CWE-346
Allowed-with-ReviewOrigin Validation Error
Abstraction: Class · Status: Draft
The product does not properly verify that the source of data or communication is valid.
961 vulnerabilities reference this CWE, most recent first.
GHSA-HC6R-WPFC-Q7M8
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2024-10-01 18:31 – Updated: 2025-11-04 00:31A compromised content process could have allowed for the arbitrary loading of cross-origin pages. This vulnerability affects Firefox < 131, Firefox ESR < 128.3, Firefox ESR < 115.16, Thunderbird < 128.3, and Thunderbird < 131.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2024-9392"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-346"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2024-10-01T16:15:10Z",
"severity": "CRITICAL"
},
"details": "A compromised content process could have allowed for the arbitrary loading of cross-origin pages. This vulnerability affects Firefox \u003c 131, Firefox ESR \u003c 128.3, Firefox ESR \u003c 115.16, Thunderbird \u003c 128.3, and Thunderbird \u003c 131.",
"id": "GHSA-hc6r-wpfc-q7m8",
"modified": "2025-11-04T00:31:32Z",
"published": "2024-10-01T18:31:18Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-9392"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1899154"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1905843"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://lists.debian.org/debian-lts-announce/2024/10/msg00004.html"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://lists.debian.org/debian-lts-announce/2024/10/msg00006.html"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.mozilla.org/security/advisories/mfsa2024-46"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.mozilla.org/security/advisories/mfsa2024-47"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.mozilla.org/security/advisories/mfsa2024-48"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.mozilla.org/security/advisories/mfsa2024-49"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.mozilla.org/security/advisories/mfsa2024-50"
}
],
"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"
}
]
}
GHSA-HCH9-GPRW-2G9J
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2023-10-23 15:30 – Updated: 2024-04-04 08:53The Vue.js Devtools extension was found to leak screenshot data back to a malicious web page via the standard postMessage() API. By creating a malicious web page with an iFrame targeting a sensitive resource (i.e. a locally accessible file or sensitive website), and registering a listener on the web page, the extension sent messages back to the listener, containing the base64 encoded screenshot data of the sensitive resource.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2023-5718"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-200",
"CWE-346"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2023-10-23T15:15:09Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "The Vue.js Devtools extension was found to leak screenshot data back to a malicious web page via the standard `postMessage()` API. By creating a malicious web page with an iFrame targeting a sensitive resource (i.e. a locally accessible file or sensitive website), and registering a listener on the web page, the extension sent messages back to the listener, containing the base64 encoded screenshot data of the sensitive resource.",
"id": "GHSA-hch9-gprw-2g9j",
"modified": "2024-04-04T08:53:13Z",
"published": "2023-10-23T15:30:24Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2023-5718"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://gist.github.com/CalumHutton/bdb97077a66021ed455f87823cd7c7cb"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-HCJF-GXG6-HWVR
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-24 17:47 – Updated: 2022-05-24 17:47An overly permissive CORS policy in Devolutions Server before 2021.1 and Devolutions Server LTS before 2020.3.18 allows a remote attacker to leak cross-origin data via a crafted HTML page.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2021-28048"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-346"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2021-04-14T20:15:00Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "An overly permissive CORS policy in Devolutions Server before 2021.1 and Devolutions Server LTS before 2020.3.18 allows a remote attacker to leak cross-origin data via a crafted HTML page.",
"id": "GHSA-hcjf-gxg6-hwvr",
"modified": "2022-05-24T17:47:37Z",
"published": "2022-05-24T17:47:37Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2021-28048"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://devolutions.net/security/advisories/DEVO-2021-0004"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": []
}
GHSA-HF28-W9WF-5X8M
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-06-15 21:30 – Updated: 2026-06-15 21:30Spring Cloud Gateway Server forwards the X-Forwarded-For and Forwarded headers from untrusted proxies in certain configuration scenarios. This affects both the WebMVC and WebFlux Gateway Servers.
Affected versions: Spring Cloud Gateway 3.1.x (fix 3.1.13). Spring Cloud Gateway 4.1.x (fix 4.1.13). Spring Cloud Gateway 4.2.x (fix 4.2.9). Spring Cloud Gateway 4.3.x (fix 4.3.5). Spring Cloud Gateway 5.0.x (fix 5.0.2).
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2026-47825"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-346"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2026-06-15T21:17:13Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "Spring Cloud Gateway Server forwards the X-Forwarded-For and Forwarded headers from untrusted proxies in certain configuration scenarios. This affects both the WebMVC and WebFlux Gateway Servers.\n\nAffected versions:\nSpring Cloud Gateway 3.1.x (fix 3.1.13).\nSpring Cloud Gateway 4.1.x (fix 4.1.13).\nSpring Cloud Gateway 4.2.x (fix 4.2.9).\nSpring Cloud Gateway 4.3.x (fix 4.3.5).\nSpring Cloud Gateway 5.0.x (fix 5.0.2).",
"id": "GHSA-hf28-w9wf-5x8m",
"modified": "2026-06-15T21:30:48Z",
"published": "2026-06-15T21:30:47Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-47825"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://spring.io/security/cve-2026-47825"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:N/I:H/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-HFPQ-RXJ4-WGM5
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-06-05 00:31 – Updated: 2026-06-05 18:31Inappropriate implementation in Chrome for iOS in Google Chrome on iOS prior to 149.0.7827.53 allowed a remote attacker to bypass same origin policy via a crafted HTML page. (Chromium security severity: Low)
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2026-11298"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-346"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2026-06-05T00:17:07Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "Inappropriate implementation in Chrome for iOS in Google Chrome on iOS prior to 149.0.7827.53 allowed a remote attacker to bypass same origin policy via a crafted HTML page. (Chromium security severity: Low)",
"id": "GHSA-hfpq-rxj4-wgm5",
"modified": "2026-06-05T18:31:39Z",
"published": "2026-06-05T00:31:55Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-11298"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://chromereleases.googleblog.com/2026/06/stable-channel-update-for-desktop.html"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://issues.chromium.org/issues/502503860"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-HG35-5J49-4JM5
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-24 16:47 – Updated: 2022-05-24 16:47Gemalto Admin Control Center, all versions prior to 7.92, uses cleartext HTTP to communicate with www3.safenet-inc.com to obtain language packs. This allows attacker to do man-in-the-middle (MITM) attack and replace original language pack by malicious one.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2019-8282"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-346"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2019-06-07T15:29:00Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "Gemalto Admin Control Center, all versions prior to 7.92, uses cleartext HTTP to communicate with www3.safenet-inc.com to obtain language packs. This allows attacker to do man-in-the-middle (MITM) attack and replace original language pack by malicious one.",
"id": "GHSA-hg35-5j49-4jm5",
"modified": "2022-05-24T16:47:40Z",
"published": "2022-05-24T16:47:40Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2019-8282"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://ics-cert.kaspersky.com/advisories/klcert-advisories/2019/06/05/klcert-19-029-gemalto-admin-control-center-uses-cleartext-communication-with-www3-safenet-inc-com"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": []
}
GHSA-HG6J-4RV6-33PG
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-06-03 21:34 – Updated: 2026-06-03 21:34Summary
Cookies set with the cookies parameter on requests are sent after following a cross-origin redirect.
Impact
If a developer uses the cookies parameter on a per-request basis then sensitive data might be leaked to an attacker if they manage to control a redirect.
Workaround
If unable to upgrade, using a Cookie header in the headers parameter is not vulnerable.
Patch: https://github.com/aio-libs/aiohttp/commit/f54c40851b0d6c4bbdab97ba518a223adda32478
{
"affected": [
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "PyPI",
"name": "aiohttp"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "0"
},
{
"fixed": "3.14.0"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
}
],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2026-47265"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-346"
],
"github_reviewed": true,
"github_reviewed_at": "2026-06-03T21:34:38Z",
"nvd_published_at": "2026-06-02T20:16:37Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "### Summary\n\nCookies set with the `cookies` parameter on requests are sent after following a cross-origin redirect.\n\n### Impact\n\nIf a developer uses the `cookies` parameter on a per-request basis then sensitive data might be leaked to an attacker if they manage to control a redirect.\n\n### Workaround\n\nIf unable to upgrade, using a `Cookie` header in the `headers` parameter is not vulnerable.\n\n-----\n\nPatch: https://github.com/aio-libs/aiohttp/commit/f54c40851b0d6c4bbdab97ba518a223adda32478",
"id": "GHSA-hg6j-4rv6-33pg",
"modified": "2026-06-03T21:34:38Z",
"published": "2026-06-03T21:34:38Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/aio-libs/aiohttp/security/advisories/GHSA-hg6j-4rv6-33pg"
},
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-47265"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/aio-libs/aiohttp/commit/f54c40851b0d6c4bbdab97ba518a223adda32478"
},
{
"type": "PACKAGE",
"url": "https://github.com/aio-libs/aiohttp"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/VI:N/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:U",
"type": "CVSS_V4"
}
],
"summary": "AIOHTTP is vulnerable to cross-origin redirect with per-request cookies"
}
GHSA-HGF5-W332-962X
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-13 01:20 – Updated: 2022-05-13 01:20A cross-origin issue existed with "iframe" elements. This was addressed with improved tracking of security origins. This issue affected versions prior to iOS 12, watchOS 5, Safari 12, iTunes 12.9 for Windows, iCloud for Windows 7.7.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2018-4319"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-346"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2019-04-03T18:29:00Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "A cross-origin issue existed with \"iframe\" elements. This was addressed with improved tracking of security origins. This issue affected versions prior to iOS 12, watchOS 5, Safari 12, iTunes 12.9 for Windows, iCloud for Windows 7.7.",
"id": "GHSA-hgf5-w332-962x",
"modified": "2022-05-13T01:20:15Z",
"published": "2022-05-13T01:20:15Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2018-4319"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://support.apple.com/kb/HT209106"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://support.apple.com/kb/HT209108"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://support.apple.com/kb/HT209109"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://support.apple.com/kb/HT209140"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://support.apple.com/kb/HT209141"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-HH43-FJWJ-9J9W
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-07-30 03:31 – Updated: 2026-07-30 21:31Insufficient policy enforcement in SVG in Google Chrome prior to 151.0.7922.72 allowed a remote attacker to leak cross-origin data via a crafted HTML page. (Chromium security severity: Low)
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2026-17911"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-346"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2026-07-30T01:16:55Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "Insufficient policy enforcement in SVG in Google Chrome prior to 151.0.7922.72 allowed a remote attacker to leak cross-origin data via a crafted HTML page. (Chromium security severity: Low)",
"id": "GHSA-hh43-fjwj-9j9w",
"modified": "2026-07-30T21:31:41Z",
"published": "2026-07-30T03:31:16Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-17911"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://chromereleases.googleblog.com/2026/07/stable-channel-update-for-desktop_0887107924.html"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://issues.chromium.org/issues/502505715"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-HHCG-R27J-FHV9
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-03-16 16:34 – Updated: 2026-03-18 21:48Summary
Glances recently added DNS rebinding protection for the MCP endpoint, but the main REST/WebUI FastAPI application still accepts arbitrary Host headers and does not apply TrustedHostMiddleware or an equivalent host allowlist.
As a result, the REST API, WebUI, and token endpoint remain reachable through attacker-controlled domains in classic DNS rebinding scenarios. Once the victim browser has rebound the attacker domain to the Glances service, same-origin policy no longer protects the API because the browser considers the rebinding domain to be the origin.
This is a distinct issue from the previously reported default CORS weakness. CORS is not required for exploitation here because DNS rebinding causes the victim browser to treat the malicious domain as same-origin with the rebinding target.
Details
The MCP endpoint now has explicit host-based transport security:
# glances/outputs/glances_mcp.py
self.mcp_allowed_hosts = ["localhost", "127.0.0.1"]
...
return TransportSecuritySettings(
allowed_hosts=allowed_hosts,
allowed_origins=allowed_origins,
)
However, the main FastAPI application for REST/WebUI/token routes is initialized without any host validation middleware:
# glances/outputs/glances_restful_api.py
self._app = FastAPI(default_response_class=GlancesJSONResponse)
...
self._app.add_middleware(
CORSMiddleware,
allow_origins=config.get_list_value('outputs', 'cors_origins', default=["*"]),
allow_credentials=config.get_bool_value('outputs', 'cors_credentials', default=True),
allow_methods=config.get_list_value('outputs', 'cors_methods', default=["*"]),
allow_headers=config.get_list_value('outputs', 'cors_headers', default=["*"]),
)
...
if self.args.password and self._jwt_handler is not None:
self._app.include_router(self._token_router())
self._app.include_router(self._router())
There is no TrustedHostMiddleware, no comparison against the configured bind host, and no allowlist enforcement for HTTP Host values on the REST/WebUI surface.
The default bind configuration also exposes the service on all interfaces:
# glances/main.py
parser.add_argument(
'-B',
'--bind',
default='0.0.0.0',
dest='bind_address',
help='bind server to the given IPv4/IPv6 address or hostname',
)
This combination means the HTTP service will typically be reachable from the victim machine under an attacker-selected hostname once DNS is rebound to the Glances listener.
The token endpoint is also mounted on the same unprotected FastAPI app:
# glances/outputs/glances_restful_api.py
def _token_router(self) -> APIRouter:
...
router.add_api_route(f'{base_path}/token', self._api_token, methods=['POST'], dependencies=[])
Why This Is Exploitable
In a DNS rebinding attack:
- The attacker serves JavaScript from
https://attacker.example. - The victim visits that page while a Glances instance is reachable on the victim network.
- The attacker's DNS for
attacker.exampleis rebound from the attacker's server to the Glances IP address. - The victim browser now sends same-origin requests to
https://attacker.example, but those requests are delivered to Glances. - Because the Glances REST/WebUI app does not validate the
Hostheader or enforce an allowed-host policy, it serves the response. - The attacker-controlled JavaScript can read the response as same-origin content.
The MCP code already acknowledges this threat model and implements host-level defenses. The REST/WebUI code path does not.
Proof of Concept
This issue is code-validated by inspection of the current implementation:
- REST/WebUI/token are all mounted on a plain
FastAPI(...)app - no
TrustedHostMiddlewareor equivalent host validation is applied - default bind is
0.0.0.0 - MCP has separate rebinding protection, showing the project already recognizes the threat model
In a live deployment, the expected verification is:
# Victim-accessible Glances service
glances -w
# Attacker-controlled rebinding domain first resolves to attacker infra,
# then rebinds to the victim-local Glances IP.
# After rebind, attacker JS can fetch:
fetch("http://attacker.example:61208/api/4/status")
.then(r => r.text())
.then(console.log)
And if the operator exposes Glances without --password (supported and common), the attacker can read endpoints such as:
GET /api/4/status
GET /api/4/all
GET /api/4/config
GET /api/4/args
GET /api/4/serverslist
Even on password-enabled deployments, the missing host validation still leaves the REST/WebUI/token surface reachable through rebinding and increases the value of chains with other authenticated browser issues.
Impact
- Remote read of local/internal REST data: DNS rebinding can expose Glances instances that were intended to be reachable only from a local or internal network context.
- Bypass of origin-based browser isolation: Same-origin policy no longer protects the API once the browser accepts the attacker-controlled rebinding host as the origin.
- High-value chaining surface: This expands the exploitability of previously identified Glances issues involving permissive CORS, credential-bearing API responses, and state-changing authenticated endpoints.
- Token surface exposure: The JWT token route is mounted on the same host-unvalidated app and is therefore also reachable through the rebinding path.
Recommended Fix
Apply host allowlist enforcement to the main REST/WebUI FastAPI app, similar in spirit to the MCP hardening:
from starlette.middleware.trustedhost import TrustedHostMiddleware
allowed_hosts = config.get_list_value(
'outputs',
'allowed_hosts',
default=['localhost', '127.0.0.1'],
)
self._app.add_middleware(TrustedHostMiddleware, allowed_hosts=allowed_hosts)
At minimum:
- reject requests whose
Hostheader does not match an explicit allowlist - do not rely on
0.0.0.0bind semantics as an access-control boundary - document that reverse-proxy deployments must set a strict host allowlist
References
glances/outputs/glances_mcp.pyglances/outputs/glances_restful_api.pyglances/main.py
{
"affected": [
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "PyPI",
"name": "Glances"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "0"
},
{
"fixed": "4.5.2"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
}
],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2026-32632"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-346"
],
"github_reviewed": true,
"github_reviewed_at": "2026-03-16T16:34:23Z",
"nvd_published_at": "2026-03-18T18:16:28Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "## Summary\n\nGlances recently added DNS rebinding protection for the MCP endpoint, but the main REST/WebUI FastAPI application still accepts arbitrary `Host` headers and does not apply `TrustedHostMiddleware` or an equivalent host allowlist.\n\nAs a result, the REST API, WebUI, and token endpoint remain reachable through attacker-controlled domains in classic DNS rebinding scenarios. Once the victim browser has rebound the attacker domain to the Glances service, same-origin policy no longer protects the API because the browser considers the rebinding domain to be the origin.\n\nThis is a distinct issue from the previously reported default CORS weakness. CORS is not required for exploitation here because DNS rebinding causes the victim browser to treat the malicious domain as same-origin with the rebinding target.\n\n## Details\n\nThe MCP endpoint now has explicit host-based transport security:\n\n```python\n# glances/outputs/glances_mcp.py\nself.mcp_allowed_hosts = [\"localhost\", \"127.0.0.1\"]\n...\nreturn TransportSecuritySettings(\n allowed_hosts=allowed_hosts,\n allowed_origins=allowed_origins,\n)\n```\n\nHowever, the main FastAPI application for REST/WebUI/token routes is initialized without any host validation middleware:\n\n```python\n# glances/outputs/glances_restful_api.py\nself._app = FastAPI(default_response_class=GlancesJSONResponse)\n...\nself._app.add_middleware(\n CORSMiddleware,\n allow_origins=config.get_list_value(\u0027outputs\u0027, \u0027cors_origins\u0027, default=[\"*\"]),\n allow_credentials=config.get_bool_value(\u0027outputs\u0027, \u0027cors_credentials\u0027, default=True),\n allow_methods=config.get_list_value(\u0027outputs\u0027, \u0027cors_methods\u0027, default=[\"*\"]),\n allow_headers=config.get_list_value(\u0027outputs\u0027, \u0027cors_headers\u0027, default=[\"*\"]),\n)\n...\nif self.args.password and self._jwt_handler is not None:\n self._app.include_router(self._token_router())\nself._app.include_router(self._router())\n```\n\nThere is no `TrustedHostMiddleware`, no comparison against the configured bind host, and no allowlist enforcement for HTTP `Host` values on the REST/WebUI surface.\n\nThe default bind configuration also exposes the service on all interfaces:\n\n```python\n# glances/main.py\nparser.add_argument(\n \u0027-B\u0027,\n \u0027--bind\u0027,\n default=\u00270.0.0.0\u0027,\n dest=\u0027bind_address\u0027,\n help=\u0027bind server to the given IPv4/IPv6 address or hostname\u0027,\n)\n```\n\nThis combination means the HTTP service will typically be reachable from the victim machine under an attacker-selected hostname once DNS is rebound to the Glances listener.\n\nThe token endpoint is also mounted on the same unprotected FastAPI app:\n\n```python\n# glances/outputs/glances_restful_api.py\ndef _token_router(self) -\u003e APIRouter:\n ...\n router.add_api_route(f\u0027{base_path}/token\u0027, self._api_token, methods=[\u0027POST\u0027], dependencies=[])\n```\n\n## Why This Is Exploitable\n\nIn a DNS rebinding attack:\n\n1. The attacker serves JavaScript from `https://attacker.example`.\n2. The victim visits that page while a Glances instance is reachable on the victim network.\n3. The attacker\u0027s DNS for `attacker.example` is rebound from the attacker\u0027s server to the Glances IP address.\n4. The victim browser now sends same-origin requests to `https://attacker.example`, but those requests are delivered to Glances.\n5. Because the Glances REST/WebUI app does not validate the `Host` header or enforce an allowed-host policy, it serves the response.\n6. The attacker-controlled JavaScript can read the response as same-origin content.\n\nThe MCP code already acknowledges this threat model and implements host-level defenses. The REST/WebUI code path does not.\n\n## Proof of Concept\n\nThis issue is code-validated by inspection of the current implementation:\n\n- REST/WebUI/token are all mounted on a plain `FastAPI(...)` app\n- no `TrustedHostMiddleware` or equivalent host validation is applied\n- default bind is `0.0.0.0`\n- MCP has separate rebinding protection, showing the project already recognizes the threat model\n\nIn a live deployment, the expected verification is:\n\n```bash\n# Victim-accessible Glances service\nglances -w\n\n# Attacker-controlled rebinding domain first resolves to attacker infra,\n# then rebinds to the victim-local Glances IP.\n# After rebind, attacker JS can fetch:\nfetch(\"http://attacker.example:61208/api/4/status\")\n .then(r =\u003e r.text())\n .then(console.log)\n```\n\nAnd if the operator exposes Glances without `--password` (supported and common), the attacker can read endpoints such as:\n\n```bash\nGET /api/4/status\nGET /api/4/all\nGET /api/4/config\nGET /api/4/args\nGET /api/4/serverslist\n```\n\nEven on password-enabled deployments, the missing host validation still leaves the REST/WebUI/token surface reachable through rebinding and increases the value of chains with other authenticated browser issues.\n\n## Impact\n\n- **Remote read of local/internal REST data:** DNS rebinding can expose Glances instances that were intended to be reachable only from a local or internal network context.\n- **Bypass of origin-based browser isolation:** Same-origin policy no longer protects the API once the browser accepts the attacker-controlled rebinding host as the origin.\n- **High-value chaining surface:** This expands the exploitability of previously identified Glances issues involving permissive CORS, credential-bearing API responses, and state-changing authenticated endpoints.\n- **Token surface exposure:** The JWT token route is mounted on the same host-unvalidated app and is therefore also reachable through the rebinding path.\n\n## Recommended Fix\n\nApply host allowlist enforcement to the main REST/WebUI FastAPI app, similar in spirit to the MCP hardening:\n\n```python\nfrom starlette.middleware.trustedhost import TrustedHostMiddleware\n\nallowed_hosts = config.get_list_value(\n \u0027outputs\u0027,\n \u0027allowed_hosts\u0027,\n default=[\u0027localhost\u0027, \u0027127.0.0.1\u0027],\n)\n\nself._app.add_middleware(TrustedHostMiddleware, allowed_hosts=allowed_hosts)\n```\n\nAt minimum:\n\n- reject requests whose `Host` header does not match an explicit allowlist\n- do not rely on `0.0.0.0` bind semantics as an access-control boundary\n- document that reverse-proxy deployments must set a strict host allowlist\n\n## References\n\n- `glances/outputs/glances_mcp.py`\n- `glances/outputs/glances_restful_api.py`\n- `glances/main.py`",
"id": "GHSA-hhcg-r27j-fhv9",
"modified": "2026-03-18T21:48:39Z",
"published": "2026-03-16T16:34:23Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/nicolargo/glances/security/advisories/GHSA-hhcg-r27j-fhv9"
},
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-32632"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/nicolargo/glances/commit/5850c564ee10804fdf884823b9c210eb954dd1f9"
},
{
"type": "PACKAGE",
"url": "https://github.com/nicolargo/glances"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/nicolargo/glances/releases/tag/v4.5.2"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:L/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
],
"summary": "Glances\u0027s REST/WebUI Lacks Host Validation and Remains Exposed to DNS Rebinding"
}
No mitigation information available for this CWE.
CAPEC-111: JSON Hijacking (aka JavaScript Hijacking)
An attacker targets a system that uses JavaScript Object Notation (JSON) as a transport mechanism between the client and the server (common in Web 2.0 systems using AJAX) to steal possibly confidential information transmitted from the server back to the client inside the JSON object by taking advantage of the loophole in the browser's Same Origin Policy that does not prohibit JavaScript from one website to be included and executed in the context of another website.
CAPEC-141: Cache Poisoning
An attacker exploits the functionality of cache technologies to cause specific data to be cached that aids the attackers' objectives. This describes any attack whereby an attacker places incorrect or harmful material in cache. The targeted cache can be an application's cache (e.g. a web browser cache) or a public cache (e.g. a DNS or ARP cache). Until the cache is refreshed, most applications or clients will treat the corrupted cache value as valid. This can lead to a wide range of exploits including redirecting web browsers towards sites that install malware and repeatedly incorrect calculations based on the incorrect value.
CAPEC-142: DNS Cache Poisoning
A domain name server translates a domain name (such as www.example.com) into an IP address that Internet hosts use to contact Internet resources. An adversary modifies a public DNS cache to cause certain names to resolve to incorrect addresses that the adversary specifies. The result is that client applications that rely upon the targeted cache for domain name resolution will be directed not to the actual address of the specified domain name but to some other address. Adversaries can use this to herd clients to sites that install malware on the victim's computer or to masquerade as part of a Pharming attack.
CAPEC-160: Exploit Script-Based APIs
Some APIs support scripting instructions as arguments. Methods that take scripted instructions (or references to scripted instructions) can be very flexible and powerful. However, if an attacker can specify the script that serves as input to these methods they can gain access to a great deal of functionality. For example, HTML pages support <script> tags that allow scripting languages to be embedded in the page and then interpreted by the receiving web browser. If the content provider is malicious, these scripts can compromise the client application. Some applications may even execute the scripts under their own identity (rather than the identity of the user providing the script) which can allow attackers to perform activities that would otherwise be denied to them.
CAPEC-21: Exploitation of Trusted Identifiers
An adversary guesses, obtains, or "rides" a trusted identifier (e.g. session ID, resource ID, cookie, etc.) to perform authorized actions under the guise of an authenticated user or service.
CAPEC-384: Application API Message Manipulation via Man-in-the-Middle
An attacker manipulates either egress or ingress data from a client within an application framework in order to change the content of messages. Performing this attack can allow the attacker to gain unauthorized privileges within the application, or conduct attacks such as phishing, deceptive strategies to spread malware, or traditional web-application attacks. The techniques require use of specialized software that allow the attacker to perform adversary-in-the-middle (CAPEC-94) communications between the web browser and the remote system. Despite the use of AiTH software, the attack is actually directed at the server, as the client is one node in a series of content brokers that pass information along to the application framework. Additionally, it is not true "Adversary-in-the-Middle" attack at the network layer, but an application-layer attack the root cause of which is the master applications trust in the integrity of code supplied by the client.
CAPEC-385: Transaction or Event Tampering via Application API Manipulation
An attacker hosts or joins an event or transaction within an application framework in order to change the content of messages or items that are being exchanged. Performing this attack allows the attacker to manipulate content in such a way as to produce messages or content that look authentic but may contain deceptive links, substitute one item or another, spoof an existing item and conduct a false exchange, or otherwise change the amounts or identity of what is being exchanged. The techniques require use of specialized software that allow the attacker to man-in-the-middle communications between the web browser and the remote system in order to change the content of various application elements. Often, items exchanged in game can be monetized via sales for coin, virtual dollars, etc. The purpose of the attack is for the attack to scam the victim by trapping the data packets involved the exchange and altering the integrity of the transfer process.
CAPEC-386: Application API Navigation Remapping
An attacker manipulates either egress or ingress data from a client within an application framework in order to change the destination and/or content of links/buttons displayed to a user within API messages. Performing this attack allows the attacker to manipulate content in such a way as to produce messages or content that looks authentic but contains links/buttons that point to an attacker controlled destination. Some applications make navigation remapping more difficult to detect because the actual HREF values of images, profile elements, and links/buttons are masked. One example would be to place an image in a user's photo gallery that when clicked upon redirected the user to an off-site location. Also, traditional web vulnerabilities (such as CSRF) can be constructed with remapped buttons or links. In some cases navigation remapping can be used for Phishing attacks or even means to artificially boost the page view, user site reputation, or click-fraud.
CAPEC-387: Navigation Remapping To Propagate Malicious Content
An adversary manipulates either egress or ingress data from a client within an application framework in order to change the content of messages and thereby circumvent the expected application logic.
CAPEC-388: Application API Button Hijacking
An attacker manipulates either egress or ingress data from a client within an application framework in order to change the destination and/or content of buttons displayed to a user within API messages. Performing this attack allows the attacker to manipulate content in such a way as to produce messages or content that looks authentic but contains buttons that point to an attacker controlled destination.
CAPEC-510: SaaS User Request Forgery
An adversary, through a previously installed malicious application, performs malicious actions against a third-party Software as a Service (SaaS) application (also known as a cloud based application) by leveraging the persistent and implicit trust placed on a trusted user's session. This attack is executed after a trusted user is authenticated into a cloud service, "piggy-backing" on the authenticated session, and exploiting the fact that the cloud service believes it is only interacting with the trusted user. If successful, the actions embedded in the malicious application will be processed and accepted by the targeted SaaS application and executed at the trusted user's privilege level.
CAPEC-59: Session Credential Falsification through Prediction
This attack targets predictable session ID in order to gain privileges. The attacker can predict the session ID used during a transaction to perform spoofing and session hijacking.
CAPEC-60: Reusing Session IDs (aka Session Replay)
This attack targets the reuse of valid session ID to spoof the target system in order to gain privileges. The attacker tries to reuse a stolen session ID used previously during a transaction to perform spoofing and session hijacking. Another name for this type of attack is Session Replay.
CAPEC-75: Manipulating Writeable Configuration Files
Generally these are manually edited files that are not in the preview of the system administrators, any ability on the attackers' behalf to modify these files, for example in a CVS repository, gives unauthorized access directly to the application, the same as authorized users.
CAPEC-76: Manipulating Web Input to File System Calls
An attacker manipulates inputs to the target software which the target software passes to file system calls in the OS. The goal is to gain access to, and perhaps modify, areas of the file system that the target software did not intend to be accessible.
CAPEC-89: Pharming
A pharming attack occurs when the victim is fooled into entering sensitive data into supposedly trusted locations, such as an online bank site or a trading platform. An attacker can impersonate these supposedly trusted sites and have the victim be directed to their site rather than the originally intended one. Pharming does not require script injection or clicking on malicious links for the attack to succeed.