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.
68579 vulnerabilities reference this CWE, most recent first.
GHSA-MJ9P-V2R8-WF8W
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2020-01-24 21:26 – Updated: 2021-01-08 20:32Background
SimpleSAMLphp allows users to report errors and failures to the system administrators via a web form. This web form gathers some contextual information automatically, but it also allows the user to provide their email address for follow-ups and a free-text explanation of what happened. Once submitted, the report is sent as an email to the administrative email address configured in the software.
Description
The www/erroreport.php script allows error reports to be submitted and sent to the system administrator. Starting with SimpleSAMLphp 1.18.0, a new SimpleSAML\Utils\EMail class was introduced to handle sending emails, implemented as a wrapper of an external dependency.
This new wrapper allows us to use Twig templates in order to create the email sent with an error report. Since Twig provides automatic escaping of variables, manual escaping of the free-text field in www/errorreport.php was removed to avoid double escaping. However, for those not using the new user interface yet, an email template is hardcoded into the class itself in plain PHP. Since no escaping is provided in this template, it is then possible to inject HTML inside the template by manually crafting the contents of the free-text field.
Affected versions
SimpleSAMLphp versions 1.18.0 to 1.18.3, both inclusive.
Impact
An attacker may take advantage of this issue to manually craft a modified email sent via the error reporting mechanism, such as this email might trick a system administrator into performing an action, such as introducing their credentials into a phishing web site that resembles the original.
Remote execution of javascript code is considered unfeasible since email clients do not run javascript present in emails, although there might be email clients which don't follow this rule, making the attack surface grow.
Resolution
Upgrade the SimpleSAMLphp installation to version 1.18.4.
Credit
This vulnerability was discovered and reported by Frederic Vleminckx.
{
"affected": [
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Packagist",
"name": "simplesamlphp/simplesamlphp"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "1.18.0"
},
{
"fixed": "1.18.4"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
}
],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2020-5226"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-79"
],
"github_reviewed": true,
"github_reviewed_at": "2020-01-24T21:09:37Z",
"nvd_published_at": null,
"severity": "LOW"
},
"details": "### Background\n\nSimpleSAMLphp allows users to report errors and failures to the system administrators via a web form. This web form gathers some contextual information automatically, but it also allows the user to provide their email address for follow-ups and a free-text explanation of what happened. Once submitted, the report is sent as an email to the administrative email address configured in the software.\n\n### Description\n\nThe `www/erroreport.php` script allows error reports to be submitted and sent to the system administrator. Starting with SimpleSAMLphp 1.18.0, a new `SimpleSAML\\Utils\\EMail` class was introduced to handle sending emails, implemented as a wrapper of an external dependency.\n\nThis new wrapper allows us to use Twig templates in order to create the email sent with an error report. Since Twig provides automatic escaping of variables, manual escaping of the free-text field in `www/errorreport.php` was removed to avoid double escaping. However, for those not using the new user interface yet, an email template is hardcoded into the class itself in plain PHP. Since no escaping is provided in this template, it is then possible to inject HTML inside the template by manually crafting the contents of the free-text field.\n\n### Affected versions\n\nSimpleSAMLphp versions 1.18.0 to 1.18.3, both inclusive.\n\n### Impact\n\nAn attacker may take advantage of this issue to manually craft a modified email sent via the error reporting mechanism, such as this email might trick a system administrator into performing an action, such as introducing their credentials into a phishing web site that resembles the original.\n\nRemote execution of javascript code is considered unfeasible since email clients do not run javascript present in emails, although there might be email clients which don\u0027t follow this rule, making the attack surface grow.\n\n### Resolution\n\nUpgrade the SimpleSAMLphp installation to version 1.18.4.\n\n### Credit\n\nThis vulnerability was discovered and reported by Frederic Vleminckx.",
"id": "GHSA-mj9p-v2r8-wf8w",
"modified": "2021-01-08T20:32:54Z",
"published": "2020-01-24T21:26:54Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/simplesamlphp/simplesamlphp/security/advisories/GHSA-mj9p-v2r8-wf8w"
},
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2020-5226"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://simplesamlphp.org/security/202001-01"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:R/S:C/C:L/I:L/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
],
"summary": "Cross-site scripting in SimpleSAMLphp"
}
GHSA-MJ9R-FPV3-RGFX
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2023-04-21 15:30 – Updated: 2025-02-05 16:45Shopware v5.5.10 was discovered to contain a cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability via the recovery/install/ URI.
{
"affected": [
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Packagist",
"name": "shopware/shopware"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "0"
},
{
"last_affected": "5.5.10"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
}
],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2022-48150"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-79"
],
"github_reviewed": true,
"github_reviewed_at": "2023-04-21T19:55:03Z",
"nvd_published_at": "2023-04-21T14:15:07Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "Shopware v5.5.10 was discovered to contain a cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability via the recovery/install/ URI.",
"id": "GHSA-mj9r-fpv3-rgfx",
"modified": "2025-02-05T16:45:55Z",
"published": "2023-04-21T15:30:18Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2022-48150"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/sahilop123/-CVE-2022-48150"
},
{
"type": "PACKAGE",
"url": "https://github.com/shopware/shopware"
}
],
"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"
}
],
"summary": "Shopware vulnerable to cross-site scripting (XSS)"
}
GHSA-MJ9V-CJJ7-PPR8
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2024-01-13 21:30 – Updated: 2024-01-13 21:30A vulnerability has been found in SourceCodester House Rental Management System 1.0 and classified as problematic. Affected by this vulnerability is an unknown functionality of the component Manage Invoice Details. The manipulation of the argument Invoice leads to cross site scripting. The attack can be launched remotely. The exploit has been disclosed to the public and may be used. The identifier VDB-250609 was assigned to this vulnerability.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2024-0501"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-79"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2024-01-13T20:15:45Z",
"severity": "LOW"
},
"details": "A vulnerability has been found in SourceCodester House Rental Management System 1.0 and classified as problematic. Affected by this vulnerability is an unknown functionality of the component Manage Invoice Details. The manipulation of the argument Invoice leads to cross site scripting. The attack can be launched remotely. The exploit has been disclosed to the public and may be used. The identifier VDB-250609 was assigned to this vulnerability.",
"id": "GHSA-mj9v-cjj7-ppr8",
"modified": "2024-01-13T21:30:24Z",
"published": "2024-01-13T21:30:24Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-0501"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://drive.google.com/file/d/1xEenTDcXwNYdOxY8kdQ142nRnbcHrTRv/view?usp=sharing"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://vuldb.com/?ctiid.250609"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://vuldb.com/?id.250609"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:H/UI:R/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-MJC2-J72W-9227
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-24 22:28 – Updated: 2024-04-04 03:10The Backup by 10Web – Backup and Restore Plugin WordPress plugin through 1.0.20 does not sanitise or escape the tab parameter before outputting it back in the page, leading to a reflected Cross-Site Scripting issue
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2021-24426"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-79"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2021-07-12T20:15:00Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "The Backup by 10Web \u00e2\u20ac\u201c Backup and Restore Plugin WordPress plugin through 1.0.20 does not sanitise or escape the tab parameter before outputting it back in the page, leading to a reflected Cross-Site Scripting issue",
"id": "GHSA-mjc2-j72w-9227",
"modified": "2024-04-04T03:10:52Z",
"published": "2022-05-24T22:28:47Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2021-24426"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://m0ze.ru/vulnerability/%5B2021-05-23%5D-%5BWordPress%5D-%5BCWE-79%5D-Backup-by-10Web-WordPress-Plugin-v1.0.20.txt"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://m0ze.ru/vulnerability/[2021-05-23]-[WordPress]-[CWE-79]-Backup-by-10Web-WordPress-Plugin-v1.0.20.txt"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://wpscan.com/vulnerability/48464b3f-fe57-40fe-8868-398a36099fb9"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:H/UI:R/S:C/C:L/I:L/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-MJCF-7MV5-X748
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2024-04-30 21:30 – Updated: 2024-08-01 15:31Cross Site Scripting vulnerability in DedeCMS v.5.7.113 allows a remote attacker to execute arbitrary code via the typeid parameter in the makehtml_list_action.php component.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2024-33371"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-79"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2024-04-30T20:15:08Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "Cross Site Scripting vulnerability in DedeCMS v.5.7.113 allows a remote attacker to execute arbitrary code via the typeid parameter in the makehtml_list_action.php component.",
"id": "GHSA-mjcf-7mv5-x748",
"modified": "2024-08-01T15:31:43Z",
"published": "2024-04-30T21:30:32Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-33371"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://gitee.com/zchuanwen/cve/issues/I9HQRY"
}
],
"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-MJCR-8W57-83Q9
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2024-09-18 00:31 – Updated: 2024-09-18 00:31Improper Neutralization of Input During Web Page Generation (XSS or 'Cross-site Scripting') vulnerability in sonalsinha21 Posterity allows Stored XSS.This issue affects Posterity: from n/a through 3.6.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2024-43995"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-79"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2024-09-18T00:15:08Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "Improper Neutralization of Input During Web Page Generation (XSS or \u0027Cross-site Scripting\u0027) vulnerability in sonalsinha21 Posterity allows Stored XSS.This issue affects Posterity: from n/a through 3.6.",
"id": "GHSA-mjcr-8w57-83q9",
"modified": "2024-09-18T00:31:12Z",
"published": "2024-09-18T00:31:12Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-43995"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://patchstack.com/database/vulnerability/posterity/wordpress-posterity-theme-3-6-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-MJCW-3G32-5P52
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-14 01:27 – Updated: 2022-05-14 01:27** DISPUTED ** Reflected Cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability in the web profiler in SensioLabs Symfony 3.3.6 allows remote attackers to inject arbitrary web script or HTML via the "file" parameter, aka an _profiler/open?file= URI. NOTE: The vendor states "The XSS ... is in the web profiler, a tool that should never be deployed in production (so, we don't handle those issues as security issues)."
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2018-12040"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-79"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2018-06-13T22:29:00Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "** DISPUTED ** Reflected Cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability in the web profiler in SensioLabs Symfony 3.3.6 allows remote attackers to inject arbitrary web script or HTML via the \"file\" parameter, aka an _profiler/open?file= URI. NOTE: The vendor states \"The XSS ... is in the web profiler, a tool that should never be deployed in production (so, we don\u0027t handle those issues as security issues).\"",
"id": "GHSA-mjcw-3g32-5p52",
"modified": "2022-05-14T01:27:14Z",
"published": "2022-05-14T01:27:14Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2018-12040"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://packetstormsecurity.com/files/148125/SensioLabs-Symfony-3.3.6-Cross-Site-Scripting.html"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://www.securityfocus.com/archive/1/542071/100/0/threaded"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:L/I:L/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-MJCW-R3MG-3848
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2024-11-26 15:31 – Updated: 2025-11-04 00:32Enhanced Tracking Protection's Strict mode may have inadvertently allowed a CSP frame-src bypass and DOM-based XSS through the Google SafeFrame shim in the Web Compatibility extension. This issue could have exposed users to malicious frames masquerading as legitimate content. This vulnerability affects Firefox < 133, Firefox ESR < 128.5, Firefox ESR < 115.18, Thunderbird < 133, and Thunderbird < 128.5.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2024-11694"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-79"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2024-11-26T14:15:18Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "Enhanced Tracking Protection\u0027s Strict mode may have inadvertently allowed a CSP `frame-src` bypass and DOM-based XSS through the Google SafeFrame shim in the Web Compatibility extension. This issue could have exposed users to malicious frames masquerading as legitimate content. This vulnerability affects Firefox \u003c 133, Firefox ESR \u003c 128.5, Firefox ESR \u003c 115.18, Thunderbird \u003c 133, and Thunderbird \u003c 128.5.",
"id": "GHSA-mjcw-r3mg-3848",
"modified": "2025-11-04T00:32:07Z",
"published": "2024-11-26T15:31:02Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-11694"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1924167"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://lists.debian.org/debian-lts-announce/2024/11/msg00029.html"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.mozilla.org/security/advisories/mfsa2024-63"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.mozilla.org/security/advisories/mfsa2024-64"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.mozilla.org/security/advisories/mfsa2024-65"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.mozilla.org/security/advisories/mfsa2024-67"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.mozilla.org/security/advisories/mfsa2024-68"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.mozilla.org/security/advisories/mfsa2024-70"
}
],
"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-MJF5-7G4M-GX5W
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-02-26 15:16 – Updated: 2026-02-26 15:16Summary
The WebSocket functionality in Storybook's dev server, used to create and update stories, is vulnerable to WebSocket hijacking. This vulnerability only affects the Storybook dev server; production builds are not impacted.
Details
Exploitation requires a developer to visit a malicious website while their local Storybook dev server is running. Because the WebSocket connection does not validate the origin of incoming connections, a malicious site can silently send WebSocket messages to the local instance without any further user interaction.
If a Storybook dev server is intentionally exposed publicly (e.g. for design reviews or stakeholder demos) the risk is higher, as no malicious site visit is required. Any unauthenticated attacker can send WebSocket messages to it directly.
The vulnerability affects the WebSocket message handlers for creating and saving stories, which can be exploited via unauthorized WebSocket connections to achieve persistent XSS or Remote Code Execution (RCE).
Note: recent versions of Chrome have some protections against this, but Firefox does not.
Impact
This vulnerability can lead to supply chain compromise. Key risks include:
- Remote Code Execution: The vulnerability can allow attackers to execute malicious code, with the extent of impact depending on the configuration. Server-side RCE is possible in non-default configurations, such as when stories are executed via portable stories in JSDOM, potentially allowing attackers to exfiltrate credentials and environment variables, access source code and the filesystem, establish backdoors, or pivot to internal network resources.
- Persistent XSS: Malicious payloads are written directly into story source files. If the malicious payload is committed to version control, it becomes part of the codebase and can propagate to deployed Storybook documentation sites, affecting developers and stakeholders who view them.
- Supply Chain Propagation: If the modified source files are committed, injected code can spread to other team members via git, execute in CI/CD pipelines, and affect shared component libraries used across multiple projects.
Affected versions
8.1 and above. While the exploitable functionality was introduced in 8.1, the patch has been applied to 7.x as a precautionary measure given the underlying WebSocket behaviour.
Recommended actions
Update to one of the patched versions: 7.6.23, 8.6.17, 9.1.19, 10.2.10.
{
"affected": [
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "npm",
"name": "storybook"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "8.1.0"
},
{
"fixed": "8.6.17"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
},
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "npm",
"name": "storybook"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "8.7.0-alpha.0"
},
{
"fixed": "9.1.19"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
},
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "npm",
"name": "storybook"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "10.0.0-beta.0"
},
{
"fixed": "10.2.10"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
}
],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2026-27148"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-1385",
"CWE-74",
"CWE-79"
],
"github_reviewed": true,
"github_reviewed_at": "2026-02-26T15:16:10Z",
"nvd_published_at": "2026-02-25T22:16:25Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "### Summary\n\nThe WebSocket functionality in Storybook\u0027s dev server, used to create and update stories, is vulnerable to WebSocket hijacking. This vulnerability **only affects the Storybook dev server; production builds are not impacted**.\n\n### Details\n\nExploitation requires a developer to visit a malicious website while their local Storybook dev server is running. Because the WebSocket connection does not validate the origin of incoming connections, a malicious site can silently send WebSocket messages to the local instance without any further user interaction.\n\nIf a Storybook dev server is intentionally exposed publicly (e.g. for design reviews or stakeholder demos) the risk is higher, as no malicious site visit is required. Any unauthenticated attacker can send WebSocket messages to it directly.\n\nThe vulnerability affects the WebSocket message handlers for creating and saving stories, which can be exploited via unauthorized WebSocket connections to achieve persistent XSS or Remote Code Execution (RCE).\n\n_Note: recent versions of Chrome have some protections against this, but Firefox does not._\n\n### Impact\nThis vulnerability can lead to supply chain compromise. Key risks include:\n\n- **Remote Code Execution**: The vulnerability can allow attackers to execute malicious code, with the extent of impact depending on the configuration. Server-side RCE is possible in non-default configurations, such as when stories are executed via portable stories in JSDOM, potentially allowing attackers to exfiltrate credentials and environment variables, access source code and the filesystem, establish backdoors, or pivot to internal network resources.\n- **Persistent XSS**: Malicious payloads are written directly into story source files. If the malicious payload is committed to version control, it becomes part of the codebase and can propagate to deployed Storybook documentation sites, affecting developers and stakeholders who view them.\n- **Supply Chain Propagation**: If the modified source files are committed, injected code can spread to other team members via git, execute in CI/CD pipelines, and affect shared component libraries used across multiple projects.\n\n### Affected versions\n\n8.1 and above. While the exploitable functionality was introduced in 8.1, the patch has been applied to 7.x as a precautionary measure given the underlying WebSocket behaviour.\n\n### Recommended actions\nUpdate to one of the patched versions: `7.6.23`, `8.6.17`, `9.1.19`, `10.2.10`.",
"id": "GHSA-mjf5-7g4m-gx5w",
"modified": "2026-02-26T15:16:10Z",
"published": "2026-02-26T15:16:10Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/storybookjs/storybook/security/advisories/GHSA-mjf5-7g4m-gx5w"
},
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-27148"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/storybookjs/storybook/commit/0affdf928bd6fafbadfb1dfe22ce6104805e10e8"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/storybookjs/storybook/commit/54689a8add18ea75d628c540f4bc677592a1e685"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/storybookjs/storybook/commit/b8cfa77c73940c140acdcd8a06ab1ea913c44761"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/storybookjs/storybook/commit/d34085f39c647f5c23c3a3b2d197c18602fcf876"
},
{
"type": "PACKAGE",
"url": "https://github.com/storybookjs/storybook"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/storybookjs/storybook/releases/tag/v10.2.10"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/storybookjs/storybook/releases/tag/v7.6.23"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/storybookjs/storybook/releases/tag/v8.6.17"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/storybookjs/storybook/releases/tag/v9.1.19"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:N/UI:A/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/SC:H/SI:H/SA:H",
"type": "CVSS_V4"
}
],
"summary": "Storybook Dev Server is Vulnerable to WebSocket Hijacking"
}
GHSA-MJF7-37PM-5WF4
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-24 19:09 – Updated: 2022-05-24 19:09In NCH WebDictate v2.13, persistent Cross Site Scripting (XSS) exists in the Recipient Name field. An authenticated user can add or modify the affected field to inject arbitrary JavaScript.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2021-37470"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-79"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2021-07-25T21:15:00Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "In NCH WebDictate v2.13, persistent Cross Site Scripting (XSS) exists in the Recipient Name field. An authenticated user can add or modify the affected field to inject arbitrary JavaScript.",
"id": "GHSA-mjf7-37pm-5wf4",
"modified": "2022-05-24T19:09:06Z",
"published": "2022-05-24T19:09:06Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2021-37470"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/0xfml/poc/blob/main/NCH/WebDictate_2.13_XSS.md"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.nch.com.au/webdictate/index.html"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": []
}
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.