "commit": "92c7ccc4398a64e61699bd79fb4010703616fc59",
                    "patchSha256": "0ecb893de30056bc3f9609fcb8de43d60b1cedd6a1eea7d6aa53ef6d351d642a",
                    "source": "https://github.com/MISP/MISP/commit/92c7ccc43.patch",
                    "sourceUrl": "https://github.com/MISP/MISP/commit/92c7ccc43.patch",
                    "subject": "fix: [security] Validate the event graph preview and stop"
                  }
                ],
                "source": "https://github.com/MISP/MISP/commit/92c7ccc43.patch",
                "subject": "fix: [security] Validate the event graph preview and stop",
                "tagVersionBoundary": {
                  "commits_after_fix": 43,
                  "repository": "https://github.com/MISP/MISP",
                  "tag": "v2.5.48",
                  "version": "2.5.48",
                  "version_type": "semver"
                },
                "weaknessRationale": [
                  {
                    "cweId": "CWE-79",
                    "rationale": "The stored preview_img value was rendered into an HTML attribute via string concatenation without sufficient neutralization, enabling script injection in the victim\u0027s browser. This is a textbook stored XSS."
                  },
                  {
                    "cweId": "CWE-20",
                    "rationale": "The server accepted and persisted the preview_img field without any format validation, allowing arbitrary content to be stored and later rendered. The fix adds a strict regex validation rule."
                  }
                ]
              }
            }
          },
          "recordType": "advisory",
          "vulnId": "GCVE-1-2026-20294"
        }
      ]
    }
  },
  "cveMetadata": {
    "assignerOrgId": "5a6e4751-2f3f-4070-9419-94fb35b644e8",
    "assignerShortName": "CIRCL",
    "cveId": "CVE-2026-103321",
    "datePublished": "2026-09-30T12:19:01.829Z",
    "dateReserved": "2026-09-30T12:18:54.232Z",
    "dateUpdated": "2026-09-30T12:44:22.064Z",
    "state": "PUBLISHED"
  },
  "dataType": "CVE_RECORD",
  "dataVersion": "5.2"
}

CVE-2026-103237 (GCVE-0-2026-103237)

Vulnerability from cvelistv5 – Published: 2026-09-30 09:56 – Updated: 2026-09-30 17:08

Title

MISP: Nested Model Alias Key Bypasses Sanitization to Modify Cross-Tenant Rows

Summary

MISP contains an improper input validation vulnerability in its ORM save path. When a user submits data through various endpoints (attribute add/edit, event edit, free-text import, sighting capture, shadow attribute proposal, event report creation, object reference add, user admin edit), the application sanitizes the flat record by stripping the primary key and pinning the event_id or object_id to the caller's context. However, the underlying ORM's set() method gives priority to a nested key whose name matches the model alias and discards the outer scalar fields. An authenticated user with basic write permissions can exploit this by embedding a nested block under the model alias key inside their request. The sanitization logic (id removal, event_id pinning) is applied to the outer record, but the ORM binds to the inner record instead, which carries an attacker-chosen id and event_id. This allows the attacker to overwrite, re-parent, or soft-delete rows belonging to other organizations or events they have no read access to. Impact: - Cross-tenant data integrity compromise (attribute values rewritten, objects re-parented to attacker events, rows soft-deleted) - Affects multiple entity types: Attribute, Object, EventReport, Sighting, AttributeTag, ShadowAttribute - Requires only a low-privilege authenticated account with perm_add Affected versions: <2.5.48

Severity

8.3 (High)


                        
                          CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:N/VI:H/VA:N/SC:N/SI:H/SA:N

SSVC

Exploitation: none Automatable: no Technical Impact: partial

CISA Coordinator · CISA-ADP (v2.0.3)

Decision recorded 2026-09-30 17:08 UTC

CWE

CWE-639 - Authorization Bypass Through User-Controlled Key
CWE-20 - Improper Input Validation

Assigner

CIRCL ENISA root Scorecard

References

1 reference

URL	Tags
https://github.com/MISP/MISP/commit/9485ae40d	patch

Impacted products

1 product

Vendor	Product	Version
MISP	MISP	Affected: 0 , < 2.5.48 (semver) cpe:2.3:a:misp:misp::::::::

Credits

Jeroen Pinoy iglocska Claude Opus 5

GCVE extensions

AI-generated Human-reviewed Confidence: high Model qwen3.8:27b advisory bcp-05-x-01bcp-05-x-02

AI involvement GCVE-BCP-05-X-01

Whole record AI-generated Human-reviewed GNA-1

Draft vulnerability metadata was generated from a git-format patch using an Ollama-hosted language model. Human validation is required before publication.

ai-computer-assisted:llm-generatedai-computer-assisted:classification

Model	Source	Identifier
qwen3.8:27b	ollama	`qwen3.8:27b`

Patch provenance GCVE-BCP-05-X-02

Generator: patch2vuln.py on 2026-09-30 09:24
Model: qwen3.8:27b
Input: https://github.com/MISP/MISP/commit/9485ae40d.patch 03af388a5ac0…
Confidence: high

Commit	Subject	Patch SHA-256
`9485ae40d334`	fix: [security] A nested model alias key no longer selects	`03af388a5ac0…`

Fix summary

The fix introduces a defensive save() override in the base model class that refuses to persist any record where the data array simultaneously contains a nested key matching the model alias and other top-level scalar fields, logging a warning and returning false. Additionally, all code paths that sanitize and save records (free-text import, module result processing, object delta merge, attribute bulk edit, sighting capture, shadow attribute proposal, event report creation) now explicitly unset the nested alias key from the data array before calling save(), ensuring the ORM cannot be redirected to an attacker-chosen row. Controller-level request reshaping was also corrected to avoid creating self-referencing data structures.

Patch summary

Added a save() override in AppModel.php that detects and rejects ambiguous payloads containing both a nested model-alias key and outer scalars. Added unset($data[$this->alias]) calls in Event.php (free-text, module results, object attribute save), MispAttribute.php (saveAttributes, captureAttribute, editAttributeBulk), MispObject.php (deltaMerge, editObject), ShadowAttribute.php (__preCaptureMassage), and Sighting.php (captureSightings) to strip the nested alias key before save. Changed six controller files to use $this->request->data = array('Model' => $this->request->data) instead of $this->request->data['Model'] = $this->request->data, preventing self-referencing structures. Added a new regression test suite (tests/testregressions.py) with cross-tenant attack scenarios and wired it into the CI workflow.

CVSS rationale

AV:N - MISP is a network-accessible web application. AC:L - The attack requires only crafting a request with a nested alias key; no race condition or complex state is needed. AT:N - No in-transit tampering required. PR:L - An authenticated user with basic write permission (perm_add) suffices; no admin or sync role needed. UI:N - No victim interaction required. VC:N - The attacker does not gain new read access; the impact is on data they can already partially see or infer. VI:H - The attacker can overwrite, re-parent, or soft-delete rows in the same instance, causing high integrity loss to the vulnerable component's data. VA:N - Soft-delete is a state change (integrity) rather than a service disruption. SC:N - No impact on separate components' confidentiality. SI:H - The cross-tenant nature means integrity of other organizations' data (a separate security scope) is compromised. SA:N - No security mechanism is weakened.

Weakness rationale

CWE-639 The attacker controls the row identifier (id) inside the nested alias block, which the ORM uses to select the target row. The application's authorization and sanitization (id stripping, event_id pinning) is applied to the outer record and is bypassed because the ORM binds to the inner record. This is a direct case of a user-controlled key selecting an unauthorized resource.
CWE-20 The application fails to validate or strip the nested model-alias key from user-supplied data before passing it to the ORM. The ORM's set() method interprets this key as the record to save, contradicting the application's intent. The absence of validation on this structural aspect of the input is the root cause.

Attack pattern rationale

CAPEC-24 The attacker tampers with the structure of request parameters by injecting a nested key matching the model alias, causing the ORM to target a different row than the application intended. The outer parameters (sanitized id, pinned event_id) are effectively ignored in favor of the attacker-controlled inner parameters. This is a structural parameter tampering attack exploiting the ORM's data-binding semantics. The mapping is the closest available CAPEC; no more specific pattern for ORM-level key injection exists in the CAPEC catalog.

Assumptions to verify

The affected version boundary is inferred from the tag_version_boundary metadata (v2.5.48); the exact last affected release and first fixed release are not explicitly stated in the patch.
PR:L assumes the attacker needs only a basic authenticated account with perm_add; the regression tests confirm a non-admin, non-sync role suffices, but the minimum permission set is not exhaustively enumerated in the patch.
VA:N assumes soft-delete is treated as an integrity impact (data state change) rather than an availability impact; if the organization considers soft-deleted records as unavailable, VA could be raised to L.
CAPEC-24 (Parameter Tampering) is the closest available pattern; the specific ORM-level key-binding manipulation does not have a dedicated CAPEC entry, so the mapping is approximate.
The Co-Authored-By line references an AI tool (Claude Opus 5); it is listed as a tool credit, not a human remediation developer, per CVE credit role semantics.
The commit date is 2026-09-25; the vulnerability may have existed for an unknown duration prior to reporting.

Model comparison

Selected qwen3.8:27b by deterministic-consensus-v1
The selected result is closest to model consensus; this heuristic does not establish factual correctness and human review remains required.

Model	Score	Agreement	Confidence	Assumptions
`qwen3.8:27b`	5	9	high	6

Show details on NVD website

JSON

To clipboard

{
  "containers": {
    "adp": [
      {
        "metrics": [
          {
            "other": {
              "content": {
                "id": "CVE-2026-103237",
                "options": [
                  {
                    "Exploitation": "none"
                  },
                  {
                    "Automatable": "no"
                  },
                  {
                    "Technical Impact": "partial"
                  }
                ],
                "role": "CISA Coordinator",
                "timestamp": "2026-09-30T17:08:29.034418Z",
                "version": "2.0.3"
              },
              "type": "ssvc"
            }
          }
        ],
        "providerMetadata": {
          "dateUpdated": "2026-09-30T17:08:51.346Z",
          "orgId": "134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0",
          "shortName": "CISA-ADP"
        },
        "title": "CISA ADP Vulnrichment"
      }
    ],
    "cna": {
      "affected": [
        {
          "cpes": [
            "cpe:2.3:a:misp:misp:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*"
          ],
          "modules": [
            "AttributesController",
            "EventReportsController",
            "EventsController",
            "ObjectReferencesController",
            "ShadowAttributesController",
            "UsersController",
            "AppModel",
            "Event model",
            "MispAttribute model",
            "MispObject model",
            "ShadowAttribute model",
            "Sighting model"
          ],
          "product": "MISP",
          "repo": "https://github.com/MISP/MISP",
          "vendor": "MISP",
          "versions": [
            {
              "lessThan": "2.5.48",
              "status": "affected",
              "version": "0",
              "versionType": "semver"
            }
          ]
        }
      ],
      "credits": [
        {
          "lang": "en",
          "type": "reporter",
          "value": "Jeroen Pinoy"
        },
        {
          "lang": "en",
          "type": "remediation developer",
          "value": "iglocska"
        },
        {
          "lang": "en",
          "type": "remediation developer",
          "value": "Claude Opus 5"
        }
      ],
      "descriptions": [
        {
          "lang": "en",
          "supportingMedia": [
            {
              "base64": false,
              "type": "text/html",
              "value": "\u003cp\u003eMISP contains an improper input validation vulnerability in its ORM save path. When a user submits data through various endpoints (attribute add/edit, event edit, free-text import, sighting capture, shadow attribute proposal, event report creation, object reference add, user admin edit), the application sanitizes the flat record by stripping the primary key and pinning the event_id or object_id to the caller\u0027s context. However, the underlying ORM\u0027s set() method gives priority to a nested key whose name matches the model alias and discards the outer scalar fields.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eAn authenticated user with basic write permissions can exploit this by embedding a nested block under the model alias key inside their request. The sanitization logic (id removal, event_id pinning) is applied to the outer record, but the ORM binds to the inner record instead, which carries an attacker-chosen id and event_id. This allows the attacker to overwrite, re-parent, or soft-delete rows belonging to other organizations or events they have no read access to.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eImpact:\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e- Cross-tenant data integrity compromise (attribute values rewritten, objects re-parented to attacker events, rows soft-deleted)\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e- Affects multiple entity types: Attribute, Object, EventReport, Sighting, AttributeTag, ShadowAttribute\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e- Requires only a low-privilege authenticated account with perm_add\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eAffected versions: \u0026lt;2.5.48\u003c/p\u003e"
            }
          ],
          "value": "MISP contains an improper input validation vulnerability in its ORM save path. When a user submits data through various endpoints (attribute add/edit, event edit, free-text import, sighting capture, shadow attribute proposal, event report creation, object reference add, user admin edit), the application sanitizes the flat record by stripping the primary key and pinning the event_id or object_id to the caller\u0027s context. However, the underlying ORM\u0027s set() method gives priority to a nested key whose name matches the model alias and discards the outer scalar fields.\n\nAn authenticated user with basic write permissions can exploit this by embedding a nested block under the model alias key inside their request. The sanitization logic (id removal, event_id pinning) is applied to the outer record, but the ORM binds to the inner record instead, which carries an attacker-chosen id and event_id. This allows the attacker to overwrite, re-parent, or soft-delete rows belonging to other organizations or events they have no read access to.\n\nImpact:\n\n- Cross-tenant data integrity compromise (attribute values rewritten, objects re-parented to attacker events, rows soft-deleted)\n\n- Affects multiple entity types: Attribute, Object, EventReport, Sighting, AttributeTag, ShadowAttribute\n\n- Requires only a low-privilege authenticated account with perm_add\n\nAffected versions: \u003c2.5.48"
        }
      ],
      "impacts": [
        {
          "capecId": "CAPEC-24",
          "descriptions": [
            {
              "lang": "en",
              "value": "CAPEC-24 Parameter Tampering"
            }
          ]
        }
      ],
      "metrics": [
        {
          "cvssV4_0": {
            "Automatable": "NOT_DEFINED",
            "Recovery": "NOT_DEFINED",
            "Safety": "NOT_DEFINED",
            "attackComplexity": "LOW",
            "attackRequirements": "NONE",
            "attackVector": "NETWORK",
            "baseScore": 8.3,
            "baseSeverity": "HIGH",
            "privilegesRequired": "LOW",
            "providerUrgency": "NOT_DEFINED",
            "subAvailabilityImpact": "NONE",
            "subConfidentialityImpact": "NONE",
            "subIntegrityImpact": "HIGH",
            "userInteraction": "NONE",
            "valueDensity": "NOT_DEFINED",
            "vectorString": "CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:N/VI:H/VA:N/SC:N/SI:H/SA:N",
            "version": "4.0",
            "vulnAvailabilityImpact": "NONE",
            "vulnConfidentialityImpact": "NONE",
            "vulnIntegrityImpact": "HIGH",
            "vulnerabilityResponseEffort": "NOT_DEFINED"
          },
          "format": "CVSS",
          "scenarios": [
            {
              "lang": "en",
              "value": "GENERAL"
            }
          ]
        }
      ],
      "problemTypes": [
        {
          "descriptions": [
            {
              "cweId": "CWE-639",
              "description": "CWE-639 Authorization Bypass Through User-Controlled Key",
              "lang": "en",
              "type": "CWE"
            }
          ]
        },
        {
          "descriptions": [
            {
              "cweId": "CWE-20",
              "description": "CWE-20 Improper Input Validation",
              "lang": "en",
              "type": "CWE"
            }
          ]
        }
      ],
      "providerMetadata": {
        "dateUpdated": "2026-09-30T09:56:35.584Z",
        "orgId": "5a6e4751-2f3f-4070-9419-94fb35b644e8",
        "shortName": "CIRCL"
      },
      "references": [
        {
          "name": "Security patch",
          "tags": [
            "patch"
          ],
          "url": "https://github.com/MISP/MISP/commit/9485ae40d"
        }
      ],
      "solutions": [
        {
          "lang": "en",
          "supportingMedia": [
            {
              "base64": false,
              "type": "text/html",
              "value": "\u003cp\u003eThe fix introduces a defensive save() override in the base model class that refuses to persist any record where the data array simultaneously contains a nested key matching the model alias and other top-level scalar fields, logging a warning and returning false. Additionally, all code paths that sanitize and save records (free-text import, module result processing, object delta merge, attribute bulk edit, sighting capture, shadow attribute proposal, event report creation) now explicitly unset the nested alias key from the data array before calling save(), ensuring the ORM cannot be redirected to an attacker-chosen row. Controller-level request reshaping was also corrected to avoid creating self-referencing data structures.\u003c/p\u003e"
            }
          ],
          "value": "The fix introduces a defensive save() override in the base model class that refuses to persist any record where the data array simultaneously contains a nested key matching the model alias and other top-level scalar fields, logging a warning and returning false. Additionally, all code paths that sanitize and save records (free-text import, module result processing, object delta merge, attribute bulk edit, sighting capture, shadow attribute proposal, event report creation) now explicitly unset the nested alias key from the data array before calling save(), ensuring the ORM cannot be redirected to an attacker-chosen row. Controller-level request reshaping was also corrected to avoid creating self-referencing data structures."
        }
      ],
      "title": "MISP: Nested Model Alias Key Bypasses Sanitization to Modify Cross-Tenant Rows",
      "x_gcve": [
        {
          "extensions": {
            "bcp-05-x-01": {
              "ai_annotations": [
                {
                  "ai_level": "generated",
                  "description": "Draft vulnerability metadata was generated from a git-format patch using an Ollama-hosted language model. Human validation is required before publication.",
                  "gna_source": 1,
                  "models": [
                    {
                      "gna_source": 1,
                      "identifier": "qwen3.8:27b",
                      "name": "qwen3.8:27b",
                      "source": "ollama"
                    }
                  ],
                  "review_status": "full",
                  "scope": "record",
                  "tags": [
                    "ai-computer-assisted:llm-generated",
                    "ai-computer-assisted:classification"
                  ]
                }
              ]
            },
            "bcp-05-x-02": {
              "x_patch2vuln": {
                "assumptions": [
                  "The affected version boundary is inferred from the tag_version_boundary metadata (v2.5.48); the exact last affected release and first fixed release are not explicitly stated in the patch.",
                  "PR:L assumes the attacker needs only a basic authenticated account with perm_add; the regression tests confirm a non-admin, non-sync role suffices, but the minimum permission set is not exhaustively enumerated in the patch.",
                  "VA:N assumes soft-delete is treated as an integrity impact (data state change) rather than an availability impact; if the organization considers soft-deleted records as unavailable, VA could be raised to L.",
                  "CAPEC-24 (Parameter Tampering) is the closest available pattern; the specific ORM-level key-binding manipulation does not have a dedicated CAPEC entry, so the mapping is approximate.",
                  "The Co-Authored-By line references an AI tool (Claude Opus 5); it is listed as a tool credit, not a human remediation developer, per CVE credit role semantics.",
                  "The commit date is 2026-09-25; the vulnerability may have existed for an unknown duration prior to reporting."
                ],
                "capecRationale": [
                  {
                    "capecId": "CAPEC-24",
                    "rationale": "The attacker tampers with the structure of request parameters by injecting a nested key matching the model alias, causing the ORM to target a different row than the application intended. The outer parameters (sanitized id, pinned event_id) are effectively ignored in favor of the attacker-controlled inner parameters. This is a structural parameter tampering attack exploiting the ORM\u0027s data-binding semantics. The mapping is the closest available CAPEC; no more specific pattern for ORM-level key injection exists in the CAPEC catalog."
                  }
                ],
                "commit": "9485ae40d334471882e3bd246651acaa68feef34",
                "confidence": "high",
                "credits": [
                  {
                    "lang": "en",
                    "type": "reporter",
                    "value": "Jeroen Pinoy"
                  },
                  {
                    "lang": "en",
                    "type": "remediation developer",
                    "value": "iglocska"
                  },
                  {
                    "lang": "en",
                    "type": "remediation developer",
                    "value": "Claude Opus 5"
                  }
                ],
                "cvssRationale": "AV:N - MISP is a network-accessible web application. AC:L - The attack requires only crafting a request with a nested alias key; no race condition or complex state is needed. AT:N - No in-transit tampering required. PR:L - An authenticated user with basic write permission (perm_add) suffices; no admin or sync role needed. UI:N - No victim interaction required. VC:N - The attacker does not gain new read access; the impact is on data they can already partially see or infer. VI:H - The attacker can overwrite, re-parent, or soft-delete rows in the same instance, causing high integrity loss to the vulnerable component\u0027s data. VA:N - Soft-delete is a state change (integrity) rather than a service disruption. SC:N - No impact on separate components\u0027 confidentiality. SI:H - The cross-tenant nature means integrity of other organizations\u0027 data (a separate security scope) is compromised. SA:N - No security mechanism is weakened.",
                "fixSummary": "The fix introduces a defensive save() override in the base model class that refuses to persist any record where the data array simultaneously contains a nested key matching the model alias and other top-level scalar fields, logging a warning and returning false. Additionally, all code paths that sanitize and save records (free-text import, module result processing, object delta merge, attribute bulk edit, sighting capture, shadow attribute proposal, event report creation) now explicitly unset the nested alias key from the data array before calling save(), ensuring the ORM cannot be redirected to an attacker-chosen row. Controller-level request reshaping was also corrected to avoid creating self-referencing data structures.",
                "generatedAt": "2026-09-30T09:24:37.816321Z",
                "generator": "patch2vuln.py",
                "model": "qwen3.8:27b",
                "modelComparison": {
                  "rankings": [
                    {
                      "agreementScore": 9,
                      "assumptionCount": 6,
                      "confidence": "high",
                      "model": "qwen3.8:27b",
                      "score": 5
                    }
                  ],
                  "selectedModel": "qwen3.8:27b",
                  "selectionMethod": "deterministic-consensus-v1",
                  "selectionNotice": "The selected result is closest to model consensus; this heuristic does not establish factual correctness and human review remains required."
                },
                "patchSha256": "03af388a5ac0d93cebef902e0050aa8496aae8d88d1496b80abc0b9a929cb39a",
                "patchSummary": "Added a save() override in AppModel.php that detects and rejects ambiguous payloads containing both a nested model-alias key and outer scalars. Added unset($data[$this-\u003ealias]) calls in Event.php (free-text, module results, object attribute save), MispAttribute.php (saveAttributes, captureAttribute, editAttributeBulk), MispObject.php (deltaMerge, editObject), ShadowAttribute.php (__preCaptureMassage), and Sighting.php (captureSightings) to strip the nested alias key before save. Changed six controller files to use $this-\u003erequest-\u003edata = array(\u0027Model\u0027 =\u003e $this-\u003erequest-\u003edata) instead of $this-\u003erequest-\u003edata[\u0027Model\u0027] = $this-\u003erequest-\u003edata, preventing self-referencing structures. Added a new regression test suite (tests/testregressions.py) with cross-tenant attack scenarios and wired it into the CI workflow.",
                "patchTruncated": false,
                "patches": [
                  {
                    "commit": "9485ae40d334471882e3bd246651acaa68feef34",
                    "patchSha256": "03af388a5ac0d93cebef902e0050aa8496aae8d88d1496b80abc0b9a929cb39a",
                    "source": "https://github.com/MISP/MISP/commit/9485ae40d.patch",
                    "sourceUrl": "https://github.com/MISP/MISP/commit/9485ae40d.patch",
                    "subject": "fix: [security] A nested model alias key no longer selects"
                  }
                ],
                "source": "https://github.com/MISP/MISP/commit/9485ae40d.patch",
                "subject": "fix: [security] A nested model alias key no longer selects",
                "tagVersionBoundary": {
                  "commits_after_fix": 23,
                  "repository": "https://github.com/MISP/MISP",
                  "tag": "v2.5.48",
                  "version": "2.5.48",
                  "version_type": "semver"
                },
                "weaknessRationale": [
                  {
                    "cweId": "CWE-639",
                    "rationale": "The attacker controls the row identifier (id) inside the nested alias block, which the ORM uses to select the target row. The application\u0027s authorization and sanitization (id stripping, event_id pinning) is applied to the outer record and is bypassed because the ORM binds to the inner record. This is a direct case of a user-controlled key selecting an unauthorized resource."
                  },
                  {
                    "cweId": "CWE-20",
                    "rationale": "The application fails to validate or strip the nested model-alias key from user-supplied data before passing it to the ORM. The ORM\u0027s set() method interprets this key as the record to save, contradicting the application\u0027s intent. The absence of validation on this structural aspect of the input is the root cause."
                  }
                ]
              }
            }
          },
          "recordType": "advisory",
          "vulnId": "GCVE-1-2026-20280"
        }
      ]
    }
  },
  "cveMetadata": {
    "assignerOrgId": "5a6e4751-2f3f-4070-9419-94fb35b644e8",
    "assignerShortName": "CIRCL",
    "cveId": "CVE-2026-103237",
    "datePublished": "2026-09-30T09:56:35.584Z",
    "dateReserved": "2026-09-30T09:56:33.891Z",
    "dateUpdated": "2026-09-30T17:08:51.346Z",
    "state": "PUBLISHED"
  },
  "dataType": "CVE_RECORD",
  "dataVersion": "5.2"
}

CVE-2026-102823 (GCVE-0-2026-102823)

Vulnerability from cvelistv5 – Published: 2026-09-29 18:25 – Updated: 2026-09-29 18:25

Title

russh: Client-side channel-scoped Handler callbacks fire for channel IDs the client never opened

Summary

Russh is a Rust SSH client and server library. Prior to 0.63.1, client_read_authenticated in russh/src/client/encrypted.rs forwards CHANNEL_DATA, CHANNEL_EXTENDED_DATA, CHANNEL_EOF, CHANNEL_CLOSE, CHANNEL_OPEN_FAILURE, CHANNEL_SUCCESS, CHANNEL_FAILURE, and CHANNEL_REQUEST subtypes exit-status, exit-signal, and xon-xoff to public client::Handler callbacks without confirming that the ChannelId belongs to a channel the client opened and established. A malicious SSH server can send lifecycle events for predicted, unopened, unconfirmed, or released channel identifiers, causing application panics or corrupting command completion and exit-code tracking. This issue is fixed in version 0.63.1.

Severity

7.5 (High)


                        
                          CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:N

CWE

CWE-20 - Improper Input Validation

Assigner

GitHub_M mitre root Scorecard

References

3 references

URL	Tags
https://github.com/Eugeny/russh/security/advisori…	x_refsource_CONFIRM
https://github.com/Eugeny/russh/commit/3430fd26ec…	x_refsource_MISC
https://github.com/Eugeny/russh/releases/tag/v0.63.1	x_refsource_MISC

Impacted products

1 product

Vendor	Product	Version
Eugeny	russh	Affected: < 0.63.1

Show details on NVD website

JSON

To clipboard

{
  "containers": {
    "cna": {
      "affected": [
        {
          "product": "russh",
          "vendor": "Eugeny",
          "versions": [
            {
              "status": "affected",
              "version": "\u003c 0.63.1"
            }
          ]
        }
      ],
      "descriptions": [
        {
          "lang": "en",
          "value": "Russh is a Rust SSH client and server library. Prior to 0.63.1, client_read_authenticated in russh/src/client/encrypted.rs forwards CHANNEL_DATA, CHANNEL_EXTENDED_DATA, CHANNEL_EOF, CHANNEL_CLOSE, CHANNEL_OPEN_FAILURE, CHANNEL_SUCCESS, CHANNEL_FAILURE, and CHANNEL_REQUEST subtypes exit-status, exit-signal, and xon-xoff to public client::Handler callbacks without confirming that the ChannelId belongs to a channel the client opened and established. A malicious SSH server can send lifecycle events for predicted, unopened, unconfirmed, or released channel identifiers, causing application panics or corrupting command completion and exit-code tracking. This issue is fixed in version 0.63.1."
        }
      ],
      "metrics": [
        {
          "cvssV3_1": {
            "attackComplexity": "LOW",
            "attackVector": "NETWORK",
            "availabilityImpact": "NONE",
            "baseScore": 7.5,
            "baseSeverity": "HIGH",
            "confidentialityImpact": "NONE",
            "integrityImpact": "HIGH",
            "privilegesRequired": "NONE",
            "scope": "UNCHANGED",
            "userInteraction": "NONE",
            "vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:N",
            "version": "3.1"
          }
        }
      ],
      "problemTypes": [
        {
          "descriptions": [
            {
              "cweId": "CWE-20",
              "description": "CWE-20: Improper Input Validation",
              "lang": "en",
              "type": "CWE"
            }
          ]
        }
      ],
      "providerMetadata": {
        "dateUpdated": "2026-09-29T18:25:58.084Z",
        "orgId": "a0819718-46f1-4df5-94e2-005712e83aaa",
        "shortName": "GitHub_M"
      },
      "references": [
        {
          "name": "https://github.com/Eugeny/russh/security/advisories/GHSA-47hw-gvq5-r2gm",
          "tags": [
            "x_refsource_CONFIRM"
          ],
          "url": "https://github.com/Eugeny/russh/security/advisories/GHSA-47hw-gvq5-r2gm"
        },
        {
          "name": "https://github.com/Eugeny/russh/commit/3430fd26ecafc0dc3705210f5f39a9119fa22774",
          "tags": [
            "x_refsource_MISC"
          ],
          "url": "https://github.com/Eugeny/russh/commit/3430fd26ecafc0dc3705210f5f39a9119fa22774"
        },
        {
          "name": "https://github.com/Eugeny/russh/releases/tag/v0.63.1",
          "tags": [
            "x_refsource_MISC"
          ],
          "url": "https://github.com/Eugeny/russh/releases/tag/v0.63.1"
        }
      ],
      "source": {
        "advisory": "GHSA-47hw-gvq5-r2gm",
        "discovery": "UNKNOWN"
      },
      "title": "russh: Client-side channel-scoped Handler callbacks fire for channel IDs the client never opened"
    }
  },
  "cveMetadata": {
    "assignerOrgId": "a0819718-46f1-4df5-94e2-005712e83aaa",
    "assignerShortName": "GitHub_M",
    "cveId": "CVE-2026-102823",
    "datePublished": "2026-09-29T18:25:58.084Z",
    "dateReserved": "2026-09-29T17:25:25.265Z",
    "dateUpdated": "2026-09-29T18:25:58.084Z",
    "state": "PUBLISHED"
  },
  "dataType": "CVE_RECORD",
  "dataVersion": "5.2"
}

CVE-2026-102677 (GCVE-0-2026-102677)

Vulnerability from cvelistv5 – Published: 2026-09-29 17:43 – Updated: 2026-09-29 17:43

Title

Electron: Sandboxed preload code cache can be poisoned by a compromised renderer

Summary

Electron is a framework for writing cross-platform desktop applications using JavaScript, HTML and CSS. From 42.3.3 until 42.10.0, 43.5.0, and 44.0.0-beta.6, Electron's sandboxed preload code cache did not verify that a cached entry matched the preload it was served for. A compromised renderer could write attacker-controlled cache data and cause Electron to reuse it for a later load, executing the renderer's code in the more privileged preload context. The issue affects applications that load untrusted content. This issue is fixed in versions 42.10.0, 43.5.0, and 44.0.0-beta.6.

Severity

7.8 (High)


                        
                          CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H

CWE

CWE-20 - Improper Input Validation
CWE-345 - Insufficient Verification of Data Authenticity

Assigner

GitHub_M mitre root Scorecard

References

8 references

URL	Tags
https://github.com/electron/electron/security/adv…	x_refsource_CONFIRM
https://github.com/electron/electron/pull/52480	x_refsource_MISC
https://github.com/electron/electron/commit/00045…	x_refsource_MISC
https://github.com/electron/electron/commit/25ba8…	x_refsource_MISC
https://github.com/electron/electron/commit/c38d6…	x_refsource_MISC
https://github.com/electron/electron/releases/tag…	x_refsource_MISC
https://github.com/electron/electron/releases/tag…	x_refsource_MISC
https://github.com/electron/electron/releases/tag…	x_refsource_MISC

Impacted products

1 product

Vendor	Product	Version
electron	electron	Affected: >= 42.3.3, < 42.10.0 Affected: >= 43.0.0-beta.1, < 43.5.0 Affected: >= 44.0.0-alpha.1, < 44.0.0-beta.6

Show details on NVD website

JSON

To clipboard

{
  "containers": {
    "cna": {
      "affected": [
        {
          "product": "electron",
          "vendor": "electron",
          "versions": [
            {
              "status": "affected",
              "version": "\u003e= 42.3.3, \u003c 42.10.0"
            },
            {
              "status": "affected",
              "version": "\u003e= 43.0.0-beta.1, \u003c 43.5.0"
            },
            {
              "status": "affected",
              "version": "\u003e= 44.0.0-alpha.1, \u003c 44.0.0-beta.6"
            }
          ]
        }
      ],
      "descriptions": [
        {
          "lang": "en",
          "value": "Electron is a framework for writing cross-platform desktop applications using JavaScript, HTML and CSS. From 42.3.3 until 42.10.0, 43.5.0, and 44.0.0-beta.6, Electron\u0027s sandboxed preload code cache did not verify that a cached entry matched the preload it was served for. A compromised renderer could write attacker-controlled cache data and cause Electron to reuse it for a later load, executing the renderer\u0027s code in the more privileged preload context. The issue affects applications that load untrusted content. This issue is fixed in versions 42.10.0, 43.5.0, and 44.0.0-beta.6."
        }
      ],
      "metrics": [
        {
          "cvssV3_1": {
            "attackComplexity": "HIGH",
            "attackVector": "LOCAL",
            "availabilityImpact": "HIGH",
            "baseScore": 7.8,
            "baseSeverity": "HIGH",
            "confidentialityImpact": "HIGH",
            "integrityImpact": "HIGH",
            "privilegesRequired": "LOW",
            "scope": "CHANGED",
            "userInteraction": "NONE",
            "vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H",
            "version": "3.1"
          }
        }
      ],
      "problemTypes": [
        {
          "descriptions": [
            {
              "cweId": "CWE-20",
              "description": "CWE-20: Improper Input Validation",
              "lang": "en",
              "type": "CWE"
            }
          ]
        },
        {
          "descriptions": [
            {
              "cweId": "CWE-345",
              "description": "CWE-345: Insufficient Verification of Data Authenticity",
              "lang": "en",
              "type": "CWE"
            }
          ]
        }
      ],
      "providerMetadata": {
        "dateUpdated": "2026-09-29T17:43:26.960Z",
        "orgId": "a0819718-46f1-4df5-94e2-005712e83aaa",
        "shortName": "GitHub_M"
      },
      "references": [
        {
          "name": "https://github.com/electron/electron/security/advisories/GHSA-qmv3-fv6v-rmhq",
          "tags": [
            "x_refsource_CONFIRM"
          ],
          "url": "https://github.com/electron/electron/security/advisories/GHSA-qmv3-fv6v-rmhq"
        },
        {
          "name": "https://github.com/electron/electron/pull/52480",
          "tags": [
            "x_refsource_MISC"
          ],
          "url": "https://github.com/electron/electron/pull/52480"
        },
        {
          "name": "https://github.com/electron/electron/commit/000453e399bd1dee5e86376cdd9ece5fc071e601",
          "tags": [
            "x_refsource_MISC"
          ],
          "url": "https://github.com/electron/electron/commit/000453e399bd1dee5e86376cdd9ece5fc071e601"
        },
        {
          "name": "https://github.com/electron/electron/commit/25ba8be57c65a83d8c14ebb8aa37693df17a04f3",
          "tags": [
            "x_refsource_MISC"
          ],
          "url": "https://github.com/electron/electron/commit/25ba8be57c65a83d8c14ebb8aa37693df17a04f3"
        },
        {
          "name": "https://github.com/electron/electron/commit/c38d6fd68756f04647ea857bdb6a2abec332e217",
          "tags": [
            "x_refsource_MISC"
          ],
          "url": "https://github.com/electron/electron/commit/c38d6fd68756f04647ea857bdb6a2abec332e217"
        },
        {
          "name": "https://github.com/electron/electron/releases/tag/v42.10.0",
          "tags": [
            "x_refsource_MISC"
          ],
          "url": "https://github.com/electron/electron/releases/tag/v42.10.0"
        },
        {
          "name": "https://github.com/electron/electron/releases/tag/v43.5.0",
          "tags": [
            "x_refsource_MISC"
          ],
          "url": "https://github.com/electron/electron/releases/tag/v43.5.0"
        },
        {
          "name": "https://github.com/electron/electron/releases/tag/v44.0.0-beta.6",
          "tags": [
            "x_refsource_MISC"
          ],
          "url": "https://github.com/electron/electron/releases/tag/v44.0.0-beta.6"
        }
      ],
      "source": {
        "advisory": "GHSA-qmv3-fv6v-rmhq",
        "discovery": "UNKNOWN"
      },
      "title": "Electron: Sandboxed preload code cache can be poisoned by a compromised renderer"
    }
  },
  "cveMetadata": {
    "assignerOrgId": "a0819718-46f1-4df5-94e2-005712e83aaa",
    "assignerShortName": "GitHub_M",
    "cveId": "CVE-2026-102677",
    "datePublished": "2026-09-29T17:43:26.960Z",
    "dateReserved": "2026-09-29T16:10:04.075Z",
    "dateUpdated": "2026-09-29T17:43:26.960Z",
    "state": "PUBLISHED"
  },
  "dataType": "CVE_RECORD",
  "dataVersion": "5.2"
}

CVE-2026-102600 (GCVE-0-2026-102600)

Vulnerability from cvelistv5 – Published: 2026-09-29 15:23 – Updated: 2026-09-29 16:28

Title

Socket.IO: Prototype Pollution via Unsafe Client Session Lookup

Summary

Socket.IO enables bidirectional and low-latency communication for every platform. Prior to 0.1.1, @socket.io/cluster-engine uses inherited object properties when looking up attacker-controlled session IDs in clustered deployments. Special property names such as __proto__ or constructor can resolve through the object prototype chain instead of identifying an actual connected client, causing the Node.js process to crash and resulting in denial of service. Applications that do not use @socket.io/cluster-engine are not affected. This issue is fixed in version 0.1.1.

Severity

7.5 (High)


                        
                          CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H

SSVC

Exploitation: none Automatable: yes Technical Impact: partial

CISA Coordinator · CISA-ADP (v2.0.3)

Decision recorded 2026-09-29 16:27 UTC

CWE

CWE-20 - Improper Input Validation
CWE-1321 - Improperly Controlled Modification of Object Prototype Attributes ('Prototype Pollution')

Assigner

GitHub_M mitre root Scorecard

References

3 references

URL	Tags
https://github.com/socketio/socket.io/security/ad…	x_refsource_CONFIRM
https://github.com/socketio/socket.io/commit/830e…	x_refsource_MISC
https://github.com/socketio/socket.io/releases/ta…	x_refsource_MISC

Impacted products

2 products

Vendor	Product	Version
socketio	socket.io	Affected: < 0.1.1
@socket.io	cluster-engine	Affected: < 0.1.1

Show details on NVD website

JSON

To clipboard

{
  "containers": {
    "adp": [
      {
        "metrics": [
          {
            "other": {
              "content": {
                "id": "CVE-2026-102600",
                "options": [
                  {
                    "Exploitation": "none"
                  },
                  {
                    "Automatable": "yes"
                  },
                  {
                    "Technical Impact": "partial"
                  }
                ],
                "role": "CISA Coordinator",
                "timestamp": "2026-09-29T16:27:29.573677Z",
                "version": "2.0.3"
              },
              "type": "ssvc"
            }
          }
        ],
        "providerMetadata": {
          "dateUpdated": "2026-09-29T16:28:28.476Z",
          "orgId": "134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0",
          "shortName": "CISA-ADP"
        },
        "title": "CISA ADP Vulnrichment"
      }
    ],
    "cna": {
      "affected": [
        {
          "product": "socket.io",
          "vendor": "socketio",
          "versions": [
            {
              "status": "affected",
              "version": "\u003c 0.1.1"
            }
          ]
        },
        {
          "product": "cluster-engine",
          "vendor": "@socket.io",
          "versions": [
            {
              "status": "affected",
              "version": "\u003c 0.1.1"
            }
          ]
        }
      ],
      "descriptions": [
        {
          "lang": "en",
          "value": "Socket.IO enables bidirectional and low-latency communication for every platform. Prior to 0.1.1, @socket.io/cluster-engine uses inherited object properties when looking up attacker-controlled session IDs in clustered deployments. Special property names such as __proto__ or constructor can resolve through the object prototype chain instead of identifying an actual connected client, causing the Node.js process to crash and resulting in denial of service. Applications that do not use @socket.io/cluster-engine are not affected. This issue is fixed in version 0.1.1."
        }
      ],
      "metrics": [
        {
          "cvssV3_1": {
            "attackComplexity": "LOW",
            "attackVector": "NETWORK",
            "availabilityImpact": "HIGH",
            "baseScore": 7.5,
            "baseSeverity": "HIGH",
            "confidentialityImpact": "NONE",
            "integrityImpact": "NONE",
            "privilegesRequired": "NONE",
            "scope": "UNCHANGED",
            "userInteraction": "NONE",
            "vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H",
            "version": "3.1"
          }
        }
      ],
      "problemTypes": [
        {
          "descriptions": [
            {
              "cweId": "CWE-20",
              "description": "CWE-20: Improper Input Validation",
              "lang": "en",
              "type": "CWE"
            }
          ]
        },
        {
          "descriptions": [
            {
              "cweId": "CWE-1321",
              "description": "CWE-1321: Improperly Controlled Modification of Object Prototype Attributes (\u0027Prototype Pollution\u0027)",
              "lang": "en",
              "type": "CWE"
            }
          ]
        }
      ],
      "providerMetadata": {
        "dateUpdated": "2026-09-29T15:23:15.857Z",
        "orgId": "a0819718-46f1-4df5-94e2-005712e83aaa",
        "shortName": "GitHub_M"
      },
      "references": [
        {
          "name": "https://github.com/socketio/socket.io/security/advisories/GHSA-wfpm-5gcm-94cg",
          "tags": [
            "x_refsource_CONFIRM"
          ],
          "url": "https://github.com/socketio/socket.io/security/advisories/GHSA-wfpm-5gcm-94cg"
        },
        {
          "name": "https://github.com/socketio/socket.io/commit/830e3642ebb8dc3784eb749b0a004fe2b932b429",
          "tags": [
            "x_refsource_MISC"
          ],
          "url": "https://github.com/socketio/socket.io/commit/830e3642ebb8dc3784eb749b0a004fe2b932b429"
        },
        {
          "name": "https://github.com/socketio/socket.io/releases/tag/@socket.io/cluster-engine@0.1.1",
          "tags": [
            "x_refsource_MISC"
          ],
          "url": "https://github.com/socketio/socket.io/releases/tag/@socket.io/cluster-engine@0.1.1"
        }
      ],
      "source": {
        "advisory": "GHSA-wfpm-5gcm-94cg",
        "discovery": "UNKNOWN"
      },
      "title": "Socket.IO: Prototype Pollution via Unsafe Client Session Lookup"
    }
  },
  "cveMetadata": {
    "assignerOrgId": "a0819718-46f1-4df5-94e2-005712e83aaa",
    "assignerShortName": "GitHub_M",
    "cveId": "CVE-2026-102600",
    "datePublished": "2026-09-29T15:23:15.857Z",
    "dateReserved": "2026-09-29T14:18:02.920Z",
    "dateUpdated": "2026-09-29T16:28:28.476Z",
    "state": "PUBLISHED"
  },
  "dataType": "CVE_RECORD",
  "dataVersion": "5.2"
}

CVE-2026-101266 (GCVE-0-2026-101266)

Vulnerability from cvelistv5 – Published: 2026-09-29 11:53 – Updated: 2026-09-29 14:46

Title

Checkout validation bypass

Summary

A logic flaw in the checkout flow allows users to bypass validations performed during the check-in by skipping entire check-in steps.

Severity

1.3 (Low)


                        
                          CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/VA:N/SC:L/SI:L/SA:N/E:U

SSVC

Exploitation: none Automatable: no Technical Impact: partial

CISA Coordinator · CISA-ADP (v2.0.3)

Decision recorded 2026-09-29 14:46 UTC

CWE

CWE-20 - Improper input validation

Assigner

rami.io mitre root Scorecard

References

1 reference

URL	Tags
https://pretix.eu/about/en/blog/20260929-release-…	vendor-advisory

Impacted products

1 product

Vendor	Product	Version
pretix	pretix	Affected: 0.0 , < 2026.5.5 (python) Affected: 2026.6.0 , < 2026.6.2 (python) Affected: 2026.7.0 , < 2026.7.1 (python)

Date Public

2026-09-29 14:00

Show details on NVD website

JSON

To clipboard

{
  "containers": {
    "adp": [
      {
        "metrics": [
          {
            "other": {
              "content": {
                "id": "CVE-2026-101266",
                "options": [
                  {
                    "Exploitation": "none"
                  },
                  {
                    "Automatable": "no"
                  },
                  {
                    "Technical Impact": "partial"
                  }
                ],
                "role": "CISA Coordinator",
                "timestamp": "2026-09-29T14:46:26.134826Z",
                "version": "2.0.3"
              },
              "type": "ssvc"
            }
          }
        ],
        "providerMetadata": {
          "dateUpdated": "2026-09-29T14:46:34.505Z",
          "orgId": "134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0",
          "shortName": "CISA-ADP"
        },
        "title": "CISA ADP Vulnrichment"
      }
    ],
    "cna": {
      "affected": [
        {
          "collectionURL": "https://pypi.python.org",
          "defaultStatus": "unaffected",
          "packageName": "pretix",
          "product": "pretix",
          "repo": "https://github.com/pretix/pretix",
          "vendor": "pretix",
          "versions": [
            {
              "lessThan": "2026.5.5",
              "status": "affected",
              "version": "0.0",
              "versionType": "python"
            },
            {
              "lessThan": "2026.6.2",
              "status": "affected",
              "version": "2026.6.0",
              "versionType": "python"
            },
            {
              "lessThan": "2026.7.1",
              "status": "affected",
              "version": "2026.7.0",
              "versionType": "python"
            }
          ]
        }
      ],
      "datePublic": "2026-09-29T14:00:00.000Z",
      "descriptions": [
        {
          "lang": "en",
          "supportingMedia": [
            {
              "base64": false,
              "type": "text/html",
              "value": "A logic flaw in the checkout flow allows users to bypass validations performed during the check-in by skipping entire check-in steps."
            }
          ],
          "value": "A logic flaw in the checkout flow allows users to bypass validations performed during the check-in by skipping entire check-in steps."
        }
      ],
      "impacts": [
        {
          "capecId": "CAPEC-153",
          "descriptions": [
            {
              "lang": "en",
              "value": "CAPEC-153 Input Data Manipulation"
            }
          ]
        }
      ],
      "metrics": [
        {
          "cvssV4_0": {
            "Automatable": "NOT_DEFINED",
            "Recovery": "NOT_DEFINED",
            "Safety": "NOT_DEFINED",
            "attackComplexity": "LOW",
            "attackRequirements": "NONE",
            "attackVector": "NETWORK",
            "baseScore": 1.3,
            "baseSeverity": "LOW",
            "exploitMaturity": "UNREPORTED",
            "privilegesRequired": "LOW",
            "providerUrgency": "NOT_DEFINED",
            "subAvailabilityImpact": "NONE",
            "subConfidentialityImpact": "LOW",
            "subIntegrityImpact": "LOW",
            "userInteraction": "NONE",
            "valueDensity": "NOT_DEFINED",
            "vectorString": "CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/VA:N/SC:L/SI:L/SA:N/E:U",
            "version": "4.0",
            "vulnAvailabilityImpact": "NONE",
            "vulnConfidentialityImpact": "LOW",
            "vulnIntegrityImpact": "LOW",
            "vulnerabilityResponseEffort": "NOT_DEFINED"
          },
          "format": "CVSS",
          "scenarios": [
            {
              "lang": "en",
              "value": "GENERAL"
            }
          ]
        }
      ],
      "problemTypes": [
        {
          "descriptions": [
            {
              "cweId": "CWE-20",
              "description": "CWE-20 Improper input validation",
              "lang": "en",
              "type": "CWE"
            }
          ]
        }
      ],
      "providerMetadata": {
        "dateUpdated": "2026-09-29T11:53:52.379Z",
        "orgId": "655498c3-6ec5-4f0b-aea6-853b334d05a6",
        "shortName": "rami.io"
      },
      "references": [
        {
          "tags": [
            "vendor-advisory"
          ],
          "url": "https://pretix.eu/about/en/blog/20260929-release-2026-7-1/"
        }
      ],
      "source": {
        "discovery": "INTERNAL"
      },
      "title": "Checkout validation bypass",
      "x_generator": {
        "engine": "Vulnogram 1.0.5"
      }
    }
  },
  "cveMetadata": {
    "assignerOrgId": "655498c3-6ec5-4f0b-aea6-853b334d05a6",
    "assignerShortName": "rami.io",
    "cveId": "CVE-2026-101266",
    "datePublished": "2026-09-29T11:53:52.379Z",
    "dateReserved": "2026-09-28T11:48:56.320Z",
    "dateUpdated": "2026-09-29T14:46:34.505Z",
    "state": "PUBLISHED"
  },
  "dataType": "CVE_RECORD",
  "dataVersion": "5.2"
}

CVE-2026-101131 (GCVE-0-2026-101131)

Vulnerability from cvelistv5 – Published: 2026-09-28 18:30 – Updated: 2026-09-28 18:47

Title

deepseek-ai deepseek-harness dsh index.ts reliance on untrusted inputs in a security decision

Summary

A vulnerability was identified in deepseek-ai deepseek-harness up to 0.1.5-rc.3. Impacted is an unknown function of the file packages/e2b/e2b/src/index.ts of the component dsh. The manipulation of the argument E2B_API_KEY leads to reliance on untrusted inputs in a security decision. Local access is required to approach this attack. The exploit is publicly available and might be used. The vendor was contacted early about this disclosure but did not respond in any way.

Severity

4.8 (Medium)


                        
                          CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:L/VI:N/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:P

3.3 (Low)


                        
                          CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N/E:P/RL:X/RC:C

3.3 (Low)


                        
                          CVSS:3.0/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N/E:P/RL:X/RC:C

SSVC

Exploitation: none Automatable: no Technical Impact: partial

CISA Coordinator · CISA-ADP (v2.0.3)

Decision recorded 2026-09-28 18:46 UTC

CWE

CWE-807 - Reliance on Untrusted Inputs in a Security Decision
CWE-20 - Improper Input Validation

Assigner

VulDB mitre root Scorecard

References

4 references

URL	Tags
https://vuldb.com/vuln/410988	vdb-entrytechnical-description
https://vuldb.com/vuln/410988/cti	signaturepermissions-required
https://vuldb.com/cve/CVE-2026-101131	third-party-advisory
https://vuldb.com/submit/938601	third-party-advisory

Impacted products

1 product

Vendor	Product	Version
deepseek-ai	deepseek-harness	Affected: 0.1.5-rc.0 Affected: 0.1.5-rc.1 Affected: 0.1.5-rc.2 Affected: 0.1.5-rc.3 cpe:2.3:a:deepseek-ai:deepseek-harness::::::::

Credits

Piggy Sprint (VulDB User) VulDB CNA Team

Show details on NVD website

JSON

To clipboard

{
  "containers": {
    "adp": [
      {
        "metrics": [
          {
            "other": {
              "content": {
                "id": "CVE-2026-101131",
                "options": [
                  {
                    "Exploitation": "none"
                  },
                  {
                    "Automatable": "no"
                  },
                  {
                    "Technical Impact": "partial"
                  }
                ],
                "role": "CISA Coordinator",
                "timestamp": "2026-09-28T18:46:46.197681Z",
                "version": "2.0.3"
              },
              "type": "ssvc"
            }
          }
        ],
        "providerMetadata": {
          "dateUpdated": "2026-09-28T18:47:04.009Z",
          "orgId": "134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0",
          "shortName": "CISA-ADP"
        },
        "title": "CISA ADP Vulnrichment"
      }
    ],
    "cna": {
      "affected": [
        {
          "cpes": [
            "cpe:2.3:a:deepseek-ai:deepseek-harness:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*"
          ],
          "modules": [
            "dsh"
          ],
          "product": "deepseek-harness",
          "vendor": "deepseek-ai",
          "versions": [
            {
              "status": "affected",
              "version": "0.1.5-rc.0"
            },
            {
              "status": "affected",
              "version": "0.1.5-rc.1"
            },
            {
              "status": "affected",
              "version": "0.1.5-rc.2"
            },
            {
              "status": "affected",
              "version": "0.1.5-rc.3"
            }
          ]
        }
      ],
      "credits": [
        {
          "lang": "en",
          "type": "reporter",
          "value": "Piggy  Sprint (VulDB User)"
        },
        {
          "lang": "en",
          "type": "coordinator",
          "value": "VulDB CNA Team"
        }
      ],
      "descriptions": [
        {
          "lang": "en",
          "value": "A vulnerability was identified in deepseek-ai deepseek-harness up to 0.1.5-rc.3. Impacted is an unknown function of the file packages/e2b/e2b/src/index.ts of the component dsh. The manipulation of the argument E2B_API_KEY leads to reliance on untrusted inputs in a security decision. Local access is required to approach this attack. The exploit is publicly available and might be used. The vendor was contacted early about this disclosure but did not respond in any way."
        }
      ],
      "metrics": [
        {
          "cvssV4_0": {
            "baseScore": 4.8,
            "baseSeverity": "MEDIUM",
            "vectorString": "CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:L/VI:N/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:P",
            "version": "4.0"
          }
        },
        {
          "cvssV3_1": {
            "baseScore": 3.3,
            "baseSeverity": "LOW",
            "vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N/E:P/RL:X/RC:C",
            "version": "3.1"
          }
        },
        {
          "cvssV3_0": {
            "baseScore": 3.3,
            "baseSeverity": "LOW",
            "vectorString": "CVSS:3.0/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N/E:P/RL:X/RC:C",
            "version": "3.0"
          }
        },
        {
          "cvssV2_0": {
            "baseScore": 1.7,
            "vectorString": "AV:L/AC:L/Au:S/C:P/I:N/A:N/E:POC/RL:ND/RC:C",
            "version": "2.0"
          }
        }
      ],
      "problemTypes": [
        {
          "descriptions": [
            {
              "cweId": "CWE-807",
              "description": "Reliance on Untrusted Inputs in a Security Decision",
              "lang": "en",
              "type": "CWE"
            }
          ]
        },
        {
          "descriptions": [
            {
              "cweId": "CWE-20",
              "description": "Improper Input Validation",
              "lang": "en",
              "type": "CWE"
            }
          ]
        }
      ],
      "providerMetadata": {
        "dateUpdated": "2026-09-28T18:30:14.509Z",
        "orgId": "1af790b2-7ee1-4545-860a-a788eba489b5",
        "shortName": "VulDB"
      },
      "references": [
        {
          "name": "VDB-410988 | deepseek-ai deepseek-harness dsh index.ts reliance on untrusted inputs in a security decision",
          "tags": [
            "vdb-entry",
            "technical-description"
          ],
          "url": "https://vuldb.com/vuln/410988"
        },
        {
          "name": "VDB-410988 | CTI Indicators (IOB, IOC, IOA)",
          "tags": [
            "signature",
            "permissions-required"
          ],
          "url": "https://vuldb.com/vuln/410988/cti"
        },
        {
          "name": "CVE-2026-101131 | CVE Analysis and Report",
          "tags": [
            "third-party-advisory"
          ],
          "url": "https://vuldb.com/cve/CVE-2026-101131"
        },
        {
          "name": "Submit #938601 | DeepSeek DeepSeek Harness 0.1.0-rc.5 \u8bbe\u8ba1\u9519\u8bef / Design Error",
          "tags": [
            "third-party-advisory"
          ],
          "url": "https://vuldb.com/submit/938601"
        }
      ],
      "timeline": [
        {
          "lang": "en",
          "time": "2026-09-28T00:00:00.000Z",
          "value": "Advisory disclosed"
        },
        {
          "lang": "en",
          "time": "2026-09-28T02:00:00.000Z",
          "value": "VulDB entry created"
        },
        {
          "lang": "en",
          "time": "2026-09-28T09:19:18.000Z",
          "value": "VulDB entry last update"
        }
      ],
      "title": "deepseek-ai deepseek-harness dsh index.ts reliance on untrusted inputs in a security decision",
      "x_generator": [
        "VulDB PVTS v202609"
      ]
    }
  },
  "cveMetadata": {
    "assignerOrgId": "1af790b2-7ee1-4545-860a-a788eba489b5",
    "assignerShortName": "VulDB",
    "cveId": "CVE-2026-101131",
    "datePublished": "2026-09-28T18:30:14.509Z",
    "dateReserved": "2026-09-28T07:14:06.791Z",
    "dateUpdated": "2026-09-28T18:47:04.009Z",
    "state": "PUBLISHED"
  },
  "dataType": "CVE_RECORD",
  "dataVersion": "5.2"
}

CVE-2026-101079 (GCVE-0-2026-101079)

Vulnerability from cvelistv5 – Published: 2026-09-28 15:45 – Updated: 2026-09-28 15:45

Title

agentverus agentverus-scanner context.js isSecurityDefenseSkill reliance on untrusted inputs in a security decision

Summary

A vulnerability was found in agentverus agentverus-scanner up to 0.8.1. Affected by this vulnerability is the function isSecurityDefenseSkill of the file dist/scanner/analyzers/context.js. Performing a manipulation results in reliance on untrusted inputs in a security decision. The attack must be initiated from a local position. The exploit has been made public and could be used. The project was informed of the problem early through an issue report but has not responded yet.

Severity

2.4 (Low)


                        
                          CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:P/VC:N/VI:L/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:P

2.8 (Low)


                        
                          CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:R/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N/E:P/RL:X/RC:C

2.8 (Low)


                        
                          CVSS:3.0/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:R/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N/E:P/RL:X/RC:C

CWE

CWE-807 - Reliance on Untrusted Inputs in a Security Decision
CWE-20 - Improper Input Validation

Assigner

VulDB mitre root Scorecard

References

6 references

URL	Tags
https://vuldb.com/vuln/410950	vdb-entrytechnical-description
https://vuldb.com/vuln/410950/cti	signaturepermissions-required
https://vuldb.com/cve/CVE-2026-101079	third-party-advisory
https://vuldb.com/submit/931274	third-party-advisory
https://github.com/agentverus/agentverus-scanner/…	exploitissue-tracking
https://github.com/agentverus/agentverus-scanner/	product

Impacted products

1 product

Vendor	Product	Version
agentverus	agentverus-scanner	Affected: 0.8.0 Affected: 0.8.1 cpe:2.3:a:agentverus:agentverus-scanner::::::::

Credits

nedlir (VulDB User) VulDB CNA Team

Show details on NVD website

JSON

To clipboard

{
  "containers": {
    "cna": {
      "affected": [
        {
          "cpes": [
            "cpe:2.3:a:agentverus:agentverus-scanner:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*"
          ],
          "product": "agentverus-scanner",
          "vendor": "agentverus",
          "versions": [
            {
              "status": "affected",
              "version": "0.8.0"
            },
            {
              "status": "affected",
              "version": "0.8.1"
            }
          ]
        }
      ],
      "credits": [
        {
          "lang": "en",
          "type": "reporter",
          "value": "nedlir (VulDB User)"
        },
        {
          "lang": "en",
          "type": "coordinator",
          "value": "VulDB CNA Team"
        }
      ],
      "descriptions": [
        {
          "lang": "en",
          "value": "A vulnerability was found in agentverus agentverus-scanner up to 0.8.1. Affected by this vulnerability is the function isSecurityDefenseSkill of the file dist/scanner/analyzers/context.js. Performing a manipulation results in reliance on untrusted inputs in a security decision. The attack must be initiated from a local position. The exploit has been made public and could be used. The project was informed of the problem early through an issue report but has not responded yet."
        }
      ],
      "metrics": [
        {
          "cvssV4_0": {
            "baseScore": 2.4,
            "baseSeverity": "LOW",
            "vectorString": "CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:P/VC:N/VI:L/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:P",
            "version": "4.0"
          }
        },
        {
          "cvssV3_1": {
            "baseScore": 2.8,
            "baseSeverity": "LOW",
            "vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:R/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N/E:P/RL:X/RC:C",
            "version": "3.1"
          }
        },
        {
          "cvssV3_0": {
            "baseScore": 2.8,
            "baseSeverity": "LOW",
            "vectorString": "CVSS:3.0/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:R/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N/E:P/RL:X/RC:C",
            "version": "3.0"
          }
        },
        {
          "cvssV2_0": {
            "baseScore": 1.7,
            "vectorString": "AV:L/AC:L/Au:S/C:N/I:P/A:N/E:POC/RL:ND/RC:C",
            "version": "2.0"
          }
        }
      ],
      "problemTypes": [
        {
          "descriptions": [
            {
              "cweId": "CWE-807",
              "description": "Reliance on Untrusted Inputs in a Security Decision",
              "lang": "en",
              "type": "CWE"
            }
          ]
        },
        {
          "descriptions": [
            {
              "cweId": "CWE-20",
              "description": "Improper Input Validation",
              "lang": "en",
              "type": "CWE"
            }
          ]
        }
      ],
      "providerMetadata": {
        "dateUpdated": "2026-09-28T15:45:10.884Z",
        "orgId": "1af790b2-7ee1-4545-860a-a788eba489b5",
        "shortName": "VulDB"
      },
      "references": [
        {
          "name": "VDB-410950 | agentverus agentverus-scanner context.js isSecurityDefenseSkill reliance on untrusted inputs in a security decision",
          "tags": [
            "vdb-entry",
            "technical-description"
          ],
          "url": "https://vuldb.com/vuln/410950"
        },
        {
          "name": "VDB-410950 | CTI Indicators (IOB, IOC, IOA)",
          "tags": [
            "signature",
            "permissions-required"
          ],
          "url": "https://vuldb.com/vuln/410950/cti"
        },
        {
          "name": "CVE-2026-101079 | CVE Analysis and Report",
          "tags": [
            "third-party-advisory"
          ],
          "url": "https://vuldb.com/cve/CVE-2026-101079"
        },
        {
          "name": "Submit #931274 | AgentVerus agentverus-scanner up to 0.8.1 Improper Input Validation",
          "tags": [
            "third-party-advisory"
          ],
          "url": "https://vuldb.com/submit/931274"
        },
        {
          "tags": [
            "exploit",
            "issue-tracking"
          ],
          "url": "https://github.com/agentverus/agentverus-scanner/issues/28"
        },
        {
          "tags": [
            "product"
          ],
          "url": "https://github.com/agentverus/agentverus-scanner/"
        }
      ],
      "timeline": [
        {
          "lang": "en",
          "time": "2026-09-27T00:00:00.000Z",
          "value": "Advisory disclosed"
        },
        {
          "lang": "en",
          "time": "2026-09-27T02:00:00.000Z",
          "value": "VulDB entry created"
        },
        {
          "lang": "en",
          "time": "2026-09-27T20:10:29.000Z",
          "value": "VulDB entry last update"
        }
      ],
      "title": "agentverus agentverus-scanner context.js isSecurityDefenseSkill reliance on untrusted inputs in a security decision",
      "x_generator": [
        "VulDB PVTS v202609"
      ]
    }
  },
  "cveMetadata": {
    "assignerOrgId": "1af790b2-7ee1-4545-860a-a788eba489b5",
    "assignerShortName": "VulDB",
    "cveId": "CVE-2026-101079",
    "datePublished": "2026-09-28T15:45:10.884Z",
    "dateReserved": "2026-09-27T18:05:22.967Z",
    "dateUpdated": "2026-09-28T15:45:10.884Z",
    "state": "PUBLISHED"
  },
  "dataType": "CVE_RECORD",
  "dataVersion": "5.2"
}

CVE-2026-101041 (GCVE-0-2026-101041)

Vulnerability from cvelistv5 – Published: 2026-09-27 14:47 – Updated: 2026-09-29 15:28

Title

Vulnerability-Lookup - Race Condition in Account Recovery Token Consumption Allows Password Takeover

Summary

The account recovery (password reset) functionality in the vulnerability-lookup web application contains a time-of-check-to-time-of-use (TOCTOU) race condition in the consumption of single-use recovery tokens. The original implementation verified the token nonce against the stored digest and then consumed (cleared) it in separate database operations. Two concurrent HTTP requests presenting the same valid recovery token could both pass the verification check before either transaction committed, allowing both to set their own password on the target account. The last transaction to commit overwrites the first, enabling an attacker who possesses a valid recovery token to replace the legitimate user's password with one of their choosing. A secondary defect in the same endpoint (confirm_account) allowed a valid recovery link to be used to set an empty or trivially short password (e.g., three characters). The view handler performed only a manual equality comparison between the two password fields and never invoked the form's validation logic, bypassing the intended minimum-length and complexity constraints. The affected component is the user account recovery endpoint (/user/confirm_account/<token>) and the associated token verification and consumption logic in the User model (website/models/user.py) and the view layer (website/web/views/user.py).

Severity

6.3 (Medium)


                        
                          CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:H/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:L/VI:N/VA:N/SC:L/SI:N/SA:N

SSVC

Exploitation: none Automatable: no Technical Impact: partial

CISA Coordinator · CISA-ADP (v2.0.3)

Decision recorded 2026-09-29 15:25 UTC

CWE

CWE-362 - Concurrency: Race Condition
CWE-20 - Improper Input Validation

Assigner

CIRCL ENISA root Scorecard

References

2 references

URL	Tags
https://github.com/vulnerability-lookup/vulnerabi…	patch
https://github.com/vulnerability-lookup/vulnerabi…	patch

Impacted products

1 product

Vendor	Product	Version
vulnerability-lookup	vulnerability-lookup	Affected: 0 , ≤ 6.2.0 (semver)

Credits

Alexandre Dulaunoy Cédric Bonhomme Claude Fable 5.1 avrlab233

GCVE extensions

AI-generated Partially reviewed Confidence: medium Model qwen3.8:27b advisory bcp-05-x-01bcp-05-x-02

AI involvement GCVE-BCP-05-X-01

Whole record AI-generated Partially reviewed GNA-1

Draft vulnerability metadata was generated from a git-format patch using an Ollama-hosted language model. Human validation is required before publication.

ai-computer-assisted:llm-generatedai-computer-assisted:classification

Model	Source	Identifier
qwen3.8:27b	ollama	`qwen3.8:27b`

Patch provenance GCVE-BCP-05-X-02

Generator: patch2vuln.py on 2026-09-27 14:43
Model: qwen3.8:27b
Input: patch set (2 sources) ccb7572963e8…
Confidence: medium

Commit	Subject	Patch SHA-256
`5462bab62d76`	Fix recovery token consumption race	`75ed8b215e27…`
`ad6f22882975`	fix: [user] Validate the recovery form and harden the token	`c1cecff5ac5f…`

Fix summary

The non-atomic check-then-consume pattern is replaced with a single conditional UPDATE statement (compare-and-set) that atomically verifies the stored SHA-256 nonce digest, updates the password hash, sets is_confirmed, and clears the token in one database operation. Only the first transaction to commit succeeds; all concurrent attempts match zero rows and are rejected with an error. The view now calls form.validate() before processing the password change, enforcing the form's length and equality validators. The dead consume_account_token() method is removed to eliminate the non-atomic consumption path entirely.

Patch summary

Added reset_password_with_account_token() to the User model performing a single conditional UPDATE (WHERE id = ? AND account_token_digest = sha256(nonce)) that sets pwdhash, is_confirmed=True, and account_token_digest=None atomically. Removed the separate consume_account_token() method. Changed the confirm_account view to call form.validate() instead of only comparing password1 and password2 manually. Introduced a _account_token_digest() static helper to centralize the SHA-256 computation (previously three inline calls). Removed synchronize_session=False from the UPDATE execution options so the ORM session stays consistent. Added regression tests for concurrent token consumption (two threads, barrier-synchronized) and for rejection of passwords that fail form validation (empty, three-character, mismatched).

CVSS rationale

AV:N: the recovery endpoint is reachable over the network. AC:H: exploiting the race condition requires precise timing of two concurrent requests, making the attack condition high complexity. AT:N: no active user interaction or deception is required beyond possessing a valid token. PR:N: no prior authentication is needed; the recovery token itself is the credential. UI:N: no user interaction is required. VC:N: the vulnerability does not directly expose confidential data. VI:H: the integrity of the user's password (a critical credential) is directly compromised. VA:N: no availability impact. SC:N: the impact is confined to the vulnerable component. SI:H: the integrity of the user's account (password, confirmation state) is compromised, affecting the user's ability to access their own account. SA:N: no security-authority impact.

Weakness rationale

CWE-362 The primary defect is a TOCTOU race: the token nonce is verified and then consumed in separate operations, allowing two concurrent transactions to both pass verification before either commits. The fix replaces this with an atomic compare-and-set UPDATE, confirming the race condition as the root cause.
CWE-20 The confirm_account view never called form.validate() on POST, so the form's minimum-length and equality validators were bypassed. A valid recovery link alone permitted setting an empty or three-character password. The fix adds the form.validate() call before processing.

Attack pattern rationale

CAPEC-111 The attacker exploits the window between token verification and token consumption by issuing a concurrent request with the same token. Both requests pass the check; the last to commit overwrites the first's password. This is a textbook race-condition attack on a shared resource (the single-use token). CAPEC-111 is the closest available pattern; no CAPEC specifically covers TOCTOU on database-level token consumption, so this is the best match.

Assumptions to verify

The product version and exact release boundary are not specified in the patch metadata; the affected version range is recorded as unspecified.
The CAPEC-111 mapping is the closest available pattern for a database-level TOCTOU race on a single-use token; no CAPEC specifically describes concurrent compare-and-set exploitation, so this is the best available match.
The CVSS AC:H reflects the race-condition aspect; the missing-validation aspect alone would be AC:L, but the patch set is treated as one vulnerability per the caller's instruction.
The vendor is not explicitly identified in the metadata; the GitHub repository name 'vulnerability-lookup' is used as the product identifier.
No specific authentication or deployment preconditions beyond possession of a valid recovery token are stated in the patch; the token is assumed to be delivered out-of-band (e.g., email).
The Co-Authored-By line for Claude Fable 5.1 is treated as a remediation developer credit per the metadata's remediation_developers list; no finder or reporter is identified in the supplied evidence.

Model comparison

Selected qwen3.8:27b by deterministic-consensus-v1
The selected result is closest to model consensus; this heuristic does not establish factual correctness and human review remains required.

Model	Score	Agreement	Confidence	Assumptions
`qwen3.8:27b`	4	9	medium	6

Show details on NVD website

JSON

To clipboard

{
  "containers": {
    "adp": [
      {
        "metrics": [
          {
            "other": {
              "content": {
                "id": "CVE-2026-101041",
                "options": [
                  {
                    "Exploitation": "none"
                  },
                  {
                    "Automatable": "no"
                  },
                  {
                    "Technical Impact": "partial"
                  }
                ],
                "role": "CISA Coordinator",
                "timestamp": "2026-09-29T15:25:10.617891Z",
                "version": "2.0.3"
              },
              "type": "ssvc"
            }
          }
        ],
        "providerMetadata": {
          "dateUpdated": "2026-09-29T15:28:11.374Z",
          "orgId": "134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0",
          "shortName": "CISA-ADP"
        },
        "title": "CISA ADP Vulnrichment"
      }
    ],
    "cna": {
      "affected": [
        {
          "modules": [
            "website/models/user.py",
            "website/web/views/user.py",
            "website/lib/user_utils.py"
          ],
          "product": "vulnerability-lookup",
          "programFiles": [
            "website/models/user.py",
            "website/web/views/user.py",
            "website/lib/user_utils.py"
          ],
          "repo": "https://github.com/vulnerability-lookup/vulnerability-lookup",
          "vendor": "vulnerability-lookup",
          "versions": [
            {
              "lessThanOrEqual": "6.2.0",
              "status": "affected",
              "version": "0",
              "versionType": "semver"
            }
          ]
        }
      ],
      "credits": [
        {
          "lang": "en",
          "type": "remediation developer",
          "value": "Alexandre Dulaunoy"
        },
        {
          "lang": "en",
          "type": "remediation developer",
          "value": "C\u00e9dric Bonhomme"
        },
        {
          "lang": "en",
          "type": "remediation developer",
          "value": "Claude Fable 5.1"
        },
        {
          "lang": "en",
          "type": "finder",
          "value": "avrlab233"
        }
      ],
      "descriptions": [
        {
          "lang": "en",
          "supportingMedia": [
            {
              "base64": false,
              "type": "text/html",
              "value": "\u003cp\u003eThe account recovery (password reset) functionality in the vulnerability-lookup web application contains a time-of-check-to-time-of-use (TOCTOU) race condition in the consumption of single-use recovery tokens. The original implementation verified the token nonce against the stored digest and then consumed (cleared) it in separate database operations. Two concurrent HTTP requests presenting the same valid recovery token could both pass the verification check before either transaction committed, allowing both to set their own password on the target account. The last transaction to commit overwrites the first, enabling an attacker who possesses a valid recovery token to replace the legitimate user\u0027s password with one of their choosing.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eA secondary defect in the same endpoint (confirm_account) allowed a valid recovery link to be used to set an empty or trivially short password (e.g., three characters). The view handler performed only a manual equality comparison between the two password fields and never invoked the form\u0027s validation logic, bypassing the intended minimum-length and complexity constraints.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe affected component is the user account recovery endpoint (/user/confirm_account/\u0026lt;token\u0026gt;) and the associated token verification and consumption logic in the User model (website/models/user.py) and the view layer (website/web/views/user.py).\u003c/p\u003e"
            }
          ],
          "value": "The account recovery (password reset) functionality in the vulnerability-lookup web application contains a time-of-check-to-time-of-use (TOCTOU) race condition in the consumption of single-use recovery tokens. The original implementation verified the token nonce against the stored digest and then consumed (cleared) it in separate database operations. Two concurrent HTTP requests presenting the same valid recovery token could both pass the verification check before either transaction committed, allowing both to set their own password on the target account. The last transaction to commit overwrites the first, enabling an attacker who possesses a valid recovery token to replace the legitimate user\u0027s password with one of their choosing.\n\nA secondary defect in the same endpoint (confirm_account) allowed a valid recovery link to be used to set an empty or trivially short password (e.g., three characters). The view handler performed only a manual equality comparison between the two password fields and never invoked the form\u0027s validation logic, bypassing the intended minimum-length and complexity constraints.\n\nThe affected component is the user account recovery endpoint (/user/confirm_account/\u003ctoken\u003e) and the associated token verification and consumption logic in the User model (website/models/user.py) and the view layer (website/web/views/user.py)."
        }
      ],
      "impacts": [
        {
          "capecId": "CAPEC-111",
          "descriptions": [
            {
              "lang": "en",
              "value": "CAPEC-111 Race Condition"
            }
          ]
        }
      ],
      "metrics": [
        {
          "cvssV4_0": {
            "Automatable": "NOT_DEFINED",
            "Recovery": "NOT_DEFINED",
            "Safety": "NOT_DEFINED",
            "attackComplexity": "HIGH",
            "attackRequirements": "NONE",
            "attackVector": "NETWORK",
            "baseScore": 6.3,
            "baseSeverity": "MEDIUM",
            "privilegesRequired": "NONE",
            "providerUrgency": "NOT_DEFINED",
            "subAvailabilityImpact": "NONE",
            "subConfidentialityImpact": "LOW",
            "subIntegrityImpact": "NONE",
            "userInteraction": "NONE",
            "valueDensity": "NOT_DEFINED",
            "vectorString": "CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:H/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:L/VI:N/VA:N/SC:L/SI:N/SA:N",
            "version": "4.0",
            "vulnAvailabilityImpact": "NONE",
            "vulnConfidentialityImpact": "LOW",
            "vulnIntegrityImpact": "NONE",
            "vulnerabilityResponseEffort": "NOT_DEFINED"
          },
          "format": "CVSS",
          "scenarios": [
            {
              "lang": "en",
              "value": "GENERAL"
            }
          ]
        }
      ],
      "problemTypes": [
        {
          "descriptions": [
            {
              "cweId": "CWE-362",
              "description": "CWE-362 Concurrency: Race Condition",
              "lang": "en",
              "type": "CWE"
            }
          ]
        },
        {
          "descriptions": [
            {
              "cweId": "CWE-20",
              "description": "CWE-20 Improper Input Validation",
              "lang": "en",
              "type": "CWE"
            }
          ]
        }
      ],
      "providerMetadata": {
        "dateUpdated": "2026-09-27T14:47:57.012Z",
        "orgId": "5a6e4751-2f3f-4070-9419-94fb35b644e8",
        "shortName": "CIRCL"
      },
      "references": [
        {
          "name": "Security patch",
          "tags": [
            "patch"
          ],
          "url": "https://github.com/vulnerability-lookup/vulnerability-lookup/commit/5462bab62d76df852619e01eb67da36c023c8c40"
        },
        {
          "name": "Security patch",
          "tags": [
            "patch"
          ],
          "url": "https://github.com/vulnerability-lookup/vulnerability-lookup/commit/ad6f22882975516adf193a1a920aaa54025c71d4"
        }
      ],
      "solutions": [
        {
          "lang": "en",
          "supportingMedia": [
            {
              "base64": false,
              "type": "text/html",
              "value": "\u003cp\u003eThe non-atomic check-then-consume pattern is replaced with a single conditional UPDATE statement (compare-and-set) that atomically verifies the stored SHA-256 nonce digest, updates the password hash, sets is_confirmed, and clears the token in one database operation. Only the first transaction to commit succeeds; all concurrent attempts match zero rows and are rejected with an error. The view now calls form.validate() before processing the password change, enforcing the form\u0027s length and equality validators. The dead consume_account_token() method is removed to eliminate the non-atomic consumption path entirely.\u003c/p\u003e"
            }
          ],
          "value": "The non-atomic check-then-consume pattern is replaced with a single conditional UPDATE statement (compare-and-set) that atomically verifies the stored SHA-256 nonce digest, updates the password hash, sets is_confirmed, and clears the token in one database operation. Only the first transaction to commit succeeds; all concurrent attempts match zero rows and are rejected with an error. The view now calls form.validate() before processing the password change, enforcing the form\u0027s length and equality validators. The dead consume_account_token() method is removed to eliminate the non-atomic consumption path entirely."
        }
      ],
      "title": "Vulnerability-Lookup - Race Condition in Account Recovery Token Consumption Allows Password Takeover",
      "x_gcve": [
        {
          "extensions": {
            "bcp-05-x-01": {
              "ai_annotations": [
                {
                  "ai_level": "generated",
                  "description": "Draft vulnerability metadata was generated from a git-format patch using an Ollama-hosted language model. Human validation is required before publication.",
                  "gna_source": 1,
                  "models": [
                    {
                      "gna_source": 1,
                      "identifier": "qwen3.8:27b",
                      "name": "qwen3.8:27b",
                      "source": "ollama"
                    }
                  ],
                  "review_status": "partial",
                  "scope": "record",
                  "tags": [
                    "ai-computer-assisted:llm-generated",
                    "ai-computer-assisted:classification"
                  ]
                }
              ]
            },
            "bcp-05-x-02": {
              "x_patch2vuln": {
                "assumptions": [
                  "The product version and exact release boundary are not specified in the patch metadata; the affected version range is recorded as unspecified.",
                  "The CAPEC-111 mapping is the closest available pattern for a database-level TOCTOU race on a single-use token; no CAPEC specifically describes concurrent compare-and-set exploitation, so this is the best available match.",
                  "The CVSS AC:H reflects the race-condition aspect; the missing-validation aspect alone would be AC:L, but the patch set is treated as one vulnerability per the caller\u0027s instruction.",
                  "The vendor is not explicitly identified in the metadata; the GitHub repository name \u0027vulnerability-lookup\u0027 is used as the product identifier.",
                  "No specific authentication or deployment preconditions beyond possession of a valid recovery token are stated in the patch; the token is assumed to be delivered out-of-band (e.g., email).",
                  "The Co-Authored-By line for Claude Fable 5.1 is treated as a remediation developer credit per the metadata\u0027s remediation_developers list; no finder or reporter is identified in the supplied evidence."
                ],
                "capecRationale": [
                  {
                    "capecId": "CAPEC-111",
                    "rationale": "The attacker exploits the window between token verification and token consumption by issuing a concurrent request with the same token. Both requests pass the check; the last to commit overwrites the first\u0027s password. This is a textbook race-condition attack on a shared resource (the single-use token). CAPEC-111 is the closest available pattern; no CAPEC specifically covers TOCTOU on database-level token consumption, so this is the best match."
                  }
                ],
                "commit": "ad6f22882975516adf193a1a920aaa54025c71d4",
                "confidence": "medium",
                "credits": [
                  {
                    "lang": "en",
                    "type": "remediation developer",
                    "value": "Alexandre Dulaunoy"
                  },
                  {
                    "lang": "en",
                    "type": "remediation developer",
                    "value": "C\u00e9dric Bonhomme"
                  },
                  {
                    "lang": "en",
                    "type": "remediation developer",
                    "value": "Claude Fable 5.1"
                  }
                ],
                "cvssRationale": "AV:N: the recovery endpoint is reachable over the network. AC:H: exploiting the race condition requires precise timing of two concurrent requests, making the attack condition high complexity. AT:N: no active user interaction or deception is required beyond possessing a valid token. PR:N: no prior authentication is needed; the recovery token itself is the credential. UI:N: no user interaction is required. VC:N: the vulnerability does not directly expose confidential data. VI:H: the integrity of the user\u0027s password (a critical credential) is directly compromised. VA:N: no availability impact. SC:N: the impact is confined to the vulnerable component. SI:H: the integrity of the user\u0027s account (password, confirmation state) is compromised, affecting the user\u0027s ability to access their own account. SA:N: no security-authority impact.",
                "fixSummary": "The non-atomic check-then-consume pattern is replaced with a single conditional UPDATE statement (compare-and-set) that atomically verifies the stored SHA-256 nonce digest, updates the password hash, sets is_confirmed, and clears the token in one database operation. Only the first transaction to commit succeeds; all concurrent attempts match zero rows and are rejected with an error. The view now calls form.validate() before processing the password change, enforcing the form\u0027s length and equality validators. The dead consume_account_token() method is removed to eliminate the non-atomic consumption path entirely.",
                "generatedAt": "2026-09-27T14:43:09.207406Z",
                "generator": "patch2vuln.py",
                "model": "qwen3.8:27b",
                "modelComparison": {
                  "rankings": [
                    {
                      "agreementScore": 9,
                      "assumptionCount": 6,
                      "confidence": "medium",
                      "model": "qwen3.8:27b",
                      "score": 4
                    }
                  ],
                  "selectedModel": "qwen3.8:27b",
                  "selectionMethod": "deterministic-consensus-v1",
                  "selectionNotice": "The selected result is closest to model consensus; this heuristic does not establish factual correctness and human review remains required."
                },
                "patchSha256": "ccb7572963e8b2435c2ee54cea019a60b1b70a5717cc3848ccd940232eae0b91",
                "patchSummary": "Added reset_password_with_account_token() to the User model performing a single conditional UPDATE (WHERE id = ? AND account_token_digest = sha256(nonce)) that sets pwdhash, is_confirmed=True, and account_token_digest=None atomically. Removed the separate consume_account_token() method. Changed the confirm_account view to call form.validate() instead of only comparing password1 and password2 manually. Introduced a _account_token_digest() static helper to centralize the SHA-256 computation (previously three inline calls). Removed synchronize_session=False from the UPDATE execution options so the ORM session stays consistent. Added regression tests for concurrent token consumption (two threads, barrier-synchronized) and for rejection of passwords that fail form validation (empty, three-character, mismatched).",
                "patchTruncated": false,
                "patches": [
                  {
                    "commit": "5462bab62d76df852619e01eb67da36c023c8c40",
                    "patchSha256": "75ed8b215e2769b5d20b161ddfbde9e0b2975f836397979a94387340b0501ec1",
                    "source": "https://github.com/vulnerability-lookup/vulnerability-lookup/commit/5462bab62d76df852619e01eb67da36c023c8c40.patch",
                    "sourceUrl": "https://github.com/vulnerability-lookup/vulnerability-lookup/commit/5462bab62d76df852619e01eb67da36c023c8c40.patch",
                    "subject": "Fix recovery token consumption race"
                  },
                  {
                    "commit": "ad6f22882975516adf193a1a920aaa54025c71d4",
                    "patchSha256": "c1cecff5ac5f7804ff42f0583b156cefa2add775cb6f80506c917f84a26bf43d",
                    "source": "https://github.com/vulnerability-lookup/vulnerability-lookup/commit/ad6f22882975516adf193a1a920aaa54025c71d4.patch",
                    "sourceUrl": "https://github.com/vulnerability-lookup/vulnerability-lookup/commit/ad6f22882975516adf193a1a920aaa54025c71d4.patch",
                    "subject": "fix: [user] Validate the recovery form and harden the token"
                  }
                ],
                "source": "patch set (2 sources)",
                "subject": "fix: [user] Validate the recovery form and harden the token",
                "weaknessRationale": [
                  {
                    "cweId": "CWE-362",
                    "rationale": "The primary defect is a TOCTOU race: the token nonce is verified and then consumed in separate operations, allowing two concurrent transactions to both pass verification before either commits. The fix replaces this with an atomic compare-and-set UPDATE, confirming the race condition as the root cause."
                  },
                  {
                    "cweId": "CWE-20",
                    "rationale": "The confirm_account view never called form.validate() on POST, so the form\u0027s minimum-length and equality validators were bypassed. A valid recovery link alone permitted setting an empty or three-character password. The fix adds the form.validate() call before processing."
                  }
                ]
              }
            }
          },
          "recordType": "advisory",
          "vulnId": "gcve-1-2026-20252"
        }
      ]
    }
  },
  "cveMetadata": {
    "assignerOrgId": "5a6e4751-2f3f-4070-9419-94fb35b644e8",
    "assignerShortName": "CIRCL",
    "cveId": "CVE-2026-101041",
    "datePublished": "2026-09-27T14:47:57.012Z",
    "dateReserved": "2026-09-27T14:47:50.804Z",
    "dateUpdated": "2026-09-29T15:28:11.374Z",
    "state": "PUBLISHED"
  },
  "dataType": "CVE_RECORD",
  "dataVersion": "5.2"
}

Mitigation

Architecture and Design

Strategy: Attack Surface Reduction

Consider using language-theoretic security (LangSec) techniques that characterize inputs using a formal language and build "recognizers" for that language. This effectively requires parsing to be a distinct layer that effectively enforces a boundary between raw input and internal data representations, instead of allowing parser code to be scattered throughout the program, where it could be subject to errors or inconsistencies that create weaknesses. [REF-1109] [REF-1110] [REF-1111]

Mitigation MIT-7

Architecture and Design

Strategy: Libraries or Frameworks

Use an input validation framework such as Struts or the OWASP ESAPI Validation API. Note that using a framework does not automatically address all input validation problems; be mindful of weaknesses that could arise from misusing the framework itself (CWE-1173).

Mitigation MIT-6

Architecture and Design Implementation

Strategy: Attack Surface Reduction

Understand all the potential areas where untrusted inputs can enter the product, including but not limited to: parameters or arguments, cookies, anything read from the network, environment variables, reverse DNS lookups, query results, request headers, URL components, e-mail, files, filenames, databases, and any external systems that provide data to the application. Remember that such inputs may be obtained indirectly through API calls.

Mitigation MIT-5

Implementation

Strategy: Input Validation

Assume all input is malicious. Use an "accept known good" input validation strategy, i.e., use a list of acceptable inputs that strictly conform to specifications. Reject any input that does not strictly conform to specifications, or transform it into something that does.
When performing input validation, consider all potentially relevant properties, including length, type of input, the full range of acceptable values, missing or extra inputs, syntax, consistency across related fields, and conformance to business rules. As an example of business rule logic, "boat" may be syntactically valid because it only contains alphanumeric characters, but it is not valid if the input is only expected to contain colors such as "red" or "blue."
Do not rely exclusively on looking for malicious or malformed inputs. This is likely to miss at least one undesirable input, especially if the code's environment changes. This can give attackers enough room to bypass the intended validation. However, denylists can be useful for detecting potential attacks or determining which inputs are so malformed that they should be rejected outright.

Mitigation

Architecture and Design

For any security checks that are performed on the client side, ensure that these checks are duplicated on the server side, in order to avoid CWE-602. Attackers can bypass the client-side checks by modifying values after the checks have been performed, or by changing the client to remove the client-side checks entirely. Then, these modified values would be submitted to the server.
Even though client-side checks provide minimal benefits with respect to server-side security, they are still useful. First, they can support intrusion detection. If the server receives input that should have been rejected by the client, then it may be an indication of an attack. Second, client-side error-checking can provide helpful feedback to the user about the expectations for valid input. Third, there may be a reduction in server-side processing time for accidental input errors, although this is typically a small savings.

Mitigation

Implementation

When your application combines data from multiple sources, perform the validation after the sources have been combined. The individual data elements may pass the validation step but violate the intended restrictions after they have been combined.

Mitigation MIT-35

Implementation

Be especially careful to validate all input when invoking code that crosses language boundaries, such as from an interpreted language to native code. This could create an unexpected interaction between the language boundaries. Ensure that you are not violating any of the expectations of the language with which you are interfacing. For example, even though Java may not be susceptible to buffer overflows, providing a large argument in a call to native code might trigger an overflow.

Mitigation

Implementation

Directly convert your input type into the expected data type, such as using a conversion function that translates a string into a number. After converting to the expected data type, ensure that the input's values fall within the expected range of allowable values and that multi-field consistencies are maintained.

Mitigation

Implementation

Inputs should be decoded and canonicalized to the application's current internal representation before being validated (CWE-180, CWE-181). Make sure that your application does not inadvertently decode the same input twice (CWE-174). Such errors could be used to bypass allowlist schemes by introducing dangerous inputs after they have been checked. Use libraries such as the OWASP ESAPI Canonicalization control.
Consider performing repeated canonicalization until your input does not change any more. This will avoid double-decoding and similar scenarios, but it might inadvertently modify inputs that are allowed to contain properly-encoded dangerous content.

Mitigation

Implementation

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-10: Buffer Overflow via Environment Variables

This attack pattern involves causing a buffer overflow through manipulation of environment variables. Once the adversary finds that they can modify an environment variable, they may try to overflow associated buffers. This attack leverages implicit trust often placed in environment variables.

CAPEC-101: Server Side Include (SSI) Injection

An attacker can use Server Side Include (SSI) Injection to send code to a web application that then gets executed by the web server. Doing so enables the attacker to achieve similar results to Cross Site Scripting, viz., arbitrary code execution and information disclosure, albeit on a more limited scale, since the SSI directives are nowhere near as powerful as a full-fledged scripting language. Nonetheless, the attacker can conveniently gain access to sensitive files, such as password files, and execute shell commands.

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-108: Command Line Execution through SQL Injection

An attacker uses standard SQL injection methods to inject data into the command line for execution. This could be done directly through misuse of directives such as MSSQL_xp_cmdshell or indirectly through injection of data into the database that would be interpreted as shell commands. Sometime later, an unscrupulous backend application (or could be part of the functionality of the same application) fetches the injected data stored in the database and uses this data as command line arguments without performing proper validation. The malicious data escapes that data plane by spawning new commands to be executed on the host.

CAPEC-109: Object Relational Mapping Injection

An attacker leverages a weakness present in the database access layer code generated with an Object Relational Mapping (ORM) tool or a weakness in the way that a developer used a persistence framework to inject their own SQL commands to be executed against the underlying database. The attack here is similar to plain SQL injection, except that the application does not use JDBC to directly talk to the database, but instead it uses a data access layer generated by an ORM tool or framework (e.g. Hibernate). While most of the time code generated by an ORM tool contains safe access methods that are immune to SQL injection, sometimes either due to some weakness in the generated code or due to the fact that the developer failed to use the generated access methods properly, SQL injection is still possible.

CAPEC-110: SQL Injection through SOAP Parameter Tampering

An attacker modifies the parameters of the SOAP message that is sent from the service consumer to the service provider to initiate a SQL injection attack. On the service provider side, the SOAP message is parsed and parameters are not properly validated before being used to access a database in a way that does not use parameter binding, thus enabling the attacker to control the structure of the executed SQL query. This pattern describes a SQL injection attack with the delivery mechanism being a SOAP message.

CAPEC-120: Double Encoding

The adversary utilizes a repeating of the encoding process for a set of characters (that is, character encoding a character encoding of a character) to obfuscate the payload of a particular request. This may allow the adversary to bypass filters that attempt to detect illegal characters or strings, such as those that might be used in traversal or injection attacks. Filters may be able to catch illegal encoded strings, but may not catch doubly encoded strings. For example, a dot (.), often used in path traversal attacks and therefore often blocked by filters, could be URL encoded as %2E. However, many filters recognize this encoding and would still block the request. In a double encoding, the % in the above URL encoding would be encoded again as %25, resulting in %252E which some filters might not catch, but which could still be interpreted as a dot (.) by interpreters on the target.

CAPEC-13: Subverting Environment Variable Values

The adversary directly or indirectly modifies environment variables used by or controlling the target software. The adversary's goal is to cause the target software to deviate from its expected operation in a manner that benefits the adversary.

CAPEC-135: Format String Injection

An adversary includes formatting characters in a string input field on the target application. Most applications assume that users will provide static text and may respond unpredictably to the presence of formatting character. For example, in certain functions of the C programming languages such as printf, the formatting character %s will print the contents of a memory location expecting this location to identify a string and the formatting character %n prints the number of DWORD written in the memory. An adversary can use this to read or write to memory locations or files, or simply to manipulate the value of the resulting text in unexpected ways. Reading or writing memory may result in program crashes and writing memory could result in the execution of arbitrary code if the adversary can write to the program stack.

CAPEC-136: LDAP Injection

An attacker manipulates or crafts an LDAP query for the purpose of undermining the security of the target. Some applications use user input to create LDAP queries that are processed by an LDAP server. For example, a user might provide their username during authentication and the username might be inserted in an LDAP query during the authentication process. An attacker could use this input to inject additional commands into an LDAP query that could disclose sensitive information. For example, entering a * in the aforementioned query might return information about all users on the system. This attack is very similar to an SQL injection attack in that it manipulates a query to gather additional information or coerce a particular return value.

CAPEC-14: Client-side Injection-induced Buffer Overflow

This type of attack exploits a buffer overflow vulnerability in targeted client software through injection of malicious content from a custom-built hostile service. This hostile service is created to deliver the correct content to the client software. For example, if the client-side application is a browser, the service will host a webpage that the browser loads.

CAPEC-153: Input Data Manipulation

An attacker exploits a weakness in input validation by controlling the format, structure, and composition of data to an input-processing interface. By supplying input of a non-standard or unexpected form an attacker can adversely impact the security of the target.

CAPEC-182: Flash Injection

An attacker tricks a victim to execute malicious flash content that executes commands or makes flash calls specified by the attacker. One example of this attack is cross-site flashing, an attacker controlled parameter to a reference call loads from content specified by the attacker.

CAPEC-209: XSS Using MIME Type Mismatch

An adversary creates a file with scripting content but where the specified MIME type of the file is such that scripting is not expected. The adversary tricks the victim into accessing a URL that responds with the script file. Some browsers will detect that the specified MIME type of the file does not match the actual type of its content and will automatically switch to using an interpreter for the real content type. If the browser does not invoke script filters before doing this, the adversary's script may run on the target unsanitized, possibly revealing the victim's cookies or executing arbitrary script in their browser.

CAPEC-22: Exploiting Trust in Client

An attack of this type exploits vulnerabilities in client/server communication channel authentication and data integrity. It leverages the implicit trust a server places in the client, or more importantly, that which the server believes is the client. An attacker executes this type of attack by communicating directly with the server where the server believes it is communicating only with a valid client. There are numerous variations of this type of attack.

CAPEC-23: File Content Injection

An adversary poisons files with a malicious payload (targeting the file systems accessible by the target software), which may be passed through by standard channels such as via email, and standard web content like PDF and multimedia files. The adversary exploits known vulnerabilities or handling routines in the target processes, in order to exploit the host's trust in executing remote content, including binary files.

CAPEC-230: Serialized Data with Nested Payloads

Applications often need to transform data in and out of a data format (e.g., XML and YAML) by using a parser. It may be possible for an adversary to inject data that may have an adverse effect on the parser when it is being processed. Many data format languages allow the definition of macro-like structures that can be used to simplify the creation of complex structures. By nesting these structures, causing the data to be repeatedly substituted, an adversary can cause the parser to consume more resources while processing, causing excessive memory consumption and CPU utilization.

CAPEC-231: Oversized Serialized Data Payloads

An adversary injects oversized serialized data payloads into a parser during data processing to produce adverse effects upon the parser such as exhausting system resources and arbitrary code execution.

CAPEC-24: Filter Failure through Buffer Overflow

In this attack, the idea is to cause an active filter to fail by causing an oversized transaction. An attacker may try to feed overly long input strings to the program in an attempt to overwhelm the filter (by causing a buffer overflow) and hoping that the filter does not fail securely (i.e. the user input is let into the system unfiltered).

CAPEC-250: XML Injection

An attacker utilizes crafted XML user-controllable input to probe, attack, and inject data into the XML database, using techniques similar to SQL injection. The user-controllable input can allow for unauthorized viewing of data, bypassing authentication or the front-end application for direct XML database access, and possibly altering database information.

CAPEC-261: Fuzzing for garnering other adjacent user/sensitive data

An adversary who is authorized to send queries to a target sends variants of expected queries in the hope that these modified queries might return information (directly or indirectly through error logs) beyond what the expected set of queries should provide.

CAPEC-267: Leverage Alternate Encoding

An adversary leverages the possibility to encode potentially harmful input or content used by applications such that the applications are ineffective at validating this encoding standard.

CAPEC-28: Fuzzing

In this attack pattern, the adversary leverages fuzzing to try to identify weaknesses in the system. Fuzzing is a software security and functionality testing method that feeds randomly constructed input to the system and looks for an indication that a failure in response to that input has occurred. Fuzzing treats the system as a black box and is totally free from any preconceptions or assumptions about the system. Fuzzing can help an attacker discover certain assumptions made about user input in the system. Fuzzing gives an attacker a quick way of potentially uncovering some of these assumptions despite not necessarily knowing anything about the internals of the system. These assumptions can then be turned against the system by specially crafting user input that may allow an attacker to achieve their goals.

CAPEC-3: Using Leading 'Ghost' Character Sequences to Bypass Input Filters

Some APIs will strip certain leading characters from a string of parameters. An adversary can intentionally introduce leading "ghost" characters (extra characters that don't affect the validity of the request at the API layer) that enable the input to pass the filters and therefore process the adversary's input. This occurs when the targeted API will accept input data in several syntactic forms and interpret it in the equivalent semantic way, while the filter does not take into account the full spectrum of the syntactic forms acceptable to the targeted API.

CAPEC-31: Accessing/Intercepting/Modifying HTTP Cookies

This attack relies on the use of HTTP Cookies to store credentials, state information and other critical data on client systems. There are several different forms of this attack. The first form of this attack involves accessing HTTP Cookies to mine for potentially sensitive data contained therein. The second form involves intercepting this data as it is transmitted from client to server. This intercepted information is then used by the adversary to impersonate the remote user/session. The third form is when the cookie's content is modified by the adversary before it is sent back to the server. Here the adversary seeks to convince the target server to operate on this falsified information.

CAPEC-42: MIME Conversion

An attacker exploits a weakness in the MIME conversion routine to cause a buffer overflow and gain control over the mail server machine. The MIME system is designed to allow various different information formats to be interpreted and sent via e-mail. Attack points exist when data are converted to MIME compatible format and back.

CAPEC-43: Exploiting Multiple Input Interpretation Layers

An attacker supplies the target software with input data that contains sequences of special characters designed to bypass input validation logic. This exploit relies on the target making multiples passes over the input data and processing a "layer" of special characters with each pass. In this manner, the attacker can disguise input that would otherwise be rejected as invalid by concealing it with layers of special/escape characters that are stripped off by subsequent processing steps. The goal is to first discover cases where the input validation layer executes before one or more parsing layers. That is, user input may go through the following logic in an application: <parser1> --> <input validator> --> <parser2>. In such cases, the attacker will need to provide input that will pass through the input validator, but after passing through parser2, will be converted into something that the input validator was supposed to stop.

CAPEC-45: Buffer Overflow via Symbolic Links

This type of attack leverages the use of symbolic links to cause buffer overflows. An adversary can try to create or manipulate a symbolic link file such that its contents result in out of bounds data. When the target software processes the symbolic link file, it could potentially overflow internal buffers with insufficient bounds checking.

CAPEC-46: Overflow Variables and Tags

This type of attack leverages the use of tags or variables from a formatted configuration data to cause buffer overflow. The adversary crafts a malicious HTML page or configuration file that includes oversized strings, thus causing an overflow.

CAPEC-47: Buffer Overflow via Parameter Expansion

In this attack, the target software is given input that the adversary knows will be modified and expanded in size during processing. This attack relies on the target software failing to anticipate that the expanded data may exceed some internal limit, thereby creating a buffer overflow.

CAPEC-473: Signature Spoof

An attacker generates a message or datablock that causes the recipient to believe that the message or datablock was generated and cryptographically signed by an authoritative or reputable source, misleading a victim or victim operating system into performing malicious actions.

CAPEC-52: Embedding NULL Bytes

An adversary embeds one or more null bytes in input to the target software. This attack relies on the usage of a null-valued byte as a string terminator in many environments. The goal is for certain components of the target software to stop processing the input when it encounters the null byte(s).

CAPEC-53: Postfix, Null Terminate, and Backslash

If a string is passed through a filter of some kind, then a terminal NULL may not be valid. Using alternate representation of NULL allows an adversary to embed the NULL mid-string while postfixing the proper data so that the filter is avoided. One example is a filter that looks for a trailing slash character. If a string insertion is possible, but the slash must exist, an alternate encoding of NULL in mid-string may be used.

CAPEC-588: DOM-Based XSS

This type of attack is a form of Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) where a malicious script is inserted into the client-side HTML being parsed by a web browser. Content served by a vulnerable web application includes script code used to manipulate the Document Object Model (DOM). This script code either does not properly validate input, or does not perform proper output encoding, thus creating an opportunity for an adversary to inject a malicious script launch a XSS attack. A key distinction between other XSS attacks and DOM-based attacks is that in other XSS attacks, the malicious script runs when the vulnerable web page is initially loaded, while a DOM-based attack executes sometime after the page loads. Another distinction of DOM-based attacks is that in some cases, the malicious script is never sent to the vulnerable web server at all. An attack like this is guaranteed to bypass any server-side filtering attempts to protect users.

CAPEC-63: Cross-Site Scripting (XSS)

An adversary embeds malicious scripts in content that will be served to web browsers. The goal of the attack is for the target software, the client-side browser, to execute the script with the users' privilege level. An attack of this type exploits a programs' vulnerabilities that are brought on by allowing remote hosts to execute code and scripts. Web browsers, for example, have some simple security controls in place, but if a remote attacker is allowed to execute scripts (through injecting them in to user-generated content like bulletin boards) then these controls may be bypassed. Further, these attacks are very difficult for an end user to detect.

CAPEC-64: Using Slashes and URL Encoding Combined to Bypass Validation Logic

This attack targets the encoding of the URL combined with the encoding of the slash characters. An attacker can take advantage of the multiple ways of encoding a URL and abuse the interpretation of the URL. A URL may contain special character that need special syntax handling in order to be interpreted. Special characters are represented using a percentage character followed by two digits representing the octet code of the original character (%HEX-CODE). For instance US-ASCII space character would be represented with %20. This is often referred as escaped ending or percent-encoding. Since the server decodes the URL from the requests, it may restrict the access to some URL paths by validating and filtering out the URL requests it received. An attacker will try to craft an URL with a sequence of special characters which once interpreted by the server will be equivalent to a forbidden URL. It can be difficult to protect against this attack since the URL can contain other format of encoding such as UTF-8 encoding, Unicode-encoding, etc.

CAPEC-664: Server Side Request Forgery

An adversary exploits improper input validation by submitting maliciously crafted input to a target application running on a server, with the goal of forcing the server to make a request either to itself, to web services running in the server’s internal network, or to external third parties. If successful, the adversary’s request will be made with the server’s privilege level, bypassing its authentication controls. This ultimately allows the adversary to access sensitive data, execute commands on the server’s network, and make external requests with the stolen identity of the server. Server Side Request Forgery attacks differ from Cross Site Request Forgery attacks in that they target the server itself, whereas CSRF attacks exploit an insecure user authentication mechanism to perform unauthorized actions on the user's behalf.

CAPEC-67: String Format Overflow in syslog()

This attack targets applications and software that uses the syslog() function insecurely. If an application does not explicitely use a format string parameter in a call to syslog(), user input can be placed in the format string parameter leading to a format string injection attack. Adversaries can then inject malicious format string commands into the function call leading to a buffer overflow. There are many reported software vulnerabilities with the root cause being a misuse of the syslog() function.

CAPEC-7: Blind SQL Injection

Blind SQL Injection results from an insufficient mitigation for SQL Injection. Although suppressing database error messages are considered best practice, the suppression alone is not sufficient to prevent SQL Injection. Blind SQL Injection is a form of SQL Injection that overcomes the lack of error messages. Without the error messages that facilitate SQL Injection, the adversary constructs input strings that probe the target through simple Boolean SQL expressions. The adversary can determine if the syntax and structure of the injection was successful based on whether the query was executed or not. Applied iteratively, the adversary determines how and where the target is vulnerable to SQL Injection.

CAPEC-71: Using Unicode Encoding to Bypass Validation Logic

An attacker may provide a Unicode string to a system component that is not Unicode aware and use that to circumvent the filter or cause the classifying mechanism to fail to properly understanding the request. That may allow the attacker to slip malicious data past the content filter and/or possibly cause the application to route the request incorrectly.

CAPEC-72: URL Encoding

This attack targets the encoding of the URL. An adversary can take advantage of the multiple way of encoding an URL and abuse the interpretation of the URL.

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-78: Using Escaped Slashes in Alternate Encoding

This attack targets the use of the backslash in alternate encoding. An adversary can provide a backslash as a leading character and causes a parser to believe that the next character is special. This is called an escape. By using that trick, the adversary tries to exploit alternate ways to encode the same character which leads to filter problems and opens avenues to attack.

CAPEC-79: Using Slashes in Alternate Encoding

This attack targets the encoding of the Slash characters. An adversary would try to exploit common filtering problems related to the use of the slashes characters to gain access to resources on the target host. Directory-driven systems, such as file systems and databases, typically use the slash character to indicate traversal between directories or other container components. For murky historical reasons, PCs (and, as a result, Microsoft OSs) choose to use a backslash, whereas the UNIX world typically makes use of the forward slash. The schizophrenic result is that many MS-based systems are required to understand both forms of the slash. This gives the adversary many opportunities to discover and abuse a number of common filtering problems. The goal of this pattern is to discover server software that only applies filters to one version, but not the other.

CAPEC-8: Buffer Overflow in an API Call

This attack targets libraries or shared code modules which are vulnerable to buffer overflow attacks. An adversary who has knowledge of known vulnerable libraries or shared code can easily target software that makes use of these libraries. All clients that make use of the code library thus become vulnerable by association. This has a very broad effect on security across a system, usually affecting more than one software process.

CAPEC-80: Using UTF-8 Encoding to Bypass Validation Logic

This attack is a specific variation on leveraging alternate encodings to bypass validation logic. This attack leverages the possibility to encode potentially harmful input in UTF-8 and submit it to applications not expecting or effective at validating this encoding standard making input filtering difficult. UTF-8 (8-bit UCS/Unicode Transformation Format) is a variable-length character encoding for Unicode. Legal UTF-8 characters are one to four bytes long. However, early version of the UTF-8 specification got some entries wrong (in some cases it permitted overlong characters). UTF-8 encoders are supposed to use the "shortest possible" encoding, but naive decoders may accept encodings that are longer than necessary. According to the RFC 3629, a particularly subtle form of this attack can be carried out against a parser which performs security-critical validity checks against the UTF-8 encoded form of its input, but interprets certain illegal octet sequences as characters.

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-83: XPath Injection

An attacker can craft special user-controllable input consisting of XPath expressions to inject the XML database and bypass authentication or glean information that they normally would not be able to. XPath Injection enables an attacker to talk directly to the XML database, thus bypassing the application completely. XPath Injection results from the failure of an application to properly sanitize input used as part of dynamic XPath expressions used to query an XML database.

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.

CAPEC-88: OS Command Injection

In this type of an attack, an adversary injects operating system commands into existing application functions. An application that uses untrusted input to build command strings is vulnerable. An adversary can leverage OS command injection in an application to elevate privileges, execute arbitrary commands and compromise the underlying operating system.

CAPEC-9: Buffer Overflow in Local Command-Line Utilities

This attack targets command-line utilities available in a number of shells. An adversary can leverage a vulnerability found in a command-line utility to escalate privilege to root.

← Back to the CWE list