Common Weakness Enumeration

CWE-693

Discouraged

Protection Mechanism Failure

Abstraction: Pillar · Status: Draft

API response cwe.mitre.org

The product does not use or incorrectly uses a protection mechanism that provides sufficient defense against directed attacks against the product.

978 vulnerabilities reference this CWE, most recent first.

GHSA-JWM6-PR74-MMPQ

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-05-14 21:30 – Updated: 2026-05-15 15:30
VLAI
Details

Inappropriate implementation in Media in Google Chrome on iOS prior to 148.0.7778.168 allowed a remote attacker who had compromised the renderer process to perform an out of bounds memory read via a crafted HTML page. (Chromium security severity: Medium)

Severity
7.5 (High)
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
Show details on source website
To clipboard 

{
  "affected": [],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2026-8585"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-693"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": false,
    "github_reviewed_at": null,
    "nvd_published_at": "2026-05-14T20:17:20Z",
    "severity": "HIGH"
  },
  "details": "Inappropriate implementation in Media in Google Chrome on iOS prior to 148.0.7778.168 allowed a remote attacker who had compromised the renderer process to perform an out of bounds memory read via a crafted HTML page. (Chromium security severity: Medium)",
  "id": "GHSA-jwm6-pr74-mmpq",
  "modified": "2026-05-15T15:30:40Z",
  "published": "2026-05-14T21:30:47Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-8585"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://chromereleases.googleblog.com/2026/05/stable-channel-update-for-desktop_12.html"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://issues.chromium.org/issues/499052720"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": [
    {
      "score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
      "type": "CVSS_V3"
    }
  ]
}

GHSA-JWVM-WX3Q-6RJH

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-05-21 09:32 – Updated: 2026-05-21 09:32
VLAI
Details

Netatalk 3.1.2 through 4.4.2 is compiled without FORTIFY_SOURCE, which disables built-in buffer overflow detection at runtime, potentially allowing a remote attacker to cause a minor denial of service via memory errors that would otherwise be caught and safely terminated by runtime protection.

Severity
3.7 (Low)
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:L
Show details on source website
To clipboard 

{
  "affected": [],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2026-44071"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-693"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": false,
    "github_reviewed_at": null,
    "nvd_published_at": "2026-05-21T09:16:29Z",
    "severity": "LOW"
  },
  "details": "Netatalk 3.1.2 through 4.4.2 is compiled without FORTIFY_SOURCE, which disables built-in buffer overflow detection at runtime, potentially allowing a remote attacker to cause a minor denial of service via memory errors that would otherwise be caught and safely terminated by runtime protection.",
  "id": "GHSA-jwvm-wx3q-6rjh",
  "modified": "2026-05-21T09:32:12Z",
  "published": "2026-05-21T09:32:12Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-44071"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://netatalk.io/security/CVE-2026-44071"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": [
    {
      "score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:L",
      "type": "CVSS_V3"
    }
  ]
}

GHSA-JX5W-PX6R-88W4

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2024-01-23 15:30 – Updated: 2025-05-22 18:31
VLAI
Details

When a parent page loaded a child in an iframe with unsafe-inline, the parent Content Security Policy could have overridden the child Content Security Policy. This vulnerability affects Firefox < 122, Firefox ESR < 115.7, and Thunderbird < 115.7.

Severity
6.5 (Medium)
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:N
Show details on source website
To clipboard 

{
  "affected": [],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2024-0747"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-693"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": false,
    "github_reviewed_at": null,
    "nvd_published_at": "2024-01-23T14:15:38Z",
    "severity": "MODERATE"
  },
  "details": "When a parent page loaded a child in an iframe with `unsafe-inline`, the parent Content Security Policy could have overridden the child Content Security Policy. This vulnerability affects Firefox \u003c 122, Firefox ESR \u003c 115.7, and Thunderbird \u003c 115.7.",
  "id": "GHSA-jx5w-px6r-88w4",
  "modified": "2025-05-22T18:31:11Z",
  "published": "2024-01-23T15:30:58Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-0747"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1764343"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://lists.debian.org/debian-lts-announce/2024/01/msg00015.html"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://lists.debian.org/debian-lts-announce/2024/01/msg00022.html"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://www.mozilla.org/security/advisories/mfsa2024-01"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://www.mozilla.org/security/advisories/mfsa2024-02"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://www.mozilla.org/security/advisories/mfsa2024-04"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": [
    {
      "score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:N",
      "type": "CVSS_V3"
    }
  ]
}

GHSA-M2R6-996J-PVF6

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2024-01-24 00:30 – Updated: 2025-05-22 18:31
VLAI
Details

Insufficient policy enforcement in iOS Security UI in Google Chrome prior to 121.0.6167.85 allowed a remote attacker to leak cross-origin data via a crafted HTML page. (Chromium security severity: Medium)

Severity
7.5 (High)
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N
Show details on source website
To clipboard 

{
  "affected": [],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2024-0804"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-693"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": false,
    "github_reviewed_at": null,
    "nvd_published_at": "2024-01-24T00:15:07Z",
    "severity": "HIGH"
  },
  "details": "Insufficient policy enforcement in iOS Security UI in Google Chrome prior to 121.0.6167.85 allowed a remote attacker to leak cross-origin data via a crafted HTML page. (Chromium security severity: Medium)",
  "id": "GHSA-m2r6-996j-pvf6",
  "modified": "2025-05-22T18:31:12Z",
  "published": "2024-01-24T00:30:32Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-0804"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://chromereleases.googleblog.com/2024/01/stable-channel-update-for-desktop_23.html"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://crbug.com/1515137"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-announce@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/MMI6GXFONZV6HE3BPZO3AP6GUVQLG4JQ"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-announce@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/VXDSGAFQD4BDB4IB2O4ZUSHC3JCVQEKC"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": [
    {
      "score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N",
      "type": "CVSS_V3"
    }
  ]
}

GHSA-M4F8-H2J6-G2C3

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2023-09-13 15:31 – Updated: 2024-04-04 07:39
VLAI
Details

A protection mechanism failure in Fortinet FortiWeb 7.2.0 through 7.2.1, 7.0.0 through 7.0.6, 6.4.0 through 6.4.3, 6.3.6 through 6.3.23 allows attacker to execute unauthorized code or commands via specially crafted HTTP requests.

Severity
7.5 (High)
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
Show details on source website
To clipboard 

{
  "affected": [],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2023-34984"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-693"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": false,
    "github_reviewed_at": null,
    "nvd_published_at": "2023-09-13T13:15:08Z",
    "severity": "HIGH"
  },
  "details": "A protection mechanism failure in Fortinet FortiWeb 7.2.0 through 7.2.1, 7.0.0 through 7.0.6, 6.4.0 through 6.4.3, 6.3.6 through 6.3.23 allows attacker to execute unauthorized code or commands via specially crafted HTTP requests.",
  "id": "GHSA-m4f8-h2j6-g2c3",
  "modified": "2024-04-04T07:39:09Z",
  "published": "2023-09-13T15:31:14Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2023-34984"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://fortiguard.com/psirt/FG-IR-23-068"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": [
    {
      "score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
      "type": "CVSS_V3"
    }
  ]
}

GHSA-M4MG-49C8-XJ46

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-24 17:17 – Updated: 2022-10-27 19:00
VLAI
Details

Multiple Cisco products are affected by a vulnerability in the Snort detection engine that could allow an unauthenticated, remote attacker to bypass the configured file policies on an affected system. The vulnerability is due to errors in how the Snort detection engine handles specific HTTP responses. An attacker could exploit this vulnerability by sending crafted HTTP packets that would flow through an affected system. A successful exploit could allow the attacker to bypass the configured file policies and deliver a malicious payload to the protected network.

Severity
5.3 (Medium)
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N
Show details on source website
To clipboard 

{
  "affected": [],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2020-3315"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-668",
      "CWE-693"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": false,
    "github_reviewed_at": null,
    "nvd_published_at": "2020-05-06T17:15:00Z",
    "severity": "MODERATE"
  },
  "details": "Multiple Cisco products are affected by a vulnerability in the Snort detection engine that could allow an unauthenticated, remote attacker to bypass the configured file policies on an affected system. The vulnerability is due to errors in how the Snort detection engine handles specific HTTP responses. An attacker could exploit this vulnerability by sending crafted HTTP packets that would flow through an affected system. A successful exploit could allow the attacker to bypass the configured file policies and deliver a malicious payload to the protected network.",
  "id": "GHSA-m4mg-49c8-xj46",
  "modified": "2022-10-27T19:00:32Z",
  "published": "2022-05-24T17:17:20Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2020-3315"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://lists.debian.org/debian-lts-announce/2023/02/msg00011.html"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://tools.cisco.com/security/center/content/CiscoSecurityAdvisory/cisco-sa-snort_filepolbypass-m4X5DgOP"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://www.debian.org/security/2023/dsa-5354"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": [
    {
      "score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N",
      "type": "CVSS_V3"
    }
  ]
}

GHSA-M596-WRFH-F3HC

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2025-07-08 18:31 – Updated: 2025-07-08 18:31
VLAI
Details

Protection mechanism failure in Windows BitLocker allows an unauthorized attacker to bypass a security feature with a physical attack.

Severity
6.8 (Medium)
CVSS:3.1/AV:P/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
Show details on source website
To clipboard 

{
  "affected": [],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2025-48003"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-693"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": false,
    "github_reviewed_at": null,
    "nvd_published_at": "2025-07-08T17:15:42Z",
    "severity": "MODERATE"
  },
  "details": "Protection mechanism failure in Windows BitLocker allows an unauthorized attacker to bypass a security feature with a physical attack.",
  "id": "GHSA-m596-wrfh-f3hc",
  "modified": "2025-07-08T18:31:45Z",
  "published": "2025-07-08T18:31:45Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2025-48003"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://msrc.microsoft.com/update-guide/vulnerability/CVE-2025-48003"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": [
    {
      "score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:P/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
      "type": "CVSS_V3"
    }
  ]
}

GHSA-M5Q2-4FM3-VFQP

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-05-29 17:44 – Updated: 2026-06-12 19:30
VLAI
Summary
vm2 has a sandbox escape via unblocked cross-realm Symbol.for keys + missing bridge write-trap symbol checks
Details

Summary

vm2 3.11.2 Symbol.for override in setup-sandbox.js only intercepts 2 of 9 dangerous Node.js cross-realm symbols. Combined with the bridge's set/defineProperty/deleteProperty traps having no isDangerousCrossRealmSymbol key check, sandbox code can obtain real cross-realm symbols, write them to host objects, and control host-side behavior — verified with a full util.promisify hijack chain.

Root Cause

1. Incomplete Symbol.for override (setup-sandbox.js:132-142):

Symbol.for = function (key) {
    const keyStr = '' + key;
    if (keyStr === 'nodejs.util.inspect.custom') return blockedSymbolCustomInspect;
    if (keyStr === 'nodejs.rejection') return blockedSymbolRejection;
    return originalSymbolFor(keyStr); // everything else passes through
};

Only inspect.custom and rejection are blocked. The following 7 Node.js internal symbols pass through as real cross-realm symbols:

  • nodejs.util.promisify.custom
  • nodejs.stream.readable
  • nodejs.stream.writable
  • nodejs.stream.duplex
  • nodejs.stream.transform
  • nodejs.webstream.isClosedPromise
  • nodejs.webstream.controllerErrorFunction

Note: bridge.js isDangerousCrossRealmSymbol covers promisify.custom on reads, but the Symbol.for override in setup-sandbox does not block it at the source.

2. Missing symbol check in bridge write traps (bridge.js):

The get trap (line 1148) and ownKeys trap (line 1541) both check isDangerousCrossRealmSymbol(key), but set (line 1231), defineProperty (line 1427), and deleteProperty (line 1493) have no such check. Sandbox code can write/define/delete properties with dangerous symbol keys on any non-protected host object.

3. Incomplete filters in setup-sandbox.js:

isDangerousSymbol(), Object.getOwnPropertyDescriptors override, and Object.assign override only filter inspect.custom and rejection — missing promisify.custom and all stream/webstream symbols.

Verified Exploitation: util.promisify Hijack

const { VM } = require('vm2');
const util = require('util');

const vm = new VM();
const hostFn = function readFile(path, cb) { cb(null, 'real data'); };
vm.setGlobal('hostFn', hostFn);

// Sandbox writes promisify.custom to host function
vm.run(`
  const kPromisify = Symbol.for('nodejs.util.promisify.custom');
  hostFn[kPromisify] = function(path) {
    return Promise.resolve('HIJACKED by sandbox');
  };
`);

// Host-side: promisified function now returns sandbox-controlled value
const asyncRead = util.promisify(hostFn);
asyncRead('/etc/passwd').then(console.log);
// Output: "HIJACKED by sandbox"

Additional verified attacks:

  • Writing nodejs.stream.writable to a host Readable stream, altering its duck-typing identity
  • Object.assign propagates unblocked symbols from sandbox source to host target
  • Object.defineProperty with unblocked symbol key succeeds on host objects
  • delete hostObj[unblocked_symbol] succeeds, removing host-set symbol properties

Impact

  • Semantic confusion: Sandbox controls host util.promisify behavior, host stream type checks, and WebStream internals for any non-frozen host object exposed to the sandbox.
  • Data integrity: Host code relying on promisified function results gets sandbox-controlled values.
  • Defense bypass: Combined with specific host API patterns, sandbox-provided fake streams could bypass host-side input validation.

This is not a direct RCE — the bridge still wraps sandbox functions crossing the boundary — but it grants the sandbox control over host-side control flow decisions that depend on these symbol-keyed properties.

Affected Versions

  • vm2 <= 3.11.2 (all 3.x versions)

Environment

  • Node.js v24.14.0
  • macOS (Darwin 25.4.0)

Suggested Fix

  1. setup-sandbox.js: Block all nodejs.* prefixed symbols:
Symbol.for = function (key) {
    const keyStr = '' + key;
    if (keyStr.startsWith('nodejs.')) return Symbol(keyStr);
    return originalSymbolFor(keyStr);
};
  1. bridge.js: Add check to write traps:
set(target, key, value, receiver) {
    if (isDangerousCrossRealmSymbol(key)) throw new VMError(OPNA);
    // ...
}
  1. setup-sandbox.js: Sync isDangerousSymbol, Object.getOwnPropertyDescriptors, Object.assign to cover all dangerous symbols.
Severity
8.7 (High)
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:N
Show details on source website
To clipboard 

{
  "affected": [
    {
      "database_specific": {
        "last_known_affected_version_range": "\u003c= 3.11.3"
      },
      "package": {
        "ecosystem": "npm",
        "name": "vm2"
      },
      "ranges": [
        {
          "events": [
            {
              "introduced": "0"
            },
            {
              "fixed": "3.11.4"
            }
          ],
          "type": "ECOSYSTEM"
        }
      ]
    }
  ],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2026-47135"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-693"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": true,
    "github_reviewed_at": "2026-05-29T17:44:32Z",
    "nvd_published_at": "2026-06-12T15:16:28Z",
    "severity": "HIGH"
  },
  "details": "## Summary\n\nvm2 3.11.2 `Symbol.for` override in `setup-sandbox.js` only intercepts 2 of 9 dangerous Node.js cross-realm symbols. Combined with the bridge\u0027s `set`/`defineProperty`/`deleteProperty` traps having **no** `isDangerousCrossRealmSymbol` key check, sandbox code can obtain real cross-realm symbols, write them to host objects, and control host-side behavior \u2014 verified with a full `util.promisify` hijack chain.\n\n## Root Cause\n\n**1. Incomplete `Symbol.for` override** (`setup-sandbox.js:132-142`):\n\n```js\nSymbol.for = function (key) {\n    const keyStr = \u0027\u0027 + key;\n    if (keyStr === \u0027nodejs.util.inspect.custom\u0027) return blockedSymbolCustomInspect;\n    if (keyStr === \u0027nodejs.rejection\u0027) return blockedSymbolRejection;\n    return originalSymbolFor(keyStr); // everything else passes through\n};\n```\n\nOnly `inspect.custom` and `rejection` are blocked. The following 7 Node.js internal symbols pass through as **real cross-realm symbols**:\n\n- `nodejs.util.promisify.custom`\n- `nodejs.stream.readable`\n- `nodejs.stream.writable`\n- `nodejs.stream.duplex`\n- `nodejs.stream.transform`\n- `nodejs.webstream.isClosedPromise`\n- `nodejs.webstream.controllerErrorFunction`\n\nNote: `bridge.js` `isDangerousCrossRealmSymbol` covers `promisify.custom` on **reads**, but the `Symbol.for` override in setup-sandbox does not block it at the source.\n\n**2. Missing symbol check in bridge write traps** (`bridge.js`):\n\nThe `get` trap (line 1148) and `ownKeys` trap (line 1541) both check `isDangerousCrossRealmSymbol(key)`, but `set` (line 1231), `defineProperty` (line 1427), and `deleteProperty` (line 1493) have **no such check**. Sandbox code can write/define/delete properties with dangerous symbol keys on any non-protected host object.\n\n**3. Incomplete filters in setup-sandbox.js**:\n\n`isDangerousSymbol()`, `Object.getOwnPropertyDescriptors` override, and `Object.assign` override only filter `inspect.custom` and `rejection` \u2014 missing `promisify.custom` and all stream/webstream symbols.\n\n## Verified Exploitation: util.promisify Hijack\n\n```js\nconst { VM } = require(\u0027vm2\u0027);\nconst util = require(\u0027util\u0027);\n\nconst vm = new VM();\nconst hostFn = function readFile(path, cb) { cb(null, \u0027real data\u0027); };\nvm.setGlobal(\u0027hostFn\u0027, hostFn);\n\n// Sandbox writes promisify.custom to host function\nvm.run(`\n  const kPromisify = Symbol.for(\u0027nodejs.util.promisify.custom\u0027);\n  hostFn[kPromisify] = function(path) {\n    return Promise.resolve(\u0027HIJACKED by sandbox\u0027);\n  };\n`);\n\n// Host-side: promisified function now returns sandbox-controlled value\nconst asyncRead = util.promisify(hostFn);\nasyncRead(\u0027/etc/passwd\u0027).then(console.log);\n// Output: \"HIJACKED by sandbox\"\n```\n\n**Additional verified attacks:**\n\n- Writing `nodejs.stream.writable` to a host Readable stream, altering its duck-typing identity\n- `Object.assign` propagates unblocked symbols from sandbox source to host target\n- `Object.defineProperty` with unblocked symbol key succeeds on host objects\n- `delete hostObj[unblocked_symbol]` succeeds, removing host-set symbol properties\n\n## Impact\n\n- **Semantic confusion**: Sandbox controls host `util.promisify` behavior, host stream type checks, and WebStream internals for any non-frozen host object exposed to the sandbox.\n- **Data integrity**: Host code relying on promisified function results gets sandbox-controlled values.\n- **Defense bypass**: Combined with specific host API patterns, sandbox-provided fake streams could bypass host-side input validation.\n\nThis is not a direct RCE \u2014 the bridge still wraps sandbox functions crossing the boundary \u2014 but it grants the sandbox control over host-side control flow decisions that depend on these symbol-keyed properties.\n\n## Affected Versions\n\n- vm2 \u003c= 3.11.2 (all 3.x versions)\n\n## Environment\n\n- Node.js v24.14.0\n- macOS (Darwin 25.4.0)\n\n## Suggested Fix\n\n1. **`setup-sandbox.js`**: Block all `nodejs.*` prefixed symbols:\n\n```js\nSymbol.for = function (key) {\n    const keyStr = \u0027\u0027 + key;\n    if (keyStr.startsWith(\u0027nodejs.\u0027)) return Symbol(keyStr);\n    return originalSymbolFor(keyStr);\n};\n```\n\n2. **`bridge.js`**: Add check to write traps:\n\n```js\nset(target, key, value, receiver) {\n    if (isDangerousCrossRealmSymbol(key)) throw new VMError(OPNA);\n    // ...\n}\n```\n\n3. **`setup-sandbox.js`**: Sync `isDangerousSymbol`, `Object.getOwnPropertyDescriptors`, `Object.assign` to cover all dangerous symbols.",
  "id": "GHSA-m5q2-4fm3-vfqp",
  "modified": "2026-06-12T19:30:01Z",
  "published": "2026-05-29T17:44:32Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/patriksimek/vm2/security/advisories/GHSA-m5q2-4fm3-vfqp"
    },
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-47135"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/patriksimek/vm2/commit/928aef51898b5c52a05f05a40c4cfeb52e172878"
    },
    {
      "type": "PACKAGE",
      "url": "https://github.com/patriksimek/vm2"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/patriksimek/vm2/releases/tag/v3.11.4"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": [
    {
      "score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:N",
      "type": "CVSS_V3"
    }
  ],
  "summary": "vm2 has a sandbox escape via unblocked cross-realm Symbol.for keys + missing bridge write-trap symbol checks"
}

GHSA-M5QG-JC75-4JP6

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-04-14 20:02 – Updated: 2026-04-14 20:02
VLAI
Summary
October Rain has a Twig Sandbox Bypass via Collection Methods
Details

A sandbox bypass vulnerability was identified in the optional Twig safe mode feature (CMS_SAFE_MODE). Certain methods on the collect() helper were not properly restricted, allowing authenticated users with template editing permissions to bypass sandbox protections.

Impact

  • Bypass of Twig sandbox restrictions
  • Only affects installations with CMS_SAFE_MODE enabled (disabled by default)
  • Requires authenticated backend access with CMS template editing permissions

Patches

The vulnerability has been patched in v4.1.5 and v3.7.13. All users who have enabled safe mode are encouraged to upgrade to the latest patched version.

Workarounds

If upgrading immediately is not possible: - Disable CMS_SAFE_MODE if untrusted template editing is not required - Restrict CMS template editing permissions to fully trusted administrators only

References

  • Reported by Łukasz Rybak
Severity
4.9 (Medium)
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N
Show details on source website
To clipboard 

{
  "affected": [
    {
      "database_specific": {
        "last_known_affected_version_range": "\u003c= 4.1.4"
      },
      "package": {
        "ecosystem": "Packagist",
        "name": "october/rain"
      },
      "ranges": [
        {
          "events": [
            {
              "introduced": "4.0.0"
            },
            {
              "fixed": "4.1.5"
            }
          ],
          "type": "ECOSYSTEM"
        }
      ]
    },
    {
      "database_specific": {
        "last_known_affected_version_range": "\u003c= 3.7.12"
      },
      "package": {
        "ecosystem": "Packagist",
        "name": "october/rain"
      },
      "ranges": [
        {
          "events": [
            {
              "introduced": "0"
            },
            {
              "fixed": "3.7.13"
            }
          ],
          "type": "ECOSYSTEM"
        }
      ]
    }
  ],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2026-22692"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-284",
      "CWE-693"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": true,
    "github_reviewed_at": "2026-04-14T20:02:05Z",
    "nvd_published_at": "2026-04-14T17:16:28Z",
    "severity": "MODERATE"
  },
  "details": "A sandbox bypass vulnerability was identified in the optional Twig safe mode feature (`CMS_SAFE_MODE`). Certain methods on the `collect()` helper were not properly restricted, allowing authenticated users with template editing permissions to bypass sandbox protections.\n\n### Impact\n- Bypass of Twig sandbox restrictions\n- Only affects installations with `CMS_SAFE_MODE` enabled (disabled by default)\n- Requires authenticated backend access with CMS template editing permissions\n\n### Patches\nThe vulnerability has been patched in v4.1.5 and v3.7.13. All users who have enabled safe mode are encouraged to upgrade to the latest patched version.\n\n### Workarounds\nIf upgrading immediately is not possible:\n- Disable `CMS_SAFE_MODE` if untrusted template editing is not required\n- Restrict CMS template editing permissions to fully trusted administrators only\n\n### References\n- Reported by \u0141ukasz Rybak",
  "id": "GHSA-m5qg-jc75-4jp6",
  "modified": "2026-04-14T20:02:05Z",
  "published": "2026-04-14T20:02:05Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/octobercms/october/security/advisories/GHSA-m5qg-jc75-4jp6"
    },
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-22692"
    },
    {
      "type": "PACKAGE",
      "url": "https://github.com/octobercms/october"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": [
    {
      "score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N",
      "type": "CVSS_V3"
    }
  ],
  "summary": "October Rain has a Twig Sandbox Bypass via Collection Methods"
}

GHSA-M67C-5QCR-Q2MM

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-06-09 00:33 – Updated: 2026-06-09 03:31
VLAI
Details

Insufficient policy enforcement in Network in Google Chrome prior to 149.0.7827.103 allowed a remote attacker who had compromised the utility process to leak cross-origin data via a crafted HTML page. (Chromium security severity: High)

Severity
3.1 (Low)
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N
Show details on source website
To clipboard 

{
  "affected": [],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2026-11684"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-693"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": false,
    "github_reviewed_at": null,
    "nvd_published_at": "2026-06-09T00:16:51Z",
    "severity": "LOW"
  },
  "details": "Insufficient policy enforcement in Network in Google Chrome prior to 149.0.7827.103 allowed a remote attacker who had compromised the utility process to leak cross-origin data via a crafted HTML page. (Chromium security severity: High)",
  "id": "GHSA-m67c-5qcr-q2mm",
  "modified": "2026-06-09T03:31:39Z",
  "published": "2026-06-09T00:33:25Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-11684"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://chromereleases.googleblog.com/2026/06/stable-channel-update-for-desktop_0153744567.html"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://issues.chromium.org/issues/517130229"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": [
    {
      "score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N",
      "type": "CVSS_V3"
    }
  ]
}

No mitigation information available for this CWE.

CAPEC-1: Accessing Functionality Not Properly Constrained by ACLs

In applications, particularly web applications, access to functionality is mitigated by an authorization framework. This framework maps Access Control Lists (ACLs) to elements of the application's functionality; particularly URL's for web apps. In the case that the administrator failed to specify an ACL for a particular element, an attacker may be able to access it with impunity. An attacker with the ability to access functionality not properly constrained by ACLs can obtain sensitive information and possibly compromise the entire application. Such an attacker can access resources that must be available only to users at a higher privilege level, can access management sections of the application, or can run queries for data that they otherwise not supposed to.

CAPEC-107: Cross Site Tracing

Cross Site Tracing (XST) enables an adversary to steal the victim's session cookie and possibly other authentication credentials transmitted in the header of the HTTP request when the victim's browser communicates to a destination system's web server.

CAPEC-127: Directory Indexing

An adversary crafts a request to a target that results in the target listing/indexing the content of a directory as output. One common method of triggering directory contents as output is to construct a request containing a path that terminates in a directory name rather than a file name since many applications are configured to provide a list of the directory's contents when such a request is received. An adversary can use this to explore the directory tree on a target as well as learn the names of files. This can often end up revealing test files, backup files, temporary files, hidden files, configuration files, user accounts, script contents, as well as naming conventions, all of which can be used by an attacker to mount additional attacks.

CAPEC-17: Using Malicious Files

An attack of this type exploits a system's configuration that allows an adversary to either directly access an executable file, for example through shell access; or in a possible worst case allows an adversary to upload a file and then execute it. Web servers, ftp servers, and message oriented middleware systems which have many integration points are particularly vulnerable, because both the programmers and the administrators must be in synch regarding the interfaces and the correct privileges for each interface.

CAPEC-20: Encryption Brute Forcing

An attacker, armed with the cipher text and the encryption algorithm used, performs an exhaustive (brute force) search on the key space to determine the key that decrypts the cipher text to obtain the plaintext.

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-237: Escaping a Sandbox by Calling Code in Another Language

The attacker may submit malicious code of another language to obtain access to privileges that were not intentionally exposed by the sandbox, thus escaping the sandbox. For instance, Java code cannot perform unsafe operations, such as modifying arbitrary memory locations, due to restrictions placed on it by the Byte code Verifier and the JVM. If allowed, Java code can call directly into native C code, which may perform unsafe operations, such as call system calls and modify arbitrary memory locations on their behalf. To provide isolation, Java does not grant untrusted code with unmediated access to native C code. Instead, the sandboxed code is typically allowed to call some subset of the pre-existing native code that is part of standard libraries.

CAPEC-36: Using Unpublished Interfaces or Functionality

An adversary searches for and invokes interfaces or functionality that the target system designers did not intend to be publicly available. If interfaces fail to authenticate requests, the attacker may be able to invoke functionality they are not authorized for.

CAPEC-477: Signature Spoofing by Mixing Signed and Unsigned Content

An attacker exploits the underlying complexity of a data structure that allows for both signed and unsigned content, to cause unsigned data to be processed as though it were signed data.

CAPEC-480: Escaping Virtualization

An adversary gains access to an application, service, or device with the privileges of an authorized or privileged user by escaping the confines of a virtualized environment. The adversary is then able to access resources or execute unauthorized code within the host environment, generally with the privileges of the user running the virtualized process. Successfully executing an attack of this type is often the first step in executing more complex attacks.

CAPEC-51: Poison Web Service Registry

SOA and Web Services often use a registry to perform look up, get schema information, and metadata about services. A poisoned registry can redirect (think phishing for servers) the service requester to a malicious service provider, provide incorrect information in schema or metadata, and delete information about service provider interfaces.

CAPEC-57: Utilizing REST's Trust in the System Resource to Obtain Sensitive Data

This attack utilizes a REST(REpresentational State Transfer)-style applications' trust in the system resources and environment to obtain sensitive data once SSL is terminated.

CAPEC-59: Session Credential Falsification through Prediction

This attack targets predictable session ID in order to gain privileges. The attacker can predict the session ID used during a transaction to perform spoofing and session hijacking.

CAPEC-65: Sniff Application Code

An adversary passively sniffs network communications and captures application code bound for an authorized client. Once obtained, they can use it as-is, or through reverse-engineering glean sensitive information or exploit the trust relationship between the client and server. Such code may belong to a dynamic update to the client, a patch being applied to a client component or any such interaction where the client is authorized to communicate with the server.

CAPEC-668: Key Negotiation of Bluetooth Attack (KNOB)

An adversary can exploit a flaw in Bluetooth key negotiation allowing them to decrypt information sent between two devices communicating via Bluetooth. The adversary uses an Adversary in the Middle setup to modify packets sent between the two devices during the authentication process, specifically the entropy bits. Knowledge of the number of entropy bits will allow the attacker to easily decrypt information passing over the line of communication.

CAPEC-74: Manipulating State

The adversary modifies state information maintained by the target software or causes a state transition in hardware. If successful, the target will use this tainted state and execute in an unintended manner.

State management is an important function within a software application. User state maintained by the application can include usernames, payment information, browsing history as well as application-specific contents such as items in a shopping cart. Manipulating user state can be employed by an adversary to elevate privilege, conduct fraudulent transactions or otherwise modify the flow of the application to derive certain benefits.

If there is a hardware logic error in a finite state machine, the adversary can use this to put the system in an undefined state which could cause a denial of service or exposure of secure data.

CAPEC-87: Forceful Browsing

An attacker employs forceful browsing (direct URL entry) to access portions of a website that are otherwise unreachable. Usually, a front controller or similar design pattern is employed to protect access to portions of a web application. Forceful browsing enables an attacker to access information, perform privileged operations and otherwise reach sections of the web application that have been improperly protected.

← Back to the CWE list