Common Weakness Enumeration

CWE-79

Allowed

Improper 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.

68581 vulnerabilities reference this CWE, most recent first.

GHSA-PR22-P9RP-2CQV

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-08-05 14:40 – Updated: 2026-08-05 14:40

Summary

Ghost: Cross-Site Scripting in Feature Image Captions

Details

Impact

An input validation issue allowed any staff user to create a post with content that could be used to hijack another staff user's Ghost Admin session resulting in privilege escalation.

Vulnerable versions

This vulnerability is present in Ghost from v4.9.0 up to v6.54.0.

Patches

v6.54.1 contains a fix for this issue.

How to update

For self-hosters using Docker, find Docker's official Ghost image here. Updating a Docker-based Ghost instance is documented here.

If your Ghost is a Ghost-CLI install see our documentation on updating it to the latest version here.

References

Ghost thanks Versa for disclosing this vulnerability responsibly.

For more information

If you have any questions or comments about this advisory, email Ghost at security@ghost.org.

Severity

4.3 (Medium)


                  
                    CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:H/UI:R/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L

Show details on source website

JSON

To clipboard

{
  "affected": [
    {
      "package": {
        "ecosystem": "npm",
        "name": "ghost"
      },
      "ranges": [
        {
          "events": [
            {
              "introduced": "4.9.0"
            },
            {
              "fixed": "6.54.1"
            }
          ],
          "type": "ECOSYSTEM"
        }
      ]
    }
  ],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2026-70596"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-79"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": true,
    "github_reviewed_at": "2026-08-05T14:40:15Z",
    "nvd_published_at": null,
    "severity": "MODERATE"
  },
  "details": "### Impact\n\nAn input validation issue allowed any staff user to create a post with content that could be used to hijack another staff user\u0027s Ghost Admin session resulting in privilege escalation.\n\n### Vulnerable versions\n\nThis vulnerability is present in Ghost from v4.9.0 up to v6.54.0.\n\n### Patches\n\nv6.54.1 contains a fix for this issue.\n\n### How to update\n\nFor self-hosters using Docker, find [Docker\u0027s official Ghost image here](https://hub.docker.com/_/ghost). Updating a Docker-based Ghost instance [is documented here](https://docs.ghost.org/install/docker#updating-ghost). \n\nIf your Ghost is a Ghost-CLI install see our documentation on [updating it to the latest version here](https://docs.ghost.org/update). \n\n### References\n\nGhost thanks Versa for disclosing this vulnerability responsibly.\n\n### For more information\n\nIf you have any questions or comments about this advisory, email Ghost at [security@ghost.org](mailto:security@ghost.org).",
  "id": "GHSA-pr22-p9rp-2cqv",
  "modified": "2026-08-05T14:40:57Z",
  "published": "2026-08-05T14:40:15Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/TryGhost/Ghost/security/advisories/GHSA-pr22-p9rp-2cqv"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/TryGhost/Ghost/pull/29635"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/TryGhost/Ghost/commit/a8bea3a4ceec4c852b880f4885119453c3d8588e"
    },
    {
      "type": "PACKAGE",
      "url": "https://github.com/TryGhost/Ghost"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/TryGhost/Ghost/releases/tag/v6.54.1"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": [
    {
      "score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:H/UI:R/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L",
      "type": "CVSS_V3"
    }
  ],
  "summary": "Ghost: Cross-Site Scripting in Feature Image Captions"
}

GHSA-PR27-H5XW-9FR6

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2025-01-07 09:30 – Updated: 2025-01-07 09:30

Details

The Solar Wizard Lite plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Stored Cross-Site Scripting via the plugin's 'solar_wizard' shortcode in all versions up to, and including, 1.2.4 due to insufficient input sanitization and output escaping on user supplied attributes. This makes it possible for authenticated attackers, with contributor-level access and above, to inject arbitrary web scripts in pages that will execute whenever a user accesses an injected page.

Severity

6.4 (Medium)


                  
                    CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:L/I:L/A:N

Show details on source website

JSON

To clipboard

{
  "affected": [],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2024-11764"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-79"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": false,
    "github_reviewed_at": null,
    "nvd_published_at": "2025-01-07T07:15:26Z",
    "severity": "MODERATE"
  },
  "details": "The Solar Wizard Lite plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Stored Cross-Site Scripting via the plugin\u0027s \u0027solar_wizard\u0027 shortcode in all versions up to, and including, 1.2.4 due to insufficient input sanitization and output escaping on user supplied attributes. This makes it possible for authenticated attackers, with contributor-level access and above, to inject arbitrary web scripts in pages that will execute whenever a user accesses an injected page.",
  "id": "GHSA-pr27-h5xw-9fr6",
  "modified": "2025-01-07T09:30:45Z",
  "published": "2025-01-07T09:30:45Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-11764"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://plugins.trac.wordpress.org/changeset?sfp_email=\u0026sfph_mail=\u0026reponame=\u0026old=3215301%40solar-wizard-lite\u0026new=3215301%40solar-wizard-lite\u0026sfp_email=\u0026sfph_mail="
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://www.wordfence.com/threat-intel/vulnerabilities/id/adcab262-08ca-448d-b1fd-295d421b82a3?source=cve"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": [
    {
      "score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:L/I:L/A:N",
      "type": "CVSS_V3"
    }
  ]
}

GHSA-PR2C-95WW-2XR3

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2021-12-15 00:00 – Updated: 2021-12-15 00:00

Details

The Magic Post Voice WordPress plugin is vulnerable to Reflected Cross-Site Scripting via the ids parameter found in the ~/inc/admin/main.php file which allows attackers to inject arbitrary web scripts, in versions up to and including 1.2.

Show details on source website

JSON

To clipboard

{
  "affected": [],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2021-39315"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-79"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": false,
    "github_reviewed_at": null,
    "nvd_published_at": "2021-12-14T16:15:00Z",
    "severity": "MODERATE"
  },
  "details": "The Magic Post Voice WordPress plugin is vulnerable to Reflected Cross-Site Scripting via the ids parameter found in the ~/inc/admin/main.php file which allows attackers to inject arbitrary web scripts, in versions up to and including 1.2.",
  "id": "GHSA-pr2c-95ww-2xr3",
  "modified": "2021-12-15T00:00:55Z",
  "published": "2021-12-15T00:00:55Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2021-39315"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://plugins.trac.wordpress.org/browser/magic-post-voice/trunk/inc/admin/main.php#L14"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://www.wordfence.com/vulnerability-advisories/#CVE-2021-39315"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": []
}

GHSA-PR2H-8F83-VHFR

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-02-19 18:31 – Updated: 2026-02-19 18:31

Details

The salavat counter Plugin plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Stored Cross-Site Scripting via the 'image_url' parameter in all versions up to, and including, 0.9.5 due to insufficient input sanitization and output escaping. This makes it possible for authenticated attackers, with administrator-level access and above, to inject arbitrary web scripts in pages that will execute whenever a user accesses an injected page.

Severity

4.4 (Medium)


                  
                    CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:H/UI:N/S:C/C:L/I:L/A:N

Show details on source website

JSON

To clipboard

{
  "affected": [],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2026-1047"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-79"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": false,
    "github_reviewed_at": null,
    "nvd_published_at": "2026-02-19T07:17:43Z",
    "severity": "MODERATE"
  },
  "details": "The salavat counter Plugin plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Stored Cross-Site Scripting via the \u0027image_url\u0027 parameter in all versions up to, and including, 0.9.5 due to insufficient input sanitization and output escaping. This makes it possible for authenticated attackers, with administrator-level access and above, to inject arbitrary web scripts in pages that will execute whenever a user accesses an injected page.",
  "id": "GHSA-pr2h-8f83-vhfr",
  "modified": "2026-02-19T18:31:50Z",
  "published": "2026-02-19T18:31:50Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-1047"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://downloads.wordpress.org/plugin/salavat-counter.zip"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://plugins.trac.wordpress.org/browser/salavat-counter/tags/0.9.5/wp-table-options.php#L352"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://plugins.trac.wordpress.org/browser/salavat-counter/trunk/wp-table-options.php#L352"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://wordpress.org/plugins/salavat-counter"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://www.wordfence.com/threat-intel/vulnerabilities/id/6696b262-c6e5-4413-b7dc-894965daa5ac?source=cve"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": [
    {
      "score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:H/UI:N/S:C/C:L/I:L/A:N",
      "type": "CVSS_V3"
    }
  ]
}

GHSA-PR2J-HH93-WG3X

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-02 03:59 – Updated: 2022-05-02 03:59

Details

Multiple cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerabilities in oBlog allow remote attackers to inject arbitrary web script or HTML via the (1) commentName, (2) commentEmail, (3) commentWeb, or (4) commentText parameter to article.php; and allow remote authenticated administrators to inject arbitrary web script or HTML via the (5) article_id or (6) title parameter to admin/write.php, the (7) category_id or (8) category_name parameter to admin/groups.php, the (9) blogroll_id or (10) title parameter to admin/blogroll.php, or the (11) blog_name or (12) tag_line parameter to admin/settings.php.

Show details on source website

JSON

To clipboard

{
  "affected": [],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2009-4908"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-79"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": false,
    "github_reviewed_at": null,
    "nvd_published_at": "2010-06-25T19:30:00Z",
    "severity": "MODERATE"
  },
  "details": "Multiple cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerabilities in oBlog allow remote attackers to inject arbitrary web script or HTML via the (1) commentName, (2) commentEmail, (3) commentWeb, or (4) commentText parameter to article.php; and allow remote authenticated administrators to inject arbitrary web script or HTML via the (5) article_id or (6) title parameter to admin/write.php, the (7) category_id or (8) category_name parameter to admin/groups.php, the (9) blogroll_id or (10) title parameter to admin/blogroll.php, or the (11) blog_name or (12) tag_line parameter to admin/settings.php.",
  "id": "GHSA-pr2j-hh93-wg3x",
  "modified": "2022-05-02T03:59:33Z",
  "published": "2022-05-02T03:59:33Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2009-4908"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://exchange.xforce.ibmcloud.com/vulnerabilities/54713"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "http://osvdb.org/60906"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "http://packetstormsecurity.org/0912-exploits/oblog-xssxsrf.txt"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "http://secunia.com/advisories/37661"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": []
}

GHSA-PR2V-JX2C-WG9F

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-07-20 18:55 – Updated: 2026-07-20 18:55

Summary

Tornado vulnerable to Header Injection and XSS via reason argument

Details

Header injection and XSS via `reason` argument

Summary

The reason argument (used by both RequestHandler.set_status and tornado.web.HTTPError is designed to allow applications to pass custom "reason" phrases (the "Not Found" in HTTP/1.1 404 Not Found) to the HTTP status line (mainly for non-standard status codes). Vulnerabilities exist in Tornado versions prior to 6.5.3 if untrusted data is passed as the reason argument.

Details

In vulnerable versions, the supplied reason phrase is used unescaped in HTTP headers (where it could be used for header injection) or in HTML in the default error page (where it could be used for XSS).

Impact

Type: Reflected Cross-Site Scripting (CWE-79) in default error page, or header injection (CWE-644)
Actors: Remote attacker who can cause the application to raise HTTPError/set_status with an attacker-controlled reason (e.g., via query parameter used by developer).
Effect: Execution of arbitrary JavaScript in victims' browsers when they view the error page — possible session token theft, CSRF escalation, UI spoofing, or other client-side attacks depending on context.
Scope: Only applications that explicitly reflect untrusted input into reason are affected.

Mitigation

Aside from upgrading to Tornado 6.5.3 or newer, the vulnerability can be mitigated by not using untrusted data for the reason argument. In the intended use case the reason argument would generally be a string literal and not derived from user input. Also, the reason argument is rarely required (reason phrases are not used at all in HTTP/2) and can generally be omitted.

For a general-purpose error message in HTTPError, consider using the log_message argument instead of reason.

Severity

5.4 (Medium)


                  
                    CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:N

Show details on source website

JSON

To clipboard

{
  "affected": [
    {
      "package": {
        "ecosystem": "PyPI",
        "name": "tornado"
      },
      "ranges": [
        {
          "events": [
            {
              "introduced": "0"
            },
            {
              "fixed": "6.5.3"
            }
          ],
          "type": "ECOSYSTEM"
        }
      ]
    }
  ],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2025-67724"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-79"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": true,
    "github_reviewed_at": "2026-07-20T18:55:11Z",
    "nvd_published_at": "2025-12-12T06:15:41Z",
    "severity": "MODERATE"
  },
  "details": "# Header injection and XSS via `reason` argument\n\n## Summary\n\nThe `reason` argument (used by both `RequestHandler.set_status` and `tornado.web.HTTPError` is designed to allow applications to pass custom \"reason\" phrases (the \"Not Found\" in `HTTP/1.1 404 Not Found`) to the HTTP status line (mainly for non-standard status codes). Vulnerabilities exist in Tornado versions prior to 6.5.3 if untrusted data is passed as the `reason` argument.\n\n## Details\n\nIn vulnerable versions, the supplied `reason` phrase is used unescaped in HTTP headers (where it could be used for header injection) or in HTML in the default error page (where it could be used for XSS).\n\n## Impact\n\n* **Type:** Reflected Cross-Site Scripting (CWE-79) in default error page, or header injection (CWE-644)\n* **Actors:** Remote attacker who can cause the application to raise `HTTPError`/`set_status` with an attacker-controlled `reason` (e.g., via query parameter used by developer).\n* **Effect:** Execution of arbitrary JavaScript in victims\u0027 browsers when they view the error page \u2014 possible session token theft, CSRF escalation, UI spoofing, or other client-side attacks depending on context.\n* **Scope:** Only applications that explicitly reflect untrusted input into `reason` are affected.\n\n## Mitigation\n\nAside from upgrading to Tornado 6.5.3 or newer, the vulnerability can be mitigated by not using untrusted data for the `reason` argument. In the intended use case the `reason` argument would generally be a string literal and not derived from user input. Also, the `reason` argument is rarely required (reason phrases are not used at all in HTTP/2) and can generally be omitted.\n\nFor a general-purpose error message in HTTPError, consider using the `log_message` argument instead of `reason`.",
  "id": "GHSA-pr2v-jx2c-wg9f",
  "modified": "2026-07-20T18:55:11Z",
  "published": "2026-07-20T18:55:11Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/tornadoweb/tornado/security/advisories/GHSA-pr2v-jx2c-wg9f"
    },
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2025-67724"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/tornadoweb/tornado/commit/9c163aebeaad9e6e7d28bac1f33580eb00b0e421"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/pypa/advisory-database/tree/main/vulns/tornado/PYSEC-2025-265.yaml"
    },
    {
      "type": "PACKAGE",
      "url": "https://github.com/tornadoweb/tornado"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/tornadoweb/tornado/releases/tag/v6.5.3"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": [
    {
      "score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:N",
      "type": "CVSS_V3"
    }
  ],
  "summary": "Tornado vulnerable to Header Injection and XSS via reason argument"
}

GHSA-PR2X-3Q8M-F66J

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2025-12-10 21:31 – Updated: 2025-12-10 21:31

Details

Adobe Experience Manager versions 6.5.23 and earlier are affected by a stored Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) vulnerability that could be abused by a low privileged attacker to inject malicious scripts into vulnerable form fields. Malicious JavaScript may be executed in a victim’s browser when they browse to the page containing the vulnerable field.

Severity

5.4 (Medium)


                  
                    CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:R/S:C/C:L/I:L/A:N

Show details on source website

JSON

To clipboard

{
  "affected": [],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2025-64576"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-79"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": false,
    "github_reviewed_at": null,
    "nvd_published_at": "2025-12-10T19:16:20Z",
    "severity": "MODERATE"
  },
  "details": "Adobe Experience Manager versions 6.5.23 and earlier are affected by a stored Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) vulnerability that could be abused by a low privileged attacker to inject malicious scripts into vulnerable form fields. Malicious JavaScript may be executed in a victim\u2019s browser when they browse to the page containing the vulnerable field.",
  "id": "GHSA-pr2x-3q8m-f66j",
  "modified": "2025-12-10T21:31:34Z",
  "published": "2025-12-10T21:31:34Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2025-64576"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://helpx.adobe.com/security/products/experience-manager/apsb25-115.html"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": [
    {
      "score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:R/S:C/C:L/I:L/A:N",
      "type": "CVSS_V3"
    }
  ]
}

GHSA-PR34-2V5X-6QJQ

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-03-04 22:47 – Updated: 2026-03-09 15:48

Summary

ZITADEL has 1-Click Account Takeover via XSS in /saml-post Endpoint

Details

Summary

A vulnerability was discovered in Zitadel's login V2 interface that allowed a possible account takeover.

Impact

Zitadel exposes an HTTP endpoint named /saml-post. This endpoint is used for handling requests to SAML IdPs and accepts two HTTP GET parameters: url and id. When these parameters are supplied, users’ browsers auto-submit an HTTP POST request to the provided url parameter.

The endpoint insecurely redirects users using the provided url GET parameter. As a result, by specifying a javascript: scheme, malicious JS code could be executed on Zitadel users’ browsers.

The endpoint also reflects user-supplied input in the server response, without HTML-encoding it. As a result, it is possible to inject arbitrary HTML code, which again leads to malicious JS code execution in the Zitadel users’ browsers.

An unauthenticated remote attacker can exploit these XSS vulnerabilities, and thus, execute malicious JavaScript code on behalf of Zitadel users. By doing so, such an attacker could reset the password of their victims, and take over their accounts.

It's important to note that this specific attack vector is mitigated for accounts that have Multi-Factor Authentication (MFA) or Passwordless authentication enabled.

Affected Versions

Systems running one of the following versions are affected: - 4.x: 4.0.0 through 4.11.1 (including RC versions)

Important Note: Although this /saml-post endpoint is used when Zitadel is integrated with a SAML Identity Provider (IdP), the vulnerability in this finding does not require Zitadel to be configured with a SAML IdP. Consequently, Zitadel is vulnerable in its default, out-of-the-box configuration.

Patches

The vulnerability has been addressed in the latest releases. The patch reworked the integration of SAML IdPs and the /saml-post endpoint no longer exists. Additionally, the page to change the password, now always requires the user's current password regardless of the state of the authenticated session.

4.x: Upgrade to >= 4.12.0

Workarounds

The recommended solution is to upgrade to a patched version. If an upgrade is not possible and no SAML IdP integration is needed, a WAF or reverse proxy rule can be deployed to prevent access to the endpoint.

Questions

If there are any questions or comments about this advisory, please email them to security@zitadel.com

Credits

ZITADEL extends thanks once again to Amit Laish from GE Vernova for finding and reporting the vulnerability.

Severity

9.3 (Critical)


                  
                    CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:N

Show details on source website

JSON

To clipboard

{
  "affected": [
    {
      "package": {
        "ecosystem": "Go",
        "name": "github.com/zitadel/zitadel"
      },
      "ranges": [
        {
          "events": [
            {
              "introduced": "4.0.0"
            },
            {
              "fixed": "4.12.0"
            }
          ],
          "type": "ECOSYSTEM"
        }
      ]
    },
    {
      "package": {
        "ecosystem": "Go",
        "name": "github.com/zitadel/zitadel/v2"
      },
      "ranges": [
        {
          "events": [
            {
              "introduced": "4.0.0"
            },
            {
              "fixed": "4.12.0"
            }
          ],
          "type": "ECOSYSTEM"
        }
      ]
    }
  ],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2026-29191"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-79"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": true,
    "github_reviewed_at": "2026-03-04T22:47:08Z",
    "nvd_published_at": "2026-03-07T15:15:55Z",
    "severity": "CRITICAL"
  },
  "details": "### Summary\n\nA vulnerability was discovered in Zitadel\u0027s login V2 interface that allowed a possible account takeover.\n\n### Impact\n\nZitadel exposes an HTTP endpoint named /saml-post. This endpoint is used for handling requests to SAML IdPs and accepts two HTTP GET parameters: url and id. When these parameters are supplied, users\u2019 browsers auto-submit an HTTP POST request to the provided url parameter.\n \nThe endpoint insecurely redirects users using the provided url GET parameter. As a result, by specifying a javascript: scheme, malicious JS code could be executed on Zitadel users\u2019 browsers. \n\nThe endpoint also reflects user-supplied input in the server response, without HTML-encoding it. As a result, it is possible to inject arbitrary HTML code, which again leads to malicious JS code execution in the Zitadel users\u2019 browsers.\n\nAn unauthenticated remote attacker can exploit these XSS vulnerabilities, and thus, execute malicious JavaScript code on behalf of Zitadel users. By doing so, such an attacker could reset the password of their victims, and take over their accounts.\n\nIt\u0027s important to note that this specific attack vector is mitigated for accounts that have Multi-Factor Authentication (MFA) or Passwordless authentication enabled.\n\n### Affected Versions\n\nSystems running one of the following versions are affected:\n- **4.x**: `4.0.0` through `4.11.1` (including RC versions)\n \nImportant Note: Although this /saml-post endpoint is used when Zitadel is integrated with a SAML Identity Provider (IdP), the vulnerability in this finding does not require Zitadel to be configured with a SAML IdP. Consequently, Zitadel is vulnerable in its default, out-of-the-box configuration.\n\n### Patches\n\nThe vulnerability has been addressed in the latest releases. The patch reworked the integration of SAML IdPs and the /saml-post endpoint no longer exists. Additionally, the page to change the password, now always requires the user\u0027s current password regardless of the state of the authenticated session.\n\n4.x: Upgrade to \u003e= [4.12.0](https://github.com/zitadel/zitadel/releases/tag/v4.12.0)\n\n### Workarounds\n\nThe recommended solution is to upgrade to a patched version. If an upgrade is not possible and no SAML IdP integration is needed, a WAF or reverse proxy rule can be deployed to prevent access to the endpoint.\n\n### Questions\n\nIf there are any questions or comments about this advisory, please email them to [security@zitadel.com](mailto:security@zitadel.com)\n\n### Credits\n\nZITADEL extends thanks once again to Amit Laish from GE Vernova for finding and reporting the vulnerability.",
  "id": "GHSA-pr34-2v5x-6qjq",
  "modified": "2026-03-09T15:48:27Z",
  "published": "2026-03-04T22:47:08Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/zitadel/zitadel/security/advisories/GHSA-pr34-2v5x-6qjq"
    },
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-29191"
    },
    {
      "type": "PACKAGE",
      "url": "https://github.com/zitadel/zitadel"
    }
  ],
  "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:N",
      "type": "CVSS_V3"
    }
  ],
  "summary": "ZITADEL has 1-Click Account Takeover via XSS in /saml-post Endpoint"
}

GHSA-PR36-W94P-68R3

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2021-11-24 00:00 – Updated: 2022-01-11 00:02

Details

Insufficient data validation in New Tab Page in Google Chrome prior to 95.0.4638.69 allowed a remote attacker to inject arbitrary scripts or HTML in a new browser tab via a crafted HTML page.

Show details on source website

JSON

To clipboard

{
  "affected": [],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2021-37999"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-79"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": false,
    "github_reviewed_at": null,
    "nvd_published_at": "2021-11-23T22:15:00Z",
    "severity": "MODERATE"
  },
  "details": "Insufficient data validation in New Tab Page in Google Chrome prior to 95.0.4638.69 allowed a remote attacker to inject arbitrary scripts or HTML in a new browser tab via a crafted HTML page.",
  "id": "GHSA-pr36-w94p-68r3",
  "modified": "2022-01-11T00:02:39Z",
  "published": "2021-11-24T00:00:28Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2021-37999"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://chromereleases.googleblog.com/2021/10/stable-channel-update-for-desktop_28.html"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://crbug.com/1251541"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-announce@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/3W46HRT2UVHWSLZB6JZHQF6JNQWKV744"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://www.debian.org/security/2022/dsa-5046"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": []
}

GHSA-PR39-PQJ4-HFFR

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2023-07-06 21:14 – Updated: 2024-04-04 05:43

Details

Auth. (admin+) Stored Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) vulnerability in Snap Creek Software EZP Maintenance Mode plugin <= 1.0.1 versions.

Severity

5.9 (Medium)


                  
                    CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:H/UI:R/S:C/C:L/I:L/A:L

Show details on source website

JSON

To clipboard

{
  "affected": [],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2023-23682"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-79"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": false,
    "github_reviewed_at": null,
    "nvd_published_at": "2023-05-15T13:15:10Z",
    "severity": "MODERATE"
  },
  "details": "Auth. (admin+) Stored Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) vulnerability in Snap Creek Software EZP Maintenance Mode plugin \u003c=\u00a01.0.1 versions.",
  "id": "GHSA-pr39-pqj4-hffr",
  "modified": "2024-04-04T05:43:18Z",
  "published": "2023-07-06T21:14:57Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2023-23682"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://patchstack.com/database/vulnerability/easy-pie-maintenance-mode/wordpress-ezp-maintenance-mode-plugin-1-0-1-cross-site-scripting-xss-vulnerability?_s_id=cve"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": [
    {
      "score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:H/UI:R/S:C/C:L/I:L/A:L",
      "type": "CVSS_V3"
    }
  ]
}

Mitigation MIT-4

Architecture and Design

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

Implementation Architecture and Design

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

Architecture and Design Implementation

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

Architecture and Design

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

Architecture and Design

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

Implementation

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

Implementation

With Struts, write all data from form beans with the bean's filter attribute set to true.

Mitigation MIT-31

Implementation

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

Implementation

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

Architecture and Design

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

Operation

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

Operation Implementation

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.

← Back to the CWE list

CWE-79

Improper Neutralization of Input During Web Page Generation ('Cross-site Scripting')

Impact

Vulnerable versions

Patches

How to update

References

For more information

Header injection and XSS via reason argument

Summary

Details

Impact

Mitigation

Summary

Impact

Affected Versions

Patches

Workarounds

Questions

Credits

Mitigation MIT-4

Mitigation

Mitigation MIT-6

Mitigation MIT-15

Mitigation MIT-27

Mitigation MIT-30.1

Mitigation MIT-43

Mitigation MIT-31

Mitigation MIT-5

Mitigation MIT-21

Mitigation MIT-29

Mitigation MIT-16

CAPEC-209: XSS Using MIME Type Mismatch

CAPEC-588: DOM-Based XSS

CAPEC-591: Reflected XSS

CAPEC-592: Stored XSS

CAPEC-63: Cross-Site Scripting (XSS)

CAPEC-85: AJAX Footprinting

Header injection and XSS via `reason` argument