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.
69944 vulnerabilities reference this CWE, most recent first.
GHSA-FF62-83W3-VF65
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-01 17:50 – Updated: 2022-05-01 17:50Cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability in call_entry.php in Call Center Software 0,93 allows remote attackers to inject arbitrary web script or HTML via the problem_desc parameter, as demonstrated by the ONLOAD attribute of a BODY element.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2007-1161"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-79"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2007-03-02T21:18:00Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "Cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability in call_entry.php in Call Center Software 0,93 allows remote attackers to inject arbitrary web script or HTML via the problem_desc parameter, as demonstrated by the ONLOAD attribute of a BODY element.",
"id": "GHSA-ff62-83w3-vf65",
"modified": "2022-05-01T17:50:51Z",
"published": "2022-05-01T17:50:51Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2007-1161"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://osvdb.org/33037"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://securityreason.com/securityalert/2333"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://www.attrition.org/pipermail/vim/2007-February/001378.html"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://www.securityfocus.com/archive/1/460797/100/0/threaded"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": []
}
GHSA-FF66-236V-P4FG
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-04-01 00:05 – Updated: 2026-04-06 16:40Summary
A vulnerability allows crafted block attribute values to bypass server-side attribute escaping when an HTML entity is mixed with raw special characters. An attacker can embed a malicious IAL value inside a .sy document, package it as a .sy.zip, and have the victim import it through the normal Import -> SiYuan .sy.zip workflow. Once the note is opened, the malicious attribute breaks out of its original HTML context and injects an event handler, resulting in stored XSS. In the Electron desktop client, this XSS reaches remote code execution because injected JavaScript runs with access to Node/Electron APIs.
Details
The issue is caused by a logic regression in escapeNodeAttributeValues in kernel/filesys/tree.go.
Previously, the escaping logic converted node.KramdownIAL with parse.IAL2Map(...) before deciding whether a value needed escaping. That conversion unescaped existing entities first, so mixed values such as:
&" onmouseenter="alert('IAL-XSS')
were still recognized as unsafe and escaped correctly.
The logic changed to inspect raw KramdownIAL values directly. The new needsEscapeForValue implementation returns false as soon as it sees any known entity such as &, ", <, or >. This means a value containing both an entity and an unescaped raw quote bypasses escaping entirely.
That bypass becomes exploitable because the renderer later inserts block IAL values directly into HTML attributes. A payload like:
&" onmouseenter="require('child_process').exec('calc')
can be rendered into HTML equivalent to:
<div title="&" onmouseenter="require('child_process').exec('calc')">
This creates a stored XSS condition. In SiYuan Desktop, the Electron renderer runs with Node.js integration available, so attacker-controlled JavaScript can invoke Node APIs directly. As a result, the issue is not limited to script execution in the page context and becomes arbitrary command execution on the victim’s machine.
The stored XSS path was validated by importing a crafted .sy.zip through the normal GUI and triggering JavaScript execution from the rendered block. Because the same injected JavaScript runs in the privileged Electron renderer, this is an RCE issue in the desktop client.
PoC
- Start SiYuan Desktop
v3.6.1. - Prepare a crafted
.sy.zipcontaining a .sy document with a block IAL property such as:
"title": "&\" onmouseenter=\"require('child_process').exec('calc')"
- In the UI, right-click any notebook.
- Select
Import -> SiYuan .sy.zip. - Import the crafted archive.
- Open the imported note.
- Move the mouse over the affected paragraph block.
- Observe that the injected JavaScript executes.
- On Windows,
calc.exelaunches, demonstrating arbitrary command execution.
Impact
This vulnerability allows an attacker to deliver a malicious .sy.zip file that executes attacker-controlled JavaScript after import. In the desktop application, that JavaScript runs with Node/Electron privileges and can execute arbitrary operating system commands under the victim’s account. This makes the bug equivalent to local code execution triggered by importing and opening attacker-supplied content.
{
"affected": [
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Go",
"name": "github.com/siyuan-note/siyuan/kernel"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "0"
},
{
"fixed": "0.0.0-20260329142331-918d1bd9f967"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
}
],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2026-34585"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-79",
"CWE-94"
],
"github_reviewed": true,
"github_reviewed_at": "2026-04-01T00:05:11Z",
"nvd_published_at": "2026-03-31T22:16:22Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "### Summary\nA vulnerability allows crafted block attribute values to bypass server-side attribute escaping when an HTML entity is mixed with raw special characters. An attacker can embed a malicious IAL value inside a `.sy` document, package it as a `.sy.zip`, and have the victim import it through the normal `Import -\u003e SiYuan .sy.zip` workflow. Once the note is opened, the malicious attribute breaks out of its original HTML context and injects an event handler, resulting in stored XSS. In the Electron desktop client, this XSS reaches remote code execution because injected JavaScript runs with access to Node/Electron APIs.\n\n### Details\nThe issue is caused by a logic regression in `escapeNodeAttributeValues` in `kernel/filesys/tree.go`.\nPreviously, the escaping logic converted `node.KramdownIAL` with `parse.IAL2Map(...)` before deciding whether a value needed escaping. That conversion unescaped existing entities first, so mixed values such as:\n```\n\u0026amp;\" onmouseenter=\"alert(\u0027IAL-XSS\u0027)\n```\nwere still recognized as unsafe and escaped correctly.\nThe logic changed to inspect raw `KramdownIAL` values directly. The new `needsEscapeForValue` implementation returns `false` as soon as it sees any known entity such as `\u0026amp;`, `\u0026quot;`, `\u0026lt;`, or `\u0026gt;`. This means a value containing both an entity and an unescaped raw quote bypasses escaping entirely.\n\nThat bypass becomes exploitable because the renderer later inserts block IAL values directly into HTML attributes. A payload like:\n```\n\u0026amp;\" onmouseenter=\"require(\u0027child_process\u0027).exec(\u0027calc\u0027)\n```\ncan be rendered into HTML equivalent to:\n```\n\u003cdiv title=\"\u0026amp;\" onmouseenter=\"require(\u0027child_process\u0027).exec(\u0027calc\u0027)\"\u003e\n```\nThis creates a stored XSS condition. In SiYuan Desktop, the Electron renderer runs with Node.js integration available, so attacker-controlled JavaScript can invoke Node APIs directly. As a result, the issue is not limited to script execution in the page context and becomes arbitrary command execution on the victim\u2019s machine.\n\nThe stored XSS path was validated by importing a crafted `.sy.zip` through the normal GUI and triggering JavaScript execution from the rendered block. Because the same injected JavaScript runs in the privileged Electron renderer, this is an RCE issue in the desktop client.\n\n### PoC\n1. Start SiYuan Desktop `v3.6.1`.\n2. Prepare a crafted `.sy.zip` containing a .sy document with a block IAL property such as:\n```\n\"title\": \"\u0026amp;\\\" onmouseenter=\\\"require(\u0027child_process\u0027).exec(\u0027calc\u0027)\"\n```\n3. In the UI, right-click any notebook.\n4. Select `Import -\u003e SiYuan .sy.zip`.\n5. Import the crafted archive.\n6. Open the imported note.\n7. Move the mouse over the affected paragraph block.\n8. Observe that the injected JavaScript executes.\n9. On Windows, `calc.exe` launches, demonstrating arbitrary command execution.\n\n### Impact\nThis vulnerability allows an attacker to deliver a malicious `.sy.zip` file that executes attacker-controlled JavaScript after import. In the desktop application, that JavaScript runs with Node/Electron privileges and can execute arbitrary operating system commands under the victim\u2019s account. This makes the bug equivalent to local code execution triggered by importing and opening attacker-supplied content.",
"id": "GHSA-ff66-236v-p4fg",
"modified": "2026-04-06T16:40:19Z",
"published": "2026-04-01T00:05:11Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/siyuan-note/siyuan/security/advisories/GHSA-ff66-236v-p4fg"
},
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-34585"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/siyuan-note/siyuan/issues/17246"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/siyuan-note/siyuan/commit/918d1bd9f967d888f474f6764744a3d8cca4a501"
},
{
"type": "PACKAGE",
"url": "https://github.com/siyuan-note/siyuan"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/siyuan-note/siyuan/releases/tag/v3.6.2"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
],
"summary": "SiYuan Desktop: Stored XSS in imported .sy.zip content leads to arbitrary command execution"
}
GHSA-FF66-QF7H-2CXR
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2025-12-30 12:30 – Updated: 2026-01-20 15:32Improper Neutralization of Input During Web Page Generation ('Cross-site Scripting') vulnerability in Tribulant Software Newsletters newsletters-lite allows Stored XSS.This issue affects Newsletters: from n/a through <= 4.12.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2025-69020"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-79"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2025-12-30T11:16:00Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "Improper Neutralization of Input During Web Page Generation (\u0027Cross-site Scripting\u0027) vulnerability in Tribulant Software Newsletters newsletters-lite allows Stored XSS.This issue affects Newsletters: from n/a through \u003c= 4.12.",
"id": "GHSA-ff66-qf7h-2cxr",
"modified": "2026-01-20T15:32:45Z",
"published": "2025-12-30T12:30:28Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2025-69020"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://patchstack.com/database/Wordpress/Plugin/newsletters-lite/vulnerability/wordpress-newsletters-plugin-4-12-cross-site-scripting-xss-vulnerability?_s_id=cve"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://vdp.patchstack.com/database/Wordpress/Plugin/newsletters-lite/vulnerability/wordpress-newsletters-plugin-4-12-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:L",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-FF6Q-3C9C-6CF5
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2025-01-14 22:18 – Updated: 2025-01-23 17:11In some cases, form messages can contain HTML markup. This is an intentional feature, allowing links and other relevant HTML markup for the given message.
Some form messages include content that the user can provide. There are scenarios in the CMS where that content doesn't get correctly sanitised prior to being included in the form message, resulting in an XSS vulnerability.
References
- https://www.silverstripe.org/download/security-releases/cve-2024-53277
Reported by
Leo Diamat from Bastion Security Group
{
"affected": [
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Packagist",
"name": "silverstripe/framework"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "0"
},
{
"fixed": "5.3.8"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
}
],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2024-53277"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-79"
],
"github_reviewed": true,
"github_reviewed_at": "2025-01-14T22:18:59Z",
"nvd_published_at": "2025-01-14T23:15:08Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "In some cases, form messages can contain HTML markup. This is an intentional feature, allowing links and other relevant HTML markup for the given message.\n\nSome form messages include content that the user can provide. There are scenarios in the CMS where that content doesn\u0027t get correctly sanitised prior to being included in the form message, resulting in an XSS vulnerability.\n\n### References\n\n- https://www.silverstripe.org/download/security-releases/cve-2024-53277\n\n## Reported by\n\nLeo Diamat from [Bastion Security Group](http://www.bastionsecurity.co.nz/)",
"id": "GHSA-ff6q-3c9c-6cf5",
"modified": "2025-01-23T17:11:55Z",
"published": "2025-01-14T22:18:59Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/silverstripe/silverstripe-framework/security/advisories/GHSA-ff6q-3c9c-6cf5"
},
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-53277"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/silverstripe/silverstripe-framework/commit/74904f539347b7d1f8c5b5fb9e28d62ff251ee00"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/FriendsOfPHP/security-advisories/blob/master/silverstripe/framework/CVE-2024-53277.yaml"
},
{
"type": "PACKAGE",
"url": "https://github.com/silverstripe/silverstripe-framework"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.silverstripe.org/download/security-releases/cve-2024-53277"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
],
"summary": "Silverstripe Framework has a XSS in form messages"
}
GHSA-FF6V-2CX8-MF3H
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2025-08-29 18:30 – Updated: 2025-09-09 15:31SolidInvoice 2.3.7 and fixed in v.2.3.8 is vulnerable to Cross Site Scripting (XSS) in the Tax Rate functionality.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2025-55579"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-79"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2025-08-29T17:15:35Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "SolidInvoice 2.3.7 and fixed in v.2.3.8 is vulnerable to Cross Site Scripting (XSS) in the Tax Rate functionality.",
"id": "GHSA-ff6v-2cx8-mf3h",
"modified": "2025-09-09T15:31:18Z",
"published": "2025-08-29T18:30:52Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2025-55579"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/ddobrev25/CVE-2025-55579"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://solidinvoice.co"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://to-be-released.com"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:L/I:L/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-FF6W-526V-C5P2
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-17 01:12 – Updated: 2022-05-17 01:12Cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability in the Process Portal in IBM Business Process Manager 8.0 through 8.0.1.3, 8.5.0 through 8.5.0.1, and 8.5.5 allows remote authenticated users to inject arbitrary web script or HTML via a crafted URL, a different vulnerability than CVE-2014-8914.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2014-8913"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-79"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2015-01-21T15:17:00Z",
"severity": "LOW"
},
"details": "Cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability in the Process Portal in IBM Business Process Manager 8.0 through 8.0.1.3, 8.5.0 through 8.5.0.1, and 8.5.5 allows remote authenticated users to inject arbitrary web script or HTML via a crafted URL, a different vulnerability than CVE-2014-8914.",
"id": "GHSA-ff6w-526v-c5p2",
"modified": "2022-05-17T01:12:41Z",
"published": "2022-05-17T01:12:41Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2014-8913"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://exchange.xforce.ibmcloud.com/vulnerabilities/99284"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://secunia.com/advisories/62205"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://www-01.ibm.com/support/docview.wss?uid=swg1JR51742"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://www-01.ibm.com/support/docview.wss?uid=swg21693239"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://www.securitytracker.com/id/1031614"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": []
}
GHSA-FF6W-C279-Q68H
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-24 17:45 – Updated: 2022-05-24 17:45A cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability in Bitweaver version 3.1.0 allows remote attackers to inject JavaScript via the /users/edit_personal_page.php URI.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2021-29029"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-79"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2021-03-24T13:15:00Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "A cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability in Bitweaver version 3.1.0 allows remote attackers to inject JavaScript via the /users/edit_personal_page.php URI.",
"id": "GHSA-ff6w-c279-q68h",
"modified": "2022-05-24T17:45:18Z",
"published": "2022-05-24T17:45:18Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2021-29029"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/xoffense/POC/blob/main/Multiple%20URI%20Based%20XSS%20in%20Bitweaver%203.1.0.md"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": []
}
GHSA-FF6X-WGV6-WJ7Q
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-17 04:49 – Updated: 2022-05-17 04:49Cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability in flowplayer.swf in the Flash fallback feature in Flowplayer HTML5 5.4.3 allows remote attackers to inject arbitrary web script or HTML by using URL encoding within the callback parameter name. NOTE: this vulnerability exists because of an incomplete fix for CVE-2013-7342.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2013-7343"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-79"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2014-03-24T14:20:00Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "Cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability in flowplayer.swf in the Flash fallback feature in Flowplayer HTML5 5.4.3 allows remote attackers to inject arbitrary web script or HTML by using URL encoding within the callback parameter name. NOTE: this vulnerability exists because of an incomplete fix for CVE-2013-7342.",
"id": "GHSA-ff6x-wgv6-wj7q",
"modified": "2022-05-17T04:49:02Z",
"published": "2022-05-17T04:49:02Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2013-7343"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/flowplayer/flowplayer/issues/381"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/flowplayer/flowplayer/commit/27e8f178276c185cbddb4f14c91d4ce7b3865db1"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": []
}
GHSA-FF72-FF42-C3GW
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2024-02-17 06:30 – Updated: 2024-11-06 23:31All versions of the package github.com/greenpau/caddy-security are vulnerable to Cross-site Scripting (XSS) via the Referer header, due to improper input sanitization. Although the Referer header is sanitized by escaping some characters that can allow XSS (e.g., [&], [<], [>], ["], [']), it does not account for the attack based on the JavaScript URL scheme (e.g., javascript:alert(document.domain)// payload). Exploiting this vulnerability may not be trivial, but it could lead to the execution of malicious scripts in the context of the target user’s browser, compromising user sessions.
{
"affected": [
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Go",
"name": "github.com/greenpau/caddy-security"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "0"
},
{
"last_affected": "1.1.23"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
}
],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2024-21496"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-79"
],
"github_reviewed": true,
"github_reviewed_at": "2024-02-20T23:46:51Z",
"nvd_published_at": "2024-02-17T05:15:09Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "All versions of the package github.com/greenpau/caddy-security are vulnerable to Cross-site Scripting (XSS) via the Referer header, due to improper input sanitization. Although the Referer header is sanitized by escaping some characters that can allow XSS (e.g., [\u0026], [\u003c], [\u003e], [\"], [\u0027]), it does not account for the attack based on the JavaScript URL scheme (e.g., javascript:alert(document.domain)// payload). Exploiting this vulnerability may not be trivial, but it could lead to the execution of malicious scripts in the context of the target user\u2019s browser, compromising user sessions.",
"id": "GHSA-ff72-ff42-c3gw",
"modified": "2024-11-06T23:31:23Z",
"published": "2024-02-17T06:30:34Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-21496"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/greenpau/caddy-security/issues/267"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://blog.trailofbits.com/2023/09/18/security-flaws-in-an-sso-plugin-for-caddy"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://security.snyk.io/vuln/SNYK-GOLANG-GITHUBCOMGREENPAUCADDYSECURITY-6249860"
},
{
"type": "PACKAGE",
"url": "github.com/greenpau/caddy-security"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:L/I:L/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
},
{
"score": "CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:P/VC:N/VI:N/VA:N/SC:L/SI:L/SA:N",
"type": "CVSS_V4"
}
],
"summary": "Cross-site Scripting in github.com/greenpau/caddy-security"
}
GHSA-FF78-WRV4-GQGW
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2025-03-21 09:30 – Updated: 2025-03-21 09:30A vulnerability was found in SimpleMachines SMF 2.1.4 and classified as problematic. Affected by this issue is some unknown functionality of the file ManageAttachments.php. The manipulation of the argument Notice leads to cross site scripting. The attack may be launched remotely. The exploit has been disclosed to the public and may be used. The vendor was contacted early about this disclosure.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2025-2582"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-79"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2025-03-21T07:15:36Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "A vulnerability was found in SimpleMachines SMF 2.1.4 and classified as problematic. Affected by this issue is some unknown functionality of the file ManageAttachments.php. The manipulation of the argument Notice leads to cross site scripting. The attack may be launched remotely. The exploit has been disclosed to the public and may be used. The vendor was contacted early about this disclosure.",
"id": "GHSA-ff78-wrv4-gqgw",
"modified": "2025-03-21T09:30:34Z",
"published": "2025-03-21T09:30:34Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2025-2582"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/Fewword/Poc/blob/main/smf/smf-poc3.md"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/Fewword/Poc/blob/main/smf/smf-poc4.md"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://vuldb.com/?ctiid.300542"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://vuldb.com/?id.300542"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://vuldb.com/?submit.511999"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:R/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
},
{
"score": "CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:P/VC:N/VI:L/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"
}
]
}
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.