CWE-88
AllowedImproper Neutralization of Argument Delimiters in a Command ('Argument Injection')
Abstraction: Base · Status: Draft
The product constructs a string for a command to be executed by a separate component in another control sphere, but it does not properly delimit the intended arguments, options, or switches within that command string.
550 vulnerabilities reference this CWE, most recent first.
GHSA-QV28-7W47-RRHX
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2025-12-16 03:31 – Updated: 2025-12-17 15:34An improper neutralization of argument delimiters in a command vulnerability has been reported to affect several QNAP operating system versions. The remote attackers can then exploit the vulnerability to alter execution logic.
We have already fixed the vulnerability in the following versions: QTS 5.2.7.3297 build 20251024 and later QuTS hero h5.2.7.3297 build 20251024 and later QuTS hero h5.3.1.3292 build 20251024 and later
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2025-62847"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-88"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2025-12-16T03:15:58Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "An improper neutralization of argument delimiters in a command vulnerability has been reported to affect several QNAP operating system versions. The remote attackers can then exploit the vulnerability to alter execution logic.\n\nWe have already fixed the vulnerability in the following versions:\nQTS 5.2.7.3297 build 20251024 and later\nQuTS hero h5.2.7.3297 build 20251024 and later\nQuTS hero h5.3.1.3292 build 20251024 and later",
"id": "GHSA-qv28-7w47-rrhx",
"modified": "2025-12-17T15:34:52Z",
"published": "2025-12-16T03:31:16Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2025-62847"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.qnap.com/en/security-advisory/qsa-25-45"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
},
{
"score": "CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:H/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:U/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-QVQM-Q7JX-3QWV
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2025-08-20 06:30 – Updated: 2025-08-21 15:30An issue was discovered in Commvault before 11.36.60. A security vulnerability has been identified that allows remote attackers to inject or manipulate command-line arguments passed to internal components due to insufficient input validation. Successful exploitation results in a valid user session for a low privilege role.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2025-57791"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-88"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2025-08-20T04:16:04Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "An issue was discovered in Commvault before 11.36.60. A security vulnerability has been identified that allows remote attackers to inject or manipulate command-line arguments passed to internal components due to insufficient input validation. Successful exploitation results in a valid user session for a low privilege role.",
"id": "GHSA-qvqm-q7jx-3qwv",
"modified": "2025-08-21T15:30:33Z",
"published": "2025-08-20T06:30:26Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2025-57791"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://documentation.commvault.com/securityadvisories/CV_2025_08_1.html"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
},
{
"score": "CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:L/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"
}
]
}
GHSA-QWQV-J7JR-4HP6
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-06 00:00 – Updated: 2024-10-25 20:49In the python-libnmap package through 0.7.2 for Python, remote command execution can occur (if used in a client application that does not validate arguments).
{
"affected": [
{
"database_specific": {
"last_known_affected_version_range": "\u003c= 0.7.2"
},
"package": {
"ecosystem": "PyPI",
"name": "python-libnmap"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "0"
},
{
"fixed": "0.7.3"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
}
],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2022-30284"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-88"
],
"github_reviewed": true,
"github_reviewed_at": "2022-05-24T20:53:45Z",
"nvd_published_at": "2022-05-04T22:15:00Z",
"severity": "CRITICAL"
},
"details": "In the python-libnmap package through 0.7.2 for Python, remote command execution can occur (if used in a client application that does not validate arguments).",
"id": "GHSA-qwqv-j7jr-4hp6",
"modified": "2024-10-25T20:49:07Z",
"published": "2022-05-06T00:00:54Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2022-30284"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/savon-noir/python-libnmap/commit/c36fecde90017befeb4853396d0e2aac93c95b64"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/pypa/advisory-database/tree/main/vulns/python-libnmap/PYSEC-2022-42999.yaml"
},
{
"type": "PACKAGE",
"url": "https://github.com/savon-noir/python-libnmap"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/savon-noir/python-libnmap/releases"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/savon-noir/python-libnmap/releases/tag/v0.7.3"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://libnmap.readthedocs.io/en/latest/process.html#using-libnmap-process"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://pypi.org/project/python-libnmap"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.swascan.com/security-advisory-libnmap-2"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
},
{
"score": "CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N",
"type": "CVSS_V4"
}
],
"summary": "Argument injection in python-libnmap"
}
GHSA-QWRQ-VXVW-537R
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2024-10-01 06:30 – Updated: 2024-11-07 18:36All versions of the package git-shallow-clone are vulnerable to Argument injection due to missing sanitization or mitigation flags in the process variable of the gitShallowClone function.
{
"affected": [
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "npm",
"name": "git-shallow-clone"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "0"
},
{
"last_affected": "0.0.2"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
}
],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2024-21531"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-88"
],
"github_reviewed": true,
"github_reviewed_at": "2024-10-01T18:10:26Z",
"nvd_published_at": "2024-10-01T05:15:12Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "All versions of the package git-shallow-clone are vulnerable to Argument injection due to missing sanitization or mitigation flags in the process variable of the gitShallowClone function.",
"id": "GHSA-qwrq-vxvw-537r",
"modified": "2024-11-07T18:36:33Z",
"published": "2024-10-01T06:30:47Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-21531"
},
{
"type": "PACKAGE",
"url": "https://github.com/10uei011/git-shallow-clone"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/10uei011/git-shallow-clone/blob/master/index.js#L27"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://security.snyk.io/vuln/SNYK-JS-GITSHALLOWCLONE-3253853"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
},
{
"score": "CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/VA:L/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N",
"type": "CVSS_V4"
}
],
"summary": "git-shallow-clone Argument Injection vulnerability"
}
GHSA-QX8P-V7MW-F7Q4
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-13 01:21 – Updated: 2022-05-13 01:21A tampering vulnerability exists when Microsoft browsers do not properly validate input under specific conditions, aka 'Microsoft Browsers Tampering Vulnerability'.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2019-0764"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-88"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2019-04-09T21:29:00Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "A tampering vulnerability exists when Microsoft browsers do not properly validate input under specific conditions, aka \u0027Microsoft Browsers Tampering Vulnerability\u0027.",
"id": "GHSA-qx8p-v7mw-f7q4",
"modified": "2022-05-13T01:21:32Z",
"published": "2022-05-13T01:21:32Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2019-0764"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://portal.msrc.microsoft.com/en-US/security-guidance/advisory/CVE-2019-0764"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/107731"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-R253-R9JW-QG44
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-06-18 17:25 – Updated: 2026-06-18 17:25Summary
The Docker API server accepted a request-supplied browser_config.extra_args, which flowed into Chromium's launch arguments. An attacker could inject Chromium switches that replace a child-process launch command (--utility-cmd-prefix, --renderer-cmd-prefix, --gpu-launcher, --browser-subprocess-path) together with --no-zygote, causing Chromium to fork/exec an attacker-controlled command as the container's runtime user. The Docker API is unauthenticated by default, so a single request yields arbitrary command execution.
The earlier extra_args SSRF patch (0.8.9) used a denylist scoped to proxy/DNS flags; a denylist of launch switches is inherently incomplete, and these command-execution switches were not covered.
Affected paths
/crawl, /crawl/stream, /crawl/job accepting a request browser_config.extra_args.
Impact
Unauthenticated remote code execution as the container runtime user; full read/write of application data, mounted secrets, environment, and tokens, and out-of-band exfiltration independent of the HTTP response.
Fix
0.9.0 establishes a trust boundary for request-supplied configuration: extra_args (along with other power fields such as proxy, user_data_dir, cdp_url, init_scripts) is a forbidden field for untrusted request bodies. Any request that sets extra_args is rejected with HTTP 400 rather than scrubbed against an always-incomplete denylist. In-process SDK callers (trusted) are unaffected.
Workarounds
- Upgrade to the patched version (0.9.0).
- Enable authentication (
CRAWL4AI_API_TOKEN) and restrict who can reach the API. - Run the container with a restrictive seccomp profile and no ability to exec helper binaries.
Credits
Y4tacker - reported the --no-zygote + --utility-cmd-prefix command-injection chain with a confirmed in-container PoC and an allowlist/reject recommendation.
UDU_RisePho (hoanggxyuuki) - independently reported the request-supplied Chromium launch-flag RCE class (--renderer-cmd-prefix), confirmed still reproducing on 0.8.9.
{
"affected": [
{
"database_specific": {
"last_known_affected_version_range": "\u003c= 0.8.9"
},
"package": {
"ecosystem": "PyPI",
"name": "crawl4ai"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "0"
},
{
"fixed": "0.9.0"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
}
],
"aliases": [],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-88",
"CWE-94"
],
"github_reviewed": true,
"github_reviewed_at": "2026-06-18T17:25:34Z",
"nvd_published_at": null,
"severity": "CRITICAL"
},
"details": "### Summary\n\nThe Docker API server accepted a request-supplied `browser_config.extra_args`, which flowed into Chromium\u0027s launch arguments. An attacker could inject Chromium switches that replace a child-process launch command (`--utility-cmd-prefix`, `--renderer-cmd-prefix`, `--gpu-launcher`, `--browser-subprocess-path`) together with `--no-zygote`, causing Chromium to fork/exec an attacker-controlled command as the container\u0027s runtime user. The Docker API is unauthenticated by default, so a single request yields arbitrary command execution.\n\nThe earlier `extra_args` SSRF patch (0.8.9) used a denylist scoped to proxy/DNS flags; a denylist of launch switches is inherently incomplete, and these command-execution switches were not covered.\n\n### Affected paths\n\n`/crawl`, `/crawl/stream`, `/crawl/job` accepting a request `browser_config.extra_args`.\n\n### Impact\n\nUnauthenticated remote code execution as the container runtime user; full read/write of application data, mounted secrets, environment, and tokens, and out-of-band exfiltration independent of the HTTP response.\n\n### Fix\n\n0.9.0 establishes a trust boundary for request-supplied configuration: `extra_args` (along with other power fields such as `proxy`, `user_data_dir`, `cdp_url`, `init_scripts`) is a forbidden field for untrusted request bodies. Any request that sets `extra_args` is rejected with HTTP 400 rather than scrubbed against an always-incomplete denylist. In-process SDK callers (trusted) are unaffected.\n\n### Workarounds\n\n- Upgrade to the patched version (0.9.0).\n- Enable authentication (`CRAWL4AI_API_TOKEN`) and restrict who can reach the API.\n- Run the container with a restrictive seccomp profile and no ability to exec helper binaries.\n\n### Credits\n\nY4tacker - reported the `--no-zygote` + `--utility-cmd-prefix` command-injection chain with a confirmed in-container PoC and an allowlist/reject recommendation.\nUDU_RisePho (hoanggxyuuki) - independently reported the request-supplied Chromium launch-flag RCE class (`--renderer-cmd-prefix`), confirmed still reproducing on 0.8.9.",
"id": "GHSA-r253-r9jw-qg44",
"modified": "2026-06-18T17:25:34Z",
"published": "2026-06-18T17:25:34Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/unclecode/crawl4ai/security/advisories/GHSA-r253-r9jw-qg44"
},
{
"type": "PACKAGE",
"url": "https://github.com/unclecode/crawl4ai"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
],
"summary": "Crawl4AI: Unauthenticated RCE via Chromium launch-argument injection in browser_config.extra_args"
}
GHSA-R2XF-7JW5-PJG6
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-06-18 13:05 – Updated: 2026-06-18 13:05Summary
A maliciously crafted OCI image label can inject arbitrary arguments into the docker run command line constructed by the MCP Gateway. An attacker who controls an image that the victim references via docker://, or that the victim's catalog pulls a snapshot from, can mount the host filesystem, run as UID 0, and execute arbitrary code on the host.
Details
The io.docker.server.metadata OCI image label is YAML-unmarshalled directly into the wide catalog.Server struct, which carries runtime-shaping fields (Volumes, User, Command, ExtraHosts, AllowHosts, DisableNetwork, Env, Remote, SSEEndpoint, OAuth,Secrets, LongLived, Policy) alongside descriptive fields. Every runtime field carries a YAML tag, so the unmarshal mass-assigns from the attacker-controlled label content; only Image is overwritten afterwards. The gateway's container-launch code then appends those fields verbatim as docker run flags (-v, -u, --add-host) with no allowlist or origin check, and execs docker with the resulting argv.
Impact
A malicious image author can achieve arbitrary code execution as UID 0 on the host of a victim running an affected version of MCP Gateway. Attacker-injected -v /:/host, -u root, and -v /var/run/docker.sock:/var/run/docker.sock arguments reach the docker run invocation that launches the MCP server container, giving the attacker full host filesystem access and root execution. The container/host trust boundary is bypassed at container-creation time, so the --security-opt no-new-privileges flag the gateway applies provides no protection: no in-container privilege escalation is needed.
Patches
The OCI image-label parser now only populates descriptive fields from the image label, which excludes fields that control the container runtime.
Credit
This issue was reported by Jabr Al-Otaibi @ DarkCov working with TrendAI Zero Day Initiative
{
"affected": [
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Go",
"name": "github.com/docker/mcp-gateway"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "0.21.0"
},
{
"fixed": "0.42.2"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
}
],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2026-55887"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-88"
],
"github_reviewed": true,
"github_reviewed_at": "2026-06-18T13:05:06Z",
"nvd_published_at": null,
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "## Summary\n\nA maliciously crafted OCI image label can inject arbitrary arguments into the `docker run` command line constructed by the MCP Gateway. An attacker who controls an image that the victim references via `docker://`, or that the victim\u0027s catalog pulls a snapshot from, can mount the host filesystem, run as UID 0, and execute arbitrary code on the host.\n \n## Details\n\n The `io.docker.server.metadata` OCI image label is YAML-unmarshalled directly into the wide `catalog.Server` struct, which carries runtime-shaping fields (`Volumes`, `User`, `Command`, `ExtraHosts`, `AllowHosts`, `DisableNetwork`, `Env`, `Remote`, `SSEEndpoint`, `OAuth`,`Secrets`, `LongLived`, `Policy`) alongside descriptive fields. Every runtime field carries a YAML tag, so the unmarshal mass-assigns from the attacker-controlled label content; only `Image` is overwritten afterwards. The gateway\u0027s container-launch code then appends those fields verbatim as `docker run` flags (`-v`, `-u`, `--add-host`) with no allowlist or origin check, and execs `docker` with the resulting argv.\n\n## Impact\n \nA malicious image author can achieve arbitrary code execution as UID 0 on the host of a victim running an affected version of MCP Gateway. Attacker-injected `-v /:/host`, `-u root`, and `-v /var/run/docker.sock:/var/run/docker.sock` arguments reach the `docker run` invocation that launches the MCP server container, giving the attacker full host filesystem access and root execution. The container/host trust boundary is bypassed at container-creation time, so the `--security-opt no-new-privileges` flag the gateway applies provides no protection: no in-container privilege escalation is needed.\n\n## Patches\nThe OCI image-label parser now only populates descriptive fields from the image label, which excludes fields that control the container runtime.\n\n## Credit\n\nThis issue was reported by Jabr Al-Otaibi `@ DarkCov` working with TrendAI Zero Day Initiative",
"id": "GHSA-r2xf-7jw5-pjg6",
"modified": "2026-06-18T13:05:06Z",
"published": "2026-06-18T13:05:06Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/docker/mcp-gateway/security/advisories/GHSA-r2xf-7jw5-pjg6"
},
{
"type": "PACKAGE",
"url": "https://github.com/docker/mcp-gateway"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:P/PR:N/UI:A/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/SC:H/SI:H/SA:H",
"type": "CVSS_V4"
}
],
"summary": "Docker MCP Gateway: Argument injection via OCI image label YAML"
}
GHSA-R39X-JCWW-82V6
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-01-28 21:28 – Updated: 2026-01-29 03:50Summary
The Symfony Process component did not correctly treat some characters (notably =) as “special” when escaping arguments on Windows. When PHP is executed from an MSYS2-based environment (e.g. Git Bash) and Symfony Process spawns native Windows executables, MSYS2’s argument/path conversion can mishandle unquoted arguments containing these characters.
This can cause the spawned process to receive corrupted/truncated arguments compared to what Symfony intended.
Impact
If an application (or tooling such as Composer scripts) uses Symfony Process to invoke file-management commands (e.g. rmdir, del, etc.) with a path argument containing =, the MSYS2 conversion layer may alter the argument at runtime. In affected setups this can result in operations being performed on an unintended path, up to and including deletion of the contents of a broader directory or drive.
The issue is particularly relevant when untrusted input can influence process arguments (directly or indirectly, e.g. via repository paths, extracted archive paths, temporary directories, or user-controlled configuration).
Resolution
Upgrade to a Symfony release that includes the fix from symfony/symfony#63164 (which updates Windows argument escaping to ensure arguments containing = and other MSYS2-sensitive characters are properly quoted/escaped). The patch for branch 5.4 is available at https://github.com/symfony/symfony/commit/ec154f6f95f8c60f831998ec4d246a857e9d179b
Workarounds / Mitigations
Avoid running PHP/your tooling from MSYS2-based shells on Windows; prefer cmd.exe or PowerShell for workflows that spawn native executables.
Avoid passing paths containing = (and similar MSYS2-sensitive characters) to Symfony Process when operating under Git Bash/MSYS2.
Where applicable, configure MSYS2 to disable or restrict argument conversion (e.g. via MSYS2_ARG_CONV_EXCL), understanding this may affect other tooling behavior.
{
"affected": [
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Packagist",
"name": "symfony/process"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "0"
},
{
"fixed": "5.4.51"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
},
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Packagist",
"name": "symfony/process"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "6.4"
},
{
"fixed": "6.4.33"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
},
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Packagist",
"name": "symfony/process"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "7.3"
},
{
"fixed": "7.3.11"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
},
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Packagist",
"name": "symfony/process"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "7.4"
},
{
"fixed": "7.4.5"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
},
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Packagist",
"name": "symfony/process"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "8.0"
},
{
"fixed": "8.0.5"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
},
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Packagist",
"name": "symfony/symfony"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "0"
},
{
"fixed": "5.4.51"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
},
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Packagist",
"name": "symfony/symfony"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "6.4"
},
{
"fixed": "6.4.33"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
},
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Packagist",
"name": "symfony/symfony"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "7.3"
},
{
"fixed": "7.3.11"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
},
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Packagist",
"name": "symfony/symfony"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "7.4"
},
{
"fixed": "7.4.5"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
},
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Packagist",
"name": "symfony/symfony"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "8.0"
},
{
"fixed": "8.0.5"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
}
],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2026-24739"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-88"
],
"github_reviewed": true,
"github_reviewed_at": "2026-01-28T21:28:10Z",
"nvd_published_at": "2026-01-28T21:16:11Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "### Summary\nThe Symfony Process component did not correctly treat some characters (notably `=`) as \u201cspecial\u201d when escaping arguments on Windows. When PHP is executed from an MSYS2-based environment (e.g. Git Bash) and Symfony Process spawns native Windows executables, MSYS2\u2019s argument/path conversion can mishandle unquoted arguments containing these characters.\n\nThis can cause the spawned process to receive corrupted/truncated arguments compared to what Symfony intended.\n\n### Impact\nIf an application (or tooling such as Composer scripts) uses Symfony Process to invoke file-management commands (e.g. `rmdir`, `del`, etc.) with a path argument containing `=`, the MSYS2 conversion layer may alter the argument at runtime. In affected setups this can result in operations being performed on an unintended path, up to and including deletion of the contents of a broader directory or drive.\n\nThe issue is particularly relevant when untrusted input can influence process arguments (directly or indirectly, e.g. via repository paths, extracted archive paths, temporary directories, or user-controlled configuration).\n\n### Resolution\nUpgrade to a Symfony release that includes the fix from symfony/symfony#63164 (which updates Windows argument escaping to ensure arguments containing = and other MSYS2-sensitive characters are properly quoted/escaped).\nThe patch for branch 5.4 is available at https://github.com/symfony/symfony/commit/ec154f6f95f8c60f831998ec4d246a857e9d179b\n\n### Workarounds / Mitigations\nAvoid running PHP/your tooling from MSYS2-based shells on Windows; prefer cmd.exe or PowerShell for workflows that spawn native executables.\nAvoid passing paths containing `=` (and similar MSYS2-sensitive characters) to Symfony Process when operating under Git Bash/MSYS2.\nWhere applicable, configure MSYS2 to disable or restrict argument conversion (e.g. via `MSYS2_ARG_CONV_EXCL`), understanding this may affect other tooling behavior.",
"id": "GHSA-r39x-jcww-82v6",
"modified": "2026-01-29T03:50:41Z",
"published": "2026-01-28T21:28:10Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/symfony/symfony/security/advisories/GHSA-r39x-jcww-82v6"
},
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-24739"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/symfony/symfony/issues/62921"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/symfony/symfony/pull/63164"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/symfony/symfony/commit/35203939050e5abd3caf2202113b00cab5d379b3"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/symfony/symfony/commit/ec154f6f95f8c60f831998ec4d246a857e9d179b"
},
{
"type": "PACKAGE",
"url": "https://github.com/symfony/symfony"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
],
"summary": "Symfony\u0027s incorrect argument escaping under MSYS2/Git Bash can lead to destructive file operations on Windows"
}
GHSA-R496-H5J2-R5VW
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-04-30 18:09 – Updated: 2022-04-30 18:09Some implementations of rlogin allow root access if given a -froot parameter.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-1999-0113"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-88"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "1994-05-23T04:00:00Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "Some implementations of rlogin allow root access if given a -froot parameter.",
"id": "GHSA-r496-h5j2-r5vw",
"modified": "2022-04-30T18:09:59Z",
"published": "2022-04-30T18:09:59Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-1999-0113"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/458"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": []
}
GHSA-R56X-JV68-VPM6
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2024-12-19 03:30 – Updated: 2024-12-19 03:30Dell PowerStore contains an Improper Neutralization of Argument Delimiters in a Command ('Argument Injection') vulnerability. A low privileged attacker with local access could potentially exploit this vulnerability, leading to modification of arbitrary system files.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2024-51532"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-88"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2024-12-19T02:15:23Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "Dell PowerStore contains an Improper Neutralization of Argument Delimiters in a Command (\u0027Argument Injection\u0027) vulnerability. A low privileged attacker with local access could potentially exploit this vulnerability, leading to modification of arbitrary system files.",
"id": "GHSA-r56x-jv68-vpm6",
"modified": "2024-12-19T03:30:42Z",
"published": "2024-12-19T03:30:42Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-51532"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.dell.com/support/kbdoc/en-ie/000250483/dsa-2024-462-dell-powerstore-t-security-update-for-multiple-vulnerabilities"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
Mitigation
Strategy: Parameterization
Where possible, avoid building a single string that contains the command and its arguments. Some languages or frameworks have functions that support specifying independent arguments, e.g. as an array, which is used to automatically perform the appropriate quoting or escaping while building the command. For example, in PHP, escapeshellarg() can be used to escape a single argument to system(), or exec() can be called with an array of arguments. In C, code can often be refactored from using system() - which accepts a single string - to using exec(), which requires separate function arguments for each parameter.
Mitigation
Strategy: Input Validation
Understand all the potential areas where untrusted inputs can enter your product: parameters or arguments, cookies, anything read from the network, environment variables, request headers as well as content, URL components, e-mail, files, databases, and any external systems that provide data to the application. Perform input validation at well-defined interfaces.
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.
Mitigation
Directly convert your input type into the expected data type, such as using a conversion function that translates a string into a number. After converting to the expected data type, ensure that the input's values fall within the expected range of allowable values and that multi-field consistencies are maintained.
Mitigation
- Inputs should be decoded and canonicalized to the application's current internal representation before being validated (CWE-180, CWE-181). Make sure that your application does not inadvertently decode the same input twice (CWE-174). Such errors could be used to bypass allowlist schemes by introducing dangerous inputs after they have been checked. Use libraries such as the OWASP ESAPI Canonicalization control.
- Consider performing repeated canonicalization until your input does not change any more. This will avoid double-decoding and similar scenarios, but it might inadvertently modify inputs that are allowed to contain properly-encoded dangerous content.
Mitigation
When exchanging data between components, ensure that both components are using the same character encoding. Ensure that the proper encoding is applied at each interface. Explicitly set the encoding you are using whenever the protocol allows you to do so.
Mitigation
When your application combines data from multiple sources, perform the validation after the sources have been combined. The individual data elements may pass the validation step but violate the intended restrictions after they have been combined.
Mitigation
Use dynamic tools and techniques that interact with the product using large test suites with many diverse inputs, such as fuzz testing (fuzzing), robustness testing, and fault injection. The product's operation may slow down, but it should not become unstable, crash, or generate incorrect results.
CAPEC-137: Parameter Injection
An adversary manipulates the content of request parameters for the purpose of undermining the security of the target. Some parameter encodings use text characters as separators. For example, parameters in a HTTP GET message are encoded as name-value pairs separated by an ampersand (&). If an attacker can supply text strings that are used to fill in these parameters, then they can inject special characters used in the encoding scheme to add or modify parameters. For example, if user input is fed directly into an HTTP GET request and the user provides the value "myInput&new_param=myValue", then the input parameter is set to myInput, but a new parameter (new_param) is also added with a value of myValue. This can significantly change the meaning of the query that is processed by the server. Any encoding scheme where parameters are identified and separated by text characters is potentially vulnerable to this attack - the HTTP GET encoding used above is just one example.
CAPEC-174: Flash Parameter Injection
An adversary takes advantage of improper data validation to inject malicious global parameters into a Flash file embedded within an HTML document. Flash files can leverage user-submitted data to configure the Flash document and access the embedding HTML document.
CAPEC-41: Using Meta-characters in E-mail Headers to Inject Malicious Payloads
This type of attack involves an attacker leveraging meta-characters in email headers to inject improper behavior into email programs. Email software has become increasingly sophisticated and feature-rich. In addition, email applications are ubiquitous and connected directly to the Web making them ideal targets to launch and propagate attacks. As the user demand for new functionality in email applications grows, they become more like browsers with complex rendering and plug in routines. As more email functionality is included and abstracted from the user, this creates opportunities for attackers. Virtually all email applications do not list email header information by default, however the email header contains valuable attacker vectors for the attacker to exploit particularly if the behavior of the email client application is known. Meta-characters are hidden from the user, but can contain scripts, enumerations, probes, and other attacks against the user's system.
CAPEC-460: HTTP Parameter Pollution (HPP)
An adversary adds duplicate HTTP GET/POST parameters by injecting query string delimiters. Via HPP it may be possible to override existing hardcoded HTTP parameters, modify the application behaviors, access and, potentially exploit, uncontrollable variables, and bypass input validation checkpoints and WAF rules.
CAPEC-88: OS Command Injection
In this type of an attack, an adversary injects operating system commands into existing application functions. An application that uses untrusted input to build command strings is vulnerable. An adversary can leverage OS command injection in an application to elevate privileges, execute arbitrary commands and compromise the underlying operating system.