CWE-79
AllowedImproper Neutralization of Input During Web Page Generation ('Cross-site Scripting')
Abstraction: Base · Status: Stable
The product does not neutralize or incorrectly neutralizes user-controllable input before it is placed in output that is used as a web page that is served to other users.
67078 vulnerabilities reference this CWE, most recent first.
GHSA-2WVV-PHHW-QVMC
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2023-05-16 18:30 – Updated: 2023-05-17 02:58Jenkins Pipeline: Job Plugin 1292.v27d8cc3e2602 and earlier does not escape the display name of the build that caused an earlier build to be aborted, when "Do not allow concurrent builds" is set.
This results in a stored cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability exploitable by attackers able to set build display names immediately.
The Jenkins security team is not aware of any plugins that allow the exploitation of this vulnerability, as the build name must be set before the build starts. Pipeline: Job Plugin 1295.v395eb_7400005 escapes the display name of the build that caused an earlier build to be aborted.
{
"affected": [
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Maven",
"name": "org.jenkins-ci.plugins.workflow:workflow-job"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "0"
},
{
"fixed": "1295.v395eb"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
}
],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2023-32977"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-79"
],
"github_reviewed": true,
"github_reviewed_at": "2023-05-17T02:58:11Z",
"nvd_published_at": "2023-05-16T16:15:10Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "Jenkins Pipeline: Job Plugin 1292.v27d8cc3e2602 and earlier does not escape the display name of the build that caused an earlier build to be aborted, when \"Do not allow concurrent builds\" is set.\n\nThis results in a stored cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability exploitable by attackers able to set build display names immediately.\n\nThe Jenkins security team is not aware of any plugins that allow the exploitation of this vulnerability, as the build name must be set before the build starts.\nPipeline: Job Plugin 1295.v395eb_7400005 escapes the display name of the build that caused an earlier build to be aborted.",
"id": "GHSA-2wvv-phhw-qvmc",
"modified": "2023-05-17T02:58:11Z",
"published": "2023-05-16T18:30:16Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2023-32977"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/jenkinsci/workflow-job-plugin/commit/395eb740000509bff789c7f409c90f2a4a738821"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.jenkins.io/security/advisory/2023-05-16/#SECURITY-3042"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
],
"summary": "Jenkins Pipeline: Job Plugin vulnerable to stored Cross-site Scripting"
}
GHSA-2WW5-C4RG-76JH
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2025-04-25 18:31 – Updated: 2025-04-25 18:31A cross-site scripting vulnerability was reported in the FileZ client that could allow execution of code if a crafted url is visited by a local user.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2025-2069"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-79"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2025-04-25T16:15:26Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "A cross-site scripting vulnerability was reported in the FileZ client that could allow execution of code if a crafted url is visited by a local user.",
"id": "GHSA-2ww5-c4rg-76jh",
"modified": "2025-04-25T18:31:11Z",
"published": "2025-04-25T18:31:11Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2025-2069"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.filez.com/securityPolicy/2.html?1744703100"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
},
{
"score": "CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:A/VC:H/VI:N/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:X/CR:X/IR:X/AR:X/MAV:X/MAC:X/MAT:X/MPR:X/MUI:X/MVC:X/MVI:X/MVA:X/MSC:X/MSI:X/MSA:X/S:X/AU:X/R:X/V:X/RE:X/U:X",
"type": "CVSS_V4"
}
]
}
GHSA-2WW6-868G-2C56
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-03-03 18:30 – Updated: 2026-03-30 13:17Summary
The HTML session exporter (src/auto-reply/reply/export-html/template.js) interpolates img.mimeType directly into <img src="data:..."> attributes without validation or escaping. A crafted mimeType value (e.g., x" onerror="alert(1)) can break out of the attribute context and execute arbitrary JavaScript.
Impact
An attacker who can control image entries in session data (via crafted tool results or session manipulation) can achieve XSS when the exported HTML is opened. The precondition is tighter than the main XSS finding (requires image content blocks with a malicious mimeType), but exploitation is straightforward.
Affected components
src/auto-reply/reply/export-html/template.js— line 1032 (tool result images), line 1306 (user message images)
Reproduction
- Craft a session entry with an image content block where
mimeTypeis set toimage/png" onerror="alert(document.domain) - Export the session to HTML
- Open the exported HTML — the injected
onerrorfires
Remediation
- Added
sanitizeImageMimeType()helper that validates mimeType against a whitelist of known image MIME types - Falls back to
application/octet-streamfor unrecognized values, preventing attribute breakout
Fix
https://github.com/openclaw/openclaw/pull/24140
{
"affected": [
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "npm",
"name": "openclaw"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "0"
},
{
"fixed": "2026.2.23"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
}
],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2026-32040"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-79"
],
"github_reviewed": true,
"github_reviewed_at": "2026-03-03T18:30:39Z",
"nvd_published_at": "2026-03-19T22:16:40Z",
"severity": "LOW"
},
"details": "## Summary\n\nThe HTML session exporter (`src/auto-reply/reply/export-html/template.js`) interpolates `img.mimeType` directly into `\u003cimg src=\"data:...\"\u003e` attributes without validation or escaping. A crafted `mimeType` value (e.g., `x\" onerror=\"alert(1)`) can break out of the attribute context and execute arbitrary JavaScript.\n\n## Impact\n\nAn attacker who can control image entries in session data (via crafted tool results or session manipulation) can achieve XSS when the exported HTML is opened. The precondition is tighter than the main XSS finding (requires image content blocks with a malicious mimeType), but exploitation is straightforward.\n\n## Affected components\n\n- `src/auto-reply/reply/export-html/template.js` \u2014 line 1032 (tool result images), line 1306 (user message images)\n\n## Reproduction\n\n1. Craft a session entry with an image content block where `mimeType` is set to `image/png\" onerror=\"alert(document.domain)`\n2. Export the session to HTML\n3. Open the exported HTML \u2014 the injected `onerror` fires\n\n## Remediation\n\n- Added `sanitizeImageMimeType()` helper that validates mimeType against a whitelist of known image MIME types\n- Falls back to `application/octet-stream` for unrecognized values, preventing attribute breakout\n\n## Fix\n\nhttps://github.com/openclaw/openclaw/pull/24140",
"id": "GHSA-2ww6-868g-2c56",
"modified": "2026-03-30T13:17:36Z",
"published": "2026-03-03T18:30:39Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/openclaw/openclaw/security/advisories/GHSA-2ww6-868g-2c56"
},
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-32040"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/openclaw/openclaw/pull/24140"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/openclaw/openclaw/commit/f3adf142c195000cbde31200626a1d8c8b716df9"
},
{
"type": "PACKAGE",
"url": "https://github.com/openclaw/openclaw"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.vulncheck.com/advisories/openclaw-html-injection-via-unvalidated-image-mime-type-in-data-url-interpolation"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:R/S:C/C:L/I:L/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
},
{
"score": "CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:P/VC:N/VI:N/VA:N/SC:L/SI:L/SA:N",
"type": "CVSS_V4"
}
],
"summary": "OpenClaw Vulnerable to HTML injection via unvalidated image MIME type in data-URL interpolation"
}
GHSA-2WW6-C8HM-GQW6
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-02-23 12:31 – Updated: 2026-02-23 12:31Reflected Cross-Site Scripting vulnerability in SOTESHOP, version 8.3.4. THis vulnerability allows an attacker execute JavaScript code in the victim's browser when a malicious URL with the 'id' parameter in '/adsTracker/checkAds' is sent to the victim. The vulnerability can be exploited to steal sensitive user information such as session cookies, or to perform actions on their behalf.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2025-40701"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-79"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2026-02-23T11:16:20Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "Reflected Cross-Site Scripting vulnerability in SOTESHOP, version 8.3.4. THis vulnerability allows an attacker execute JavaScript code in the victim\u0027s browser when a malicious URL with the \u0027id\u0027 parameter in \u0027/adsTracker/checkAds\u0027 is sent to the victim. The vulnerability can be exploited to steal sensitive user information such as session cookies, or to perform actions on their behalf.",
"id": "GHSA-2ww6-c8hm-gqw6",
"modified": "2026-02-23T12:31:29Z",
"published": "2026-02-23T12:31:29Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2025-40701"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.incibe.es/en/incibe-cert/notices/aviso/reflected-cross-site-scripting-xss-sotes-soteshop"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:A/VC:N/VI:N/VA:N/SC:L/SI:L/SA:N/E:X/CR:X/IR:X/AR:X/MAV:X/MAC:X/MAT:X/MPR:X/MUI:X/MVC:X/MVI:X/MVA:X/MSC:X/MSI:X/MSA:X/S:X/AU:X/R:X/V:X/RE:X/U:X",
"type": "CVSS_V4"
}
]
}
GHSA-2WWM-WG24-4PM9
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2025-11-25 09:31 – Updated: 2025-11-25 09:31The Inline frame – Iframe plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Stored Cross-Site Scripting via the 'embedsite' shortcode in all versions up to, and including, 0.1. This is due to insufficient input sanitization and output escaping on user supplied attributes. This makes it possible for authenticated attackers, with contributor-level access and above, to inject arbitrary web scripts in pages that will execute whenever a user accesses an injected page.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2025-12645"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-79"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2025-11-25T08:15:49Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "The Inline frame \u2013 Iframe plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Stored Cross-Site Scripting via the \u0027embedsite\u0027 shortcode in all versions up to, and including, 0.1. This is due to insufficient input sanitization and output escaping on user supplied attributes. This makes it possible for authenticated attackers, with contributor-level access and above, to inject arbitrary web scripts in pages that will execute whenever a user accesses an injected page.",
"id": "GHSA-2wwm-wg24-4pm9",
"modified": "2025-11-25T09:31:24Z",
"published": "2025-11-25T09:31:24Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2025-12645"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://plugins.trac.wordpress.org/browser/inline-frame-iframe/tags/0.1/iframe.php#L76"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.wordfence.com/threat-intel/vulnerabilities/id/ceda1e49-4e65-4038-9207-ef4647838f53?source=cve"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:L/I:L/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-2WWR-9X6F-88GP
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-07-01 18:18 – Updated: 2026-07-01 18:18EasyAdminBundle ships two public Twig components — <twig:ea:Flag countryCode="..."> and <twig:ea:Icon name="..."> — that load SVG files from disk using a path built directly from a public component property, and then render the resulting markup with the Twig |raw filter.
When an application binds either of those properties to data that is influenced by an end user, the lack of validation on the property value leads to two distinct issues:
- Arbitrary
.svgfile disclosure (both components) — the property value is concatenated into a filesystem path without normalizing or constraining it, so..segments are preserved and resolved by PHP. Any file on the server whose absolute path ends in.svg(for example, user-uploaded SVG icons stored elsewhere on the host) can be read and embedded into the rendered page. - Reflected XSS in the admin UI (Flag component only) — when the requested flag file does not exist, the Flag component falls back to a hard-coded SVG string that interpolates the raw
countryCodevalue twice, and the parent template renders that string with|raw. An attacker who controlscountryCodecan therefore inject arbitrary HTML/JavaScript that will execute inside the authenticated admin context that rendered the component.
The first-party usage shipped by EasyAdminBundle itself is not affected: the bundle only passes ISO 3166 alpha-2 codes validated through Symfony\Component\Intl\Countries to the Flag component, and only hard-coded internal:.. names or values previously set in PHP via MenuItem::setIcon() to the Icon component. The vulnerability is reachable only in third-party templates that pass attacker-controlled data into these properties.
Impact
Path traversal is information disclosure bounded by the .svg extension; reflected XSS in Flag runs in the admin context and is therefore more sensitive but requires a vulnerable template wiring and user interaction.
Affected components
EasyCorp\Bundle\EasyAdminBundle\Twig\Component\Flag— public Twig tag<twig:ea:Flag>, propertycountryCode.EasyCorp\Bundle\EasyAdminBundle\Twig\Component\Icon— public Twig tag<twig:ea:Icon>, propertynamewhen the value starts with theinternal:prefix.
Credit
EasyAdmin would like to thank Claude Mythos Preview (via Project Glasswing and The PHP Foundation) for reporting the issue and providing the fix.
{
"affected": [
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Packagist",
"name": "easycorp/easyadmin-bundle"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "4.0.0"
},
{
"fixed": "4.29.10"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
},
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Packagist",
"name": "easycorp/easyadmin-bundle"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "5.0.0"
},
{
"fixed": "5.0.10"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
}
],
"aliases": [],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-22",
"CWE-73",
"CWE-79"
],
"github_reviewed": true,
"github_reviewed_at": "2026-07-01T18:18:46Z",
"nvd_published_at": null,
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "EasyAdminBundle ships two public Twig components \u2014 `\u003ctwig:ea:Flag countryCode=\"...\"\u003e` and `\u003ctwig:ea:Icon name=\"...\"\u003e` \u2014 that load SVG files from disk using a path built directly from a public component property, and then render the resulting markup with the Twig `|raw` filter.\n\nWhen an application binds either of those properties to data that is influenced by an end user, the lack of validation on the property value leads to two distinct issues:\n\n- Arbitrary `.svg` file disclosure (both components) \u2014 the property value is concatenated into a filesystem path without normalizing or constraining it, so `..` segments are preserved and resolved by PHP. Any file on the server whose absolute path ends in `.svg` (for example, user-uploaded SVG icons stored elsewhere on the host) can be read and embedded into the rendered page.\n- Reflected XSS in the admin UI (Flag component only) \u2014 when the requested flag file does not exist, the Flag component falls back to a hard-coded SVG string that interpolates the raw `countryCode` value twice, and the parent template renders that string with `|raw`. An attacker who controls `countryCode` can therefore inject arbitrary HTML/JavaScript that will execute inside the authenticated admin context that rendered the component.\n\nThe first-party usage shipped by EasyAdminBundle itself is not affected: the bundle only passes ISO 3166 alpha-2 codes validated through `Symfony\\Component\\Intl\\Countries` to the `Flag` component, and only hard-coded `internal:..` names or values previously set in PHP via `MenuItem::setIcon()` to the `Icon` component. The vulnerability is reachable only in third-party templates that pass attacker-controlled data into these properties.\n\n### Impact\n\nPath traversal is information disclosure bounded by the `.svg` extension; reflected XSS in Flag runs in the admin context and is therefore more sensitive but requires a vulnerable template wiring and user interaction.\n\n### Affected components\n\n- `EasyCorp\\Bundle\\EasyAdminBundle\\Twig\\Component\\Flag` \u2014 public Twig tag `\u003ctwig:ea:Flag\u003e`, property `countryCode`.\n- `EasyCorp\\Bundle\\EasyAdminBundle\\Twig\\Component\\Icon` \u2014 public Twig tag `\u003ctwig:ea:Icon\u003e`, property `name` when the value starts with the `internal:` prefix.\n\n### Credit\n\nEasyAdmin would like to thank Claude Mythos Preview (via Project Glasswing and The PHP Foundation) for reporting the issue and providing the fix.",
"id": "GHSA-2wwr-9x6f-88gp",
"modified": "2026-07-01T18:18:46Z",
"published": "2026-07-01T18:18:46Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/EasyCorp/EasyAdminBundle/security/advisories/GHSA-2wwr-9x6f-88gp"
},
{
"type": "PACKAGE",
"url": "https://github.com/EasyCorp/EasyAdminBundle"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
],
"summary": "EasyAdminBundle has path traversal and reflected XSS in Flag and Icon Twig components"
}
GHSA-2WX3-JM7X-4XG5
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2024-07-04 09:32 – Updated: 2024-07-04 09:32The One Click Order Re-Order plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to unauthorized modification of data due to a missing capability check on the 'ced_ocor_save_general_setting' function in all versions up to, and including, 1.1.9. This makes it possible for authenticated attackers, with Subscriber-level access and above, to change the plugin settings, including adding stored cross-site scripting.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2024-5641"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-79",
"CWE-862"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2024-07-04T08:15:01Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "The One Click Order Re-Order plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to unauthorized modification of data due to a missing capability check on the \u0027ced_ocor_save_general_setting\u0027 function in all versions up to, and including, 1.1.9. This makes it possible for authenticated attackers, with Subscriber-level access and above, to change the plugin settings, including adding stored cross-site scripting.",
"id": "GHSA-2wx3-jm7x-4xg5",
"modified": "2024-07-04T09:32:49Z",
"published": "2024-07-04T09:32:49Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-5641"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://plugins.trac.wordpress.org/browser/one-click-order-reorder/trunk/includes/class-basket-order.php#L489"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://plugins.trac.wordpress.org/changeset/3110914"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.wordfence.com/threat-intel/vulnerabilities/id/8a297784-96cd-4135-a8f1-e50f3a0d71bd?source=cve"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:L/I:L/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-2WX4-C69C-72WC
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-13 01:54 – Updated: 2022-05-13 01:54IBM Cognos Analytics 11.0 is vulnerable to cross-site scripting. This vulnerability allows users to embed arbitrary JavaScript code in the Web UI thus altering the intended functionality potentially leading to credentials disclosure within a trusted session. IBM Reference #: 1998887.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2016-3031"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-79"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2017-04-05T18:59:00Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "IBM Cognos Analytics 11.0 is vulnerable to cross-site scripting. This vulnerability allows users to embed arbitrary JavaScript code in the Web UI thus altering the intended functionality potentially leading to credentials disclosure within a trusted session. IBM Reference #: 1998887.",
"id": "GHSA-2wx4-c69c-72wc",
"modified": "2022-05-13T01:54:02Z",
"published": "2022-05-13T01:54:02Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2016-3031"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://www.ibm.com/support/docview.wss?uid=swg21998887"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/97280"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:R/S:C/C:L/I:L/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-2WX5-XX7R-5PP4
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2023-04-25 15:30 – Updated: 2024-04-04 03:40A stored cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability in ChurchCRM 4.5.3, allows remote attackers to inject arbitrary web script or HTML via input fields. These input fields are located in the "Title" Input Field in EventEditor.php.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2023-25347"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-79"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2023-04-25T13:15:09Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "A stored cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability in ChurchCRM 4.5.3, allows remote attackers to inject arbitrary web script or HTML via input fields. These input fields are located in the \"Title\" Input Field in EventEditor.php.",
"id": "GHSA-2wx5-xx7r-5pp4",
"modified": "2024-04-04T03:40:26Z",
"published": "2023-04-25T15:30:28Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2023-25347"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/10splayaSec/CVE-Disclosures/tree/main/ChurchCRM/CVE-2023-25347"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/ChurchCRM/CRM"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:R/S:C/C:L/I:L/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-2X26-R374-V69M
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2025-10-27 03:30 – Updated: 2026-01-20 15:31Improper Neutralization of Input During Web Page Generation ('Cross-site Scripting') vulnerability in Justin Tadlock Query Posts query-posts allows Stored XSS.This issue affects Query Posts: from n/a through <= 0.3.2.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2025-62905"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-79"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2025-10-27T02:15:49Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "Improper Neutralization of Input During Web Page Generation (\u0027Cross-site Scripting\u0027) vulnerability in Justin Tadlock Query Posts query-posts allows Stored XSS.This issue affects Query Posts: from n/a through \u003c= 0.3.2.",
"id": "GHSA-2x26-r374-v69m",
"modified": "2026-01-20T15:31:35Z",
"published": "2025-10-27T03:30:37Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2025-62905"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://patchstack.com/database/Wordpress/Plugin/query-posts/vulnerability/wordpress-query-posts-plugin-0-3-2-cross-site-scripting-xss-vulnerability?_s_id=cve"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://vdp.patchstack.com/database/Wordpress/Plugin/query-posts/vulnerability/wordpress-query-posts-plugin-0-3-2-cross-site-scripting-xss-vulnerability"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://vdp.patchstack.com/database/Wordpress/Plugin/query-posts/vulnerability/wordpress-query-posts-plugin-0-3-2-cross-site-scripting-xss-vulnerability?_s_id=cve"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:R/S:C/C:L/I:L/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
Mitigation MIT-4
Strategy: Libraries or Frameworks
- Use a vetted library or framework that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid [REF-1482].
- Examples of libraries and frameworks that make it easier to generate properly encoded output include Microsoft's Anti-XSS library, the OWASP ESAPI Encoding module, and Apache Wicket.
Mitigation
- Understand the context in which your data will be used and the encoding that will be expected. This is especially important when transmitting data between different components, or when generating outputs that can contain multiple encodings at the same time, such as web pages or multi-part mail messages. Study all expected communication protocols and data representations to determine the required encoding strategies.
- For any data that will be output to another web page, especially any data that was received from external inputs, use the appropriate encoding on all non-alphanumeric characters.
- Parts of the same output document may require different encodings, which will vary depending on whether the output is in the:
- etc. Note that HTML Entity Encoding is only appropriate for the HTML body.
- Consult the XSS Prevention Cheat Sheet [REF-724] for more details on the types of encoding and escaping that are needed.
- HTML body
- Element attributes (such as src="XYZ")
- URIs
- JavaScript sections
- Cascading Style Sheets and style property
Mitigation MIT-6
Strategy: Attack Surface Reduction
Understand all the potential areas where untrusted inputs can enter your software: 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-15
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.
Mitigation MIT-27
Strategy: Parameterization
If available, use structured mechanisms that automatically enforce the separation between data and code. These mechanisms may be able to provide the relevant quoting, encoding, and validation automatically, instead of relying on the developer to provide this capability at every point where output is generated.
Mitigation MIT-30.1
Strategy: Output Encoding
- Use and specify an output encoding that can be handled by the downstream component that is reading the output. Common encodings include ISO-8859-1, UTF-7, and UTF-8. When an encoding is not specified, a downstream component may choose a different encoding, either by assuming a default encoding or automatically inferring which encoding is being used, which can be erroneous. When the encodings are inconsistent, the downstream component might treat some character or byte sequences as special, even if they are not special in the original encoding. Attackers might then be able to exploit this discrepancy and conduct injection attacks; they even might be able to bypass protection mechanisms that assume the original encoding is also being used by the downstream component.
- The problem of inconsistent output encodings often arises in web pages. If an encoding is not specified in an HTTP header, web browsers often guess about which encoding is being used. This can open up the browser to subtle XSS attacks.
Mitigation MIT-43
With Struts, write all data from form beans with the bean's filter attribute set to true.
Mitigation MIT-31
Strategy: Attack Surface Reduction
To help mitigate XSS attacks against the user's session cookie, set the session cookie to be HttpOnly. In browsers that support the HttpOnly feature (such as more recent versions of Internet Explorer and Firefox), this attribute can prevent the user's session cookie from being accessible to malicious client-side scripts that use document.cookie. This is not a complete solution, since HttpOnly is not supported by all browsers. More importantly, XmlHttpRequest and other powerful browser technologies provide read access to HTTP headers, including the Set-Cookie header in which the HttpOnly flag is set.
Mitigation MIT-5
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.
- When dynamically constructing web pages, use stringent allowlists that limit the character set based on the expected value of the parameter in the request. All input should be validated and cleansed, not just parameters that the user is supposed to specify, but all data in the request, including hidden fields, cookies, headers, the URL itself, and so forth. A common mistake that leads to continuing XSS vulnerabilities is to validate only fields that are expected to be redisplayed by the site. It is common to see data from the request that is reflected by the application server or the application that the development team did not anticipate. Also, a field that is not currently reflected may be used by a future developer. Therefore, validating ALL parts of the HTTP request is recommended.
- Note that proper output encoding, escaping, and quoting is the most effective solution for preventing XSS, although input validation may provide some defense-in-depth. This is because it effectively limits what will appear in output. Input validation will not always prevent XSS, especially if you are required to support free-form text fields that could contain arbitrary characters. For example, in a chat application, the heart emoticon ("<3") would likely pass the validation step, since it is commonly used. However, it cannot be directly inserted into the web page because it contains the "<" character, which would need to be escaped or otherwise handled. In this case, stripping the "<" might reduce the risk of XSS, but it would produce incorrect behavior because the emoticon would not be recorded. This might seem to be a minor inconvenience, but it would be more important in a mathematical forum that wants to represent inequalities.
- Even if you make a mistake in your validation (such as forgetting one out of 100 input fields), appropriate encoding is still likely to protect you from injection-based attacks. As long as it is not done in isolation, input validation is still a useful technique, since it may significantly reduce your attack surface, allow you to detect some attacks, and provide other security benefits that proper encoding does not address.
- Ensure that you perform input validation at well-defined interfaces within the application. This will help protect the application even if a component is reused or moved elsewhere.
Mitigation MIT-21
Strategy: Enforcement by Conversion
When the set of acceptable objects, such as filenames or URLs, is limited or known, create a mapping from a set of fixed input values (such as numeric IDs) to the actual filenames or URLs, and reject all other inputs.
Mitigation MIT-29
Strategy: Firewall
Use an application firewall that can detect attacks against this weakness. It can be beneficial in cases in which the code cannot be fixed (because it is controlled by a third party), as an emergency prevention measure while more comprehensive software assurance measures are applied, or to provide defense in depth [REF-1481].
Mitigation MIT-16
Strategy: Environment Hardening
When using PHP, configure the application so that it does not use register_globals. During implementation, develop the application so that it does not rely on this feature, but be wary of implementing a register_globals emulation that is subject to weaknesses such as CWE-95, CWE-621, and similar issues.
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-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-591: Reflected XSS
This type of attack is a form of Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) where a malicious script is "reflected" off a vulnerable web application and then executed by a victim's browser. The process starts with an adversary delivering a malicious script to a victim and convincing the victim to send the script to the vulnerable web application.
CAPEC-592: Stored XSS
An adversary utilizes a form of Cross-site Scripting (XSS) where a malicious script is persistently "stored" within the data storage of a vulnerable web application as valid input.
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-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.