CWE-693
DiscouragedProtection Mechanism Failure
Abstraction: Pillar · Status: Draft
The product does not use or incorrectly uses a protection mechanism that provides sufficient defense against directed attacks against the product.
979 vulnerabilities reference this CWE, most recent first.
GHSA-9M4G-F42Q-VRRH
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-17 04:32 – Updated: 2024-10-11 20:47The sandbox whitelisting function (allowmodule.py) in Plone before 4.2.3 and 4.3 before beta 1 allows remote authenticated users with certain privileges to bypass the Python sandbox restriction and execute arbitrary Python code via vectors related to importing.
{
"affected": [
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "PyPI",
"name": "Plone"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "0"
},
{
"fixed": "4.2.3"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
},
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "PyPI",
"name": "Plone"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "4.3a0"
},
{
"fixed": "4.3b1"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
}
],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2012-5487"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-693"
],
"github_reviewed": true,
"github_reviewed_at": "2023-08-29T21:35:59Z",
"nvd_published_at": "2014-09-30T14:55:00Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "The sandbox whitelisting function (`allowmodule.py`) in Plone before 4.2.3 and 4.3 before beta 1 allows remote authenticated users with certain privileges to bypass the Python sandbox restriction and execute arbitrary Python code via vectors related to importing.",
"id": "GHSA-9m4g-f42q-vrrh",
"modified": "2024-10-11T20:47:03Z",
"published": "2022-05-17T04:32:24Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2012-5487"
},
{
"type": "PACKAGE",
"url": "https://github.com/plone/Plone"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/plone/Products.CMFPlone/blob/4.2.3/docs/CHANGES.txt"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/pypa/advisory-database/tree/main/vulns/plone/PYSEC-2014-29.yaml"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://plone.org/products/plone-hotfix/releases/20121106"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://plone.org/products/plone/security/advisories/20121106/03"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://www.openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2012/11/10/1"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
},
{
"score": "CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:N/SC:H/SI:H/SA:H",
"type": "CVSS_V4"
}
],
"summary": "Plone Sandbox Bypass"
}
GHSA-9PP5-9C7G-4R83
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2025-05-21 15:30 – Updated: 2025-10-15 20:13Spring Security Aspects may not correctly locate method security annotations on private methods. This can cause an authorization bypass.
Your application may be affected by this if the following are true:
- You are using @EnableMethodSecurity(mode=ASPECTJ) and spring-security-aspects, and
- You have Spring Security method annotations on a private method In that case, the target method may be able to be invoked without proper authorization.
You are not affected if:
- You are not using @EnableMethodSecurity(mode=ASPECTJ) or spring-security-aspects, or
- You have no Spring Security-annotated private methods
{
"affected": [
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Maven",
"name": "org.springframework.security:spring-security-aspects"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "6.4.0"
},
{
"fixed": "6.4.6"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
},
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Maven",
"name": "org.springframework.security:spring-security-core"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "6.4.0"
},
{
"fixed": "6.4.6"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
}
],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2025-41232"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-693"
],
"github_reviewed": true,
"github_reviewed_at": "2025-05-21T18:31:29Z",
"nvd_published_at": "2025-05-21T12:16:21Z",
"severity": "CRITICAL"
},
"details": "Spring Security Aspects may not correctly locate method security annotations on private methods. This can cause an authorization bypass.\n\nYour application may be affected by this if the following are true:\n\n * You are using @EnableMethodSecurity(mode=ASPECTJ)\u00a0and spring-security-aspects, and\n * You have Spring Security method annotations on a private method\nIn that case, the target method may be able to be invoked without proper authorization.\n\nYou are not affected if:\n\n * You are not using @EnableMethodSecurity(mode=ASPECTJ)\u00a0or spring-security-aspects, or\n * You have no Spring Security-annotated private methods",
"id": "GHSA-9pp5-9c7g-4r83",
"modified": "2025-10-15T20:13:15Z",
"published": "2025-05-21T15:30:33Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2025-41232"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/spring-projects/spring-security/commit/bf2aaa1b1830e534ba651d422545ac08a115151b"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/spring-projects/spring-security/commit/c972de5369a1261ab674a3f5e3a80e8ce3e8cdfb"
},
{
"type": "PACKAGE",
"url": "https://github.com/spring-projects/spring-security"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/spring-projects/spring-security/releases/tag/6.4.6"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://spring.io/security/cve-2025-41232"
}
],
"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:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
],
"summary": "Spring Security authorization bypass for method security annotations on private methods"
}
GHSA-9PRX-6FQF-VVJH
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-03-12 15:30 – Updated: 2026-03-12 15:30A vulnerability allowing an authenticated user with the Backup Administrator role to perform remote code execution (RCE) in high availability (HA) deployments of Veeam Backup & Replication.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2026-21671"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-693",
"CWE-94"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2026-03-12T15:16:13Z",
"severity": "CRITICAL"
},
"details": "A vulnerability allowing an authenticated user with the Backup Administrator role to perform remote code execution (RCE) in high availability (HA) deployments of Veeam Backup \u0026 Replication.",
"id": "GHSA-9prx-6fqf-vvjh",
"modified": "2026-03-12T15:30:26Z",
"published": "2026-03-12T15:30:26Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-21671"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.veeam.com/kb4831"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-9Q36-67VC-RRWG
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-03-09 19:54 – Updated: 2026-03-30 13:31Summary
Sandboxed requester sessions could reach host-side ACP session initialization through /acp spawn.
OpenClaw already blocked sessions_spawn({ runtime: "acp" }) from sandboxed sessions, but the slash-command path initialized ACP directly without applying the same host-runtime guard first.
Affected Packages / Versions
- npm package:
openclaw - Affected versions:
<= 2026.3.2 - Patched version:
>= 2026.3.7
Details
ACP sessions run on the host, not inside the OpenClaw sandbox. The direct ACP spawn path in src/agents/acp-spawn.ts already denied sandboxed requesters, but /acp spawn in src/auto-reply/reply/commands-acp/lifecycle.ts called initializeSession(...) without first applying the same restriction.
In affected versions, an already authorized sender in a sandboxed session could use /acp spawn to cross from sandboxed chat context into host-side ACP runtime initialization when ACP was enabled and a backend was available.
Fix Commit(s)
61000b8e4ded919ca1a825d4700db4cb3fdc56e3
Fix Details
The fix introduced a shared ACP runtime-policy guard in src/agents/acp-spawn.ts and reused it from the /acp spawn handler in src/auto-reply/reply/commands-acp/lifecycle.ts before any ACP backend initialization. Regression coverage was added in src/auto-reply/reply/commands-acp.test.ts to prove sandboxed /acp spawn requests are rejected early, while existing ACP spawn behavior for non-sandboxed sessions remains unchanged.
Release Process Note
Patched version is pre-set to 2026.3.7 so the advisory can be published once that npm release is available.
Thanks @tdjackey for reporting.
{
"affected": [
{
"database_specific": {
"last_known_affected_version_range": "\u003c= 2026.3.2"
},
"package": {
"ecosystem": "npm",
"name": "openclaw"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "0"
},
{
"fixed": "2026.3.7"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
}
],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2026-27646"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-284",
"CWE-693",
"CWE-863"
],
"github_reviewed": true,
"github_reviewed_at": "2026-03-09T19:54:54Z",
"nvd_published_at": "2026-03-23T22:16:25Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "### Summary\nSandboxed requester sessions could reach host-side ACP session initialization through `/acp spawn`.\n\nOpenClaw already blocked `sessions_spawn({ runtime: \"acp\" })` from sandboxed sessions, but the slash-command path initialized ACP directly without applying the same host-runtime guard first.\n\n### Affected Packages / Versions\n- npm package: `openclaw`\n- Affected versions: `\u003c= 2026.3.2`\n- Patched version: `\u003e= 2026.3.7`\n\n### Details\nACP sessions run on the host, not inside the OpenClaw sandbox. The direct ACP spawn path in `src/agents/acp-spawn.ts` already denied sandboxed requesters, but `/acp spawn` in `src/auto-reply/reply/commands-acp/lifecycle.ts` called `initializeSession(...)` without first applying the same restriction.\n\nIn affected versions, an already authorized sender in a sandboxed session could use `/acp spawn` to cross from sandboxed chat context into host-side ACP runtime initialization when ACP was enabled and a backend was available.\n\n### Fix Commit(s)\n- `61000b8e4ded919ca1a825d4700db4cb3fdc56e3`\n\n### Fix Details\nThe fix introduced a shared ACP runtime-policy guard in `src/agents/acp-spawn.ts` and reused it from the `/acp spawn` handler in `src/auto-reply/reply/commands-acp/lifecycle.ts` before any ACP backend initialization. Regression coverage was added in `src/auto-reply/reply/commands-acp.test.ts` to prove sandboxed `/acp spawn` requests are rejected early, while existing ACP spawn behavior for non-sandboxed sessions remains unchanged.\n\n### Release Process Note\nPatched version is pre-set to `2026.3.7` so the advisory can be published once that npm release is available.\n\nThanks @tdjackey for reporting.",
"id": "GHSA-9q36-67vc-rrwg",
"modified": "2026-03-30T13:31:02Z",
"published": "2026-03-09T19:54:54Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/openclaw/openclaw/security/advisories/GHSA-9q36-67vc-rrwg"
},
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-27646"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/openclaw/openclaw/commit/61000b8e4ded919ca1a825d4700db4cb3fdc56e3"
},
{
"type": "PACKAGE",
"url": "https://github.com/openclaw/openclaw"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/openclaw/openclaw/releases/tag/v2026.3.7"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://vulncheck.com/advisories/openclaw-mar-sandbox-escape-via-acp-spawn-command"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:H/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
},
{
"score": "CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:P/PR:L/UI:N/VC:L/VI:H/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N",
"type": "CVSS_V4"
}
],
"summary": "OpenClaw: Sandboxed /acp spawn requests could initialize host ACP sessions"
}
GHSA-9Q6Q-QV82-8QM9
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-07-04 03:31 – Updated: 2026-07-04 03:31picklescan before 0.0.33 fails to detect operator.methodcaller function calls in pickle files, allowing attackers to bypass security checks. Remote attackers can craft malicious pickle payloads using operator.methodcaller that execute arbitrary code when loaded, compromising systems relying on picklescan for validation.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2025-71373"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-693"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2026-07-04T02:16:23Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "picklescan before 0.0.33 fails to detect operator.methodcaller function calls in pickle files, allowing attackers to bypass security checks. Remote attackers can craft malicious pickle payloads using operator.methodcaller that execute arbitrary code when loaded, compromising systems relying on picklescan for validation.",
"id": "GHSA-9q6q-qv82-8qm9",
"modified": "2026-07-04T03:31:02Z",
"published": "2026-07-04T03:31:02Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/mmaitre314/picklescan/security/advisories/GHSA-x843-g5mx-g377"
},
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2025-71373"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.vulncheck.com/advisories/picklescan-remote-code-execution-via-operator-methodcaller-detection-bypass"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
},
{
"score": "CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:N/UI:P/VC:H/VI:H/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-9QVR-8P9R-M8VJ
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-03-02 21:31 – Updated: 2026-03-06 06:30In exitKeyguardAndFinishSurfaceBehindRemoteAnimation of KeyguardViewMediator.java, there is a possible lockscreen bypass due to a logic error in the code. This could lead to local escalation of privilege with no additional execution privileges needed. User interaction is not needed for exploitation.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2025-48602"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-693"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2026-03-02T19:16:26Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "In exitKeyguardAndFinishSurfaceBehindRemoteAnimation of KeyguardViewMediator.java, there is a possible lockscreen bypass due to a logic error in the code. This could lead to local escalation of privilege with no additional execution privileges needed. User interaction is not needed for exploitation.",
"id": "GHSA-9qvr-8p9r-m8vj",
"modified": "2026-03-06T06:30:29Z",
"published": "2026-03-02T21:31:30Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2025-48602"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://source.android.com/docs/security/bulletin/2026/2026-03-01"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://source.android.com/security/bulletin/2026-03-01"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-9R2R-C24C-X9G4
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-06-15 06:31 – Updated: 2026-06-15 06:31A security flaw has been discovered in Qihoo 360 Total Security 6.0. This vulnerability affects the function RpcStringBindingComposeW of the component Nucleus Engine Monitoring Logic. Performing a manipulation of the argument NetworkAddr results in protection mechanism failure. The attack requires a local approach. The exploit has been released to the public and may be used for attacks. The vendor was contacted early about this disclosure but did not respond in any way.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2026-12214"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-693"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2026-06-15T04:16:25Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "A security flaw has been discovered in Qihoo 360 Total Security 6.0. This vulnerability affects the function RpcStringBindingComposeW of the component Nucleus Engine Monitoring Logic. Performing a manipulation of the argument NetworkAddr results in protection mechanism failure. The attack requires a local approach. The exploit has been released to the public and may be used for attacks. The vendor was contacted early about this disclosure but did not respond in any way.",
"id": "GHSA-9r2r-c24c-x9g4",
"modified": "2026-06-15T06:31:38Z",
"published": "2026-06-15T06:31:38Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-12214"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/Gach0ng/vuldb_submit/issues/4"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://vuldb.com/cve/CVE-2026-12214"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://vuldb.com/submit/833135"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://vuldb.com/vuln/370858"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://vuldb.com/vuln/370858/cti"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
},
{
"score": "CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/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-9R7R-6R2R-9FMJ
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-07-01 00:34 – Updated: 2026-07-01 15:35Insufficient policy enforcement in WebXR in Google Chrome on Android prior to 150.0.7871.47 allowed a remote attacker to leak cross-origin data via a crafted HTML page. (Chromium security severity: Medium)
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2026-13910"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-693"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2026-06-30T23:17:05Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "Insufficient policy enforcement in WebXR in Google Chrome on Android prior to 150.0.7871.47 allowed a remote attacker to leak cross-origin data via a crafted HTML page. (Chromium security severity: Medium)",
"id": "GHSA-9r7r-6r2r-9fmj",
"modified": "2026-07-01T15:35:02Z",
"published": "2026-07-01T00:34:06Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-13910"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://chromereleases.googleblog.com/2026/06/stable-channel-update-for-desktop_0175352312.html"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://issues.chromium.org/issues/507231605"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-9V8P-C94C-Q287
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-24 17:08 – Updated: 2022-12-13 18:30A vulnerability has been identified in SCALANCE X-200 switch family (incl. SIPLUS NET variants) (all versions < 5.2.4), SCALANCE X-200IRT switch family (incl. SIPLUS NET variants) (All versions), SCALANCE X-300 switch family (incl. X408 and SIPLUS NET variants) (all versions < 4.1.3). The device does not send the X-Frame-Option Header in the administrative web interface, which makes it vulnerable to Clickjacking attacks. The security vulnerability could be exploited by an attacker that is able to trick an administrative user with a valid session on the target device into clicking on a website controlled by the attacker. The vulnerability could allow an attacker to perform administrative actions via the web interface. At the time of advisory publication no public exploitation of this security vulnerability was known.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2019-13924"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-1021",
"CWE-693"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2020-02-11T16:15:00Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "A vulnerability has been identified in SCALANCE X-200 switch family (incl. SIPLUS NET variants) (all versions \u003c 5.2.4), SCALANCE X-200IRT switch family (incl. SIPLUS NET variants) (All versions), SCALANCE X-300 switch family (incl. X408 and SIPLUS NET variants) (all versions \u003c 4.1.3). The device does not send the X-Frame-Option Header in the administrative web interface, which makes it vulnerable to Clickjacking attacks. The security vulnerability could be exploited by an attacker that is able to trick an administrative user with a valid session on the target device into clicking on a website controlled by the attacker. The vulnerability could allow an attacker to perform administrative actions via the web interface. At the time of advisory publication no public exploitation of this security vulnerability was known.",
"id": "GHSA-9v8p-c94c-q287",
"modified": "2022-12-13T18:30:27Z",
"published": "2022-05-24T17:08:23Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2019-13924"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://cert-portal.siemens.com/productcert/pdf/ssa-951513.pdf"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.us-cert.gov/ics/advisories/icsa-20-042-07"
}
],
"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"
}
]
}
GHSA-9X9P-QF8F-MVJG
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-05-27 00:28 – Updated: 2026-07-09 21:06Summary
Context.spawn() in liquidjs creates a child Context for the {% render %} tag but does not propagate the parent context's resolved ownPropertyOnly value. The new context re-derives ownPropertyOnly from opts.ownPropertyOnly (the instance-level option), silently discarding any RenderOptions.ownPropertyOnly override that was supplied to parseAndRender(). As a result, a developer who runs a Liquid instance with the backwards-compatible ownPropertyOnly:false and then locks down an untrusted render with parseAndRender(..., { ownPropertyOnly: true }) still leaks prototype-chain properties from inside any {% render %} partial. This is a distinct exploit surface from the previously identified array-filter variants (where, reject, group_by, find, find_index, has) — the underlying root cause in Context.spawn() is shared, but {% render %} is a separately reachable sink that needs no filter usage.
Details
The bug is in Context.spawn():
// src/context/context.ts:105-114
public spawn (scope = {}) {
return new Context(scope, this.opts, {
sync: this.sync,
globals: this.globals,
strictVariables: this.strictVariables
// <-- ownPropertyOnly is missing here
}, {
renderLimit: this.renderLimit,
memoryLimit: this.memoryLimit
})
}
The constructor resolves ownPropertyOnly as:
// src/context/context.ts:47
this.ownPropertyOnly = renderOptions.ownPropertyOnly ?? opts.ownPropertyOnly
Because spawn() passes a RenderOptions object with no ownPropertyOnly, the child context falls back to opts.ownPropertyOnly (the instance-level option), throwing away any per-render override that the parent context had applied. this.opts is the raw normalized instance options object; it is not mutated to reflect render-time overrides.
The {% render %} tag at src/tags/render.ts:51-77 calls spawn() to build the partial's isolated scope:
* render (ctx: Context, emitter: Emitter): Generator<unknown, void, unknown> {
const { liquid, hash } = this
const filepath = (yield renderFilePath(this['file'], ctx, liquid)) as string
assert(filepath, () => `illegal file path "${filepath}"`)
const childCtx = ctx.spawn() // <-- ownPropertyOnly lost here
const scope = childCtx.bottom()
__assign(scope, yield hash.render(ctx))
...
const templates = (yield liquid._parsePartialFile(filepath, childCtx.sync, this['currentFile'])) as Template[]
yield liquid.renderer.renderTemplates(templates, childCtx, emitter)
}
All template variable lookups inside the partial then go through childCtx.readProperty() (src/context/context.ts:123-135), which calls readJSProperty(obj, key, this.ownPropertyOnly). With childCtx.ownPropertyOnly === false (inherited from opts), the protective check at src/context/context.ts:138-141 is skipped and prototype-chain properties are returned to the template:
export function readJSProperty (obj: Scope, key: PropertyKey, ownPropertyOnly: boolean) {
if (ownPropertyOnly && !hasOwnProperty.call(obj, key) && !(obj instanceof Drop)) return undefined
return obj[key]
}
The {% include %} tag is not affected: it does not call spawn(); it pushes onto the parent context's scope stack (src/tags/include.ts:40), so the parent's resolved ownPropertyOnly continues to apply.
Trust model / why this matters: RenderOptions.ownPropertyOnly is documented (src/liquid-options.ts:108-111) as "Same as ownPropertyOnly on LiquidOptions, but only for current render() call". It exists precisely so that developers running a non-strict instance can lock down individual untrusted renders. That contract is broken — the override is silently dropped at every partial boundary.
PoC
mkdir -p /tmp/render-poc
printf '{{ user.passwordHash }}' > /tmp/render-poc/_user.liquid
node -e "
const { Liquid } = require('./dist/liquid.node.js');
const liquid = new Liquid({ ownPropertyOnly: false, root: '/tmp/render-poc' });
class User { constructor(n){ this.name = n; } }
User.prototype.passwordHash = 'bcrypt\$secret';
const u = new User('alice');
liquid.parseAndRender(
'Direct:[{{ user.passwordHash }}] Render:[{% render \"_user.liquid\", user: user %}]',
{ user: u },
{ ownPropertyOnly: true }
).then(console.log);
"
Verified output on liquidjs 10.25.7:
Direct:[] Render:[bcrypt$secret]
The top-level expression {{ user.passwordHash }} is correctly blocked by the per-render ownPropertyOnly:true, but the same expression inside the partial loaded by {% render %} returns the prototype-chain property — proof that Context.spawn() discarded the override.
Impact
- Information disclosure: Any prototype-chain property of objects passed into a
{% render %}partial — including secrets, hashes, internal state, framework-injected helpers — becomes readable from inside the partial template, even when the developer used the documented per-render lockdown. - Realistic threat model: Applications that maintain
ownPropertyOnly:falsefor backwards compatibility (or because their data layer relies on prototype methods) and lock down untrusted-template renders withparseAndRender(..., { ownPropertyOnly:true })are protected at the top level but silently exposed inside any partial. User-controllable template content (CMS snippets, theme partials, email templates) that uses{% render %}becomes an info-leak primitive. - Distinct from existing CVE-2022-25948: the prior advisory only covered direct use of
ownPropertyOnly:false; this is a failure of the documented mitigation (ownPropertyOnly:trueper-render override), not a missing setting. - Distinct from the array-filter variant: same
spawn()root cause, but exploitable without invokingwhere/reject/group_by/find/find_index/has— only requires that the template uses{% render %}(a basic templating feature) and that one of the rendered values has prototype-chain properties.
Recommended Fix
Propagate ownPropertyOnly (and any other security-relevant render options) inside Context.spawn():
// src/context/context.ts
public spawn (scope = {}) {
return new Context(scope, this.opts, {
sync: this.sync,
globals: this.globals,
strictVariables: this.strictVariables,
ownPropertyOnly: this.ownPropertyOnly // <-- propagate resolved per-render value
}, {
renderLimit: this.renderLimit,
memoryLimit: this.memoryLimit
})
}
Passing this.ownPropertyOnly (the resolved value, not this.opts.ownPropertyOnly) ensures any RenderOptions.ownPropertyOnly override flows into spawned child contexts. This single change closes both the {% render %} pathway documented here and the array-filter pathway tracked separately. A regression test should assert that a partial rendered via {% render %} honours parseAndRender(..., { ownPropertyOnly: true }) against an object with prototype-chain properties.
{
"affected": [
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "npm",
"name": "liquidjs"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "0"
},
{
"last_affected": "10.25.7"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
}
],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2026-44646"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-693"
],
"github_reviewed": true,
"github_reviewed_at": "2026-05-27T00:28:06Z",
"nvd_published_at": "2026-06-17T23:17:03Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "## Summary\n\n`Context.spawn()` in liquidjs creates a child `Context` for the `{% render %}` tag but does not propagate the parent context\u0027s resolved `ownPropertyOnly` value. The new context re-derives `ownPropertyOnly` from `opts.ownPropertyOnly` (the instance-level option), silently discarding any `RenderOptions.ownPropertyOnly` override that was supplied to `parseAndRender()`. As a result, a developer who runs a Liquid instance with the backwards-compatible `ownPropertyOnly:false` and then locks down an untrusted render with `parseAndRender(..., { ownPropertyOnly: true })` still leaks prototype-chain properties from inside any `{% render %}` partial. This is a distinct exploit surface from the previously identified array-filter variants (`where`, `reject`, `group_by`, `find`, `find_index`, `has`) \u2014 the underlying root cause in `Context.spawn()` is shared, but `{% render %}` is a separately reachable sink that needs no filter usage.\n\n## Details\n\nThe bug is in `Context.spawn()`:\n\n```ts\n// src/context/context.ts:105-114\npublic spawn (scope = {}) {\n return new Context(scope, this.opts, {\n sync: this.sync,\n globals: this.globals,\n strictVariables: this.strictVariables\n // \u003c-- ownPropertyOnly is missing here\n }, {\n renderLimit: this.renderLimit,\n memoryLimit: this.memoryLimit\n })\n}\n```\n\nThe constructor resolves `ownPropertyOnly` as:\n\n```ts\n// src/context/context.ts:47\nthis.ownPropertyOnly = renderOptions.ownPropertyOnly ?? opts.ownPropertyOnly\n```\n\nBecause `spawn()` passes a `RenderOptions` object with no `ownPropertyOnly`, the child context falls back to `opts.ownPropertyOnly` (the instance-level option), throwing away any per-render override that the parent context had applied. `this.opts` is the raw normalized instance options object; it is not mutated to reflect render-time overrides.\n\nThe `{% render %}` tag at `src/tags/render.ts:51-77` calls `spawn()` to build the partial\u0027s isolated scope:\n\n```ts\n* render (ctx: Context, emitter: Emitter): Generator\u003cunknown, void, unknown\u003e {\n const { liquid, hash } = this\n const filepath = (yield renderFilePath(this[\u0027file\u0027], ctx, liquid)) as string\n assert(filepath, () =\u003e `illegal file path \"${filepath}\"`)\n\n const childCtx = ctx.spawn() // \u003c-- ownPropertyOnly lost here\n const scope = childCtx.bottom()\n __assign(scope, yield hash.render(ctx))\n ...\n const templates = (yield liquid._parsePartialFile(filepath, childCtx.sync, this[\u0027currentFile\u0027])) as Template[]\n yield liquid.renderer.renderTemplates(templates, childCtx, emitter)\n}\n```\n\nAll template variable lookups inside the partial then go through `childCtx.readProperty()` (`src/context/context.ts:123-135`), which calls `readJSProperty(obj, key, this.ownPropertyOnly)`. With `childCtx.ownPropertyOnly === false` (inherited from `opts`), the protective check at `src/context/context.ts:138-141` is skipped and prototype-chain properties are returned to the template:\n\n```ts\nexport function readJSProperty (obj: Scope, key: PropertyKey, ownPropertyOnly: boolean) {\n if (ownPropertyOnly \u0026\u0026 !hasOwnProperty.call(obj, key) \u0026\u0026 !(obj instanceof Drop)) return undefined\n return obj[key]\n}\n```\n\nThe `{% include %}` tag is **not** affected: it does not call `spawn()`; it pushes onto the parent context\u0027s scope stack (`src/tags/include.ts:40`), so the parent\u0027s resolved `ownPropertyOnly` continues to apply.\n\nTrust model / why this matters: `RenderOptions.ownPropertyOnly` is documented (`src/liquid-options.ts:108-111`) as \"Same as `ownPropertyOnly` on LiquidOptions, but only for current `render()` call\". It exists precisely so that developers running a non-strict instance can lock down individual untrusted renders. That contract is broken \u2014 the override is silently dropped at every partial boundary.\n\n## PoC\n\n```bash\nmkdir -p /tmp/render-poc\nprintf \u0027{{ user.passwordHash }}\u0027 \u003e /tmp/render-poc/_user.liquid\n\nnode -e \"\nconst { Liquid } = require(\u0027./dist/liquid.node.js\u0027);\nconst liquid = new Liquid({ ownPropertyOnly: false, root: \u0027/tmp/render-poc\u0027 });\n\nclass User { constructor(n){ this.name = n; } }\nUser.prototype.passwordHash = \u0027bcrypt\\$secret\u0027;\nconst u = new User(\u0027alice\u0027);\n\nliquid.parseAndRender(\n \u0027Direct:[{{ user.passwordHash }}] Render:[{% render \\\"_user.liquid\\\", user: user %}]\u0027,\n { user: u },\n { ownPropertyOnly: true }\n).then(console.log);\n\"\n```\n\nVerified output on liquidjs 10.25.7:\n\n```\nDirect:[] Render:[bcrypt$secret]\n```\n\nThe top-level expression `{{ user.passwordHash }}` is correctly blocked by the per-render `ownPropertyOnly:true`, but the same expression inside the partial loaded by `{% render %}` returns the prototype-chain property \u2014 proof that `Context.spawn()` discarded the override.\n\n## Impact\n\n- **Information disclosure**: Any prototype-chain property of objects passed into a `{% render %}` partial \u2014 including secrets, hashes, internal state, framework-injected helpers \u2014 becomes readable from inside the partial template, even when the developer used the documented per-render lockdown.\n- **Realistic threat model**: Applications that maintain `ownPropertyOnly:false` for backwards compatibility (or because their data layer relies on prototype methods) and lock down untrusted-template renders with `parseAndRender(..., { ownPropertyOnly:true })` are protected at the top level but silently exposed inside any partial. User-controllable template content (CMS snippets, theme partials, email templates) that uses `{% render %}` becomes an info-leak primitive.\n- **Distinct from existing CVE-2022-25948**: the prior advisory only covered direct use of `ownPropertyOnly:false`; this is a failure of the documented mitigation (`ownPropertyOnly:true` per-render override), not a missing setting.\n- **Distinct from the array-filter variant**: same `spawn()` root cause, but exploitable without invoking `where/reject/group_by/find/find_index/has` \u2014 only requires that the template uses `{% render %}` (a basic templating feature) and that one of the rendered values has prototype-chain properties.\n\n## Recommended Fix\n\nPropagate `ownPropertyOnly` (and any other security-relevant render options) inside `Context.spawn()`:\n\n```ts\n// src/context/context.ts\npublic spawn (scope = {}) {\n return new Context(scope, this.opts, {\n sync: this.sync,\n globals: this.globals,\n strictVariables: this.strictVariables,\n ownPropertyOnly: this.ownPropertyOnly // \u003c-- propagate resolved per-render value\n }, {\n renderLimit: this.renderLimit,\n memoryLimit: this.memoryLimit\n })\n}\n```\n\nPassing `this.ownPropertyOnly` (the resolved value, not `this.opts.ownPropertyOnly`) ensures any `RenderOptions.ownPropertyOnly` override flows into spawned child contexts. This single change closes both the `{% render %}` pathway documented here and the array-filter pathway tracked separately. A regression test should assert that a partial rendered via `{% render %}` honours `parseAndRender(..., { ownPropertyOnly: true })` against an object with prototype-chain properties.",
"id": "GHSA-9x9p-qf8f-mvjg",
"modified": "2026-07-09T21:06:26Z",
"published": "2026-05-27T00:28:06Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/harttle/liquidjs/security/advisories/GHSA-9x9p-qf8f-mvjg"
},
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-44646"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/harttle/liquidjs/commit/dbbf6288030591bf6da28d8c1cce5a17bca97bb6"
},
{
"type": "PACKAGE",
"url": "https://github.com/harttle/liquidjs"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/harttle/liquidjs/releases/tag/v10.26.0"
}
],
"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"
}
],
"summary": "LiquidJS\u0027s `{% render %}` tag silently bypasses per-render `ownPropertyOnly:true` via `Context.spawn()`"
}
No mitigation information available for this CWE.
CAPEC-1: Accessing Functionality Not Properly Constrained by ACLs
In applications, particularly web applications, access to functionality is mitigated by an authorization framework. This framework maps Access Control Lists (ACLs) to elements of the application's functionality; particularly URL's for web apps. In the case that the administrator failed to specify an ACL for a particular element, an attacker may be able to access it with impunity. An attacker with the ability to access functionality not properly constrained by ACLs can obtain sensitive information and possibly compromise the entire application. Such an attacker can access resources that must be available only to users at a higher privilege level, can access management sections of the application, or can run queries for data that they otherwise not supposed to.
CAPEC-107: Cross Site Tracing
Cross Site Tracing (XST) enables an adversary to steal the victim's session cookie and possibly other authentication credentials transmitted in the header of the HTTP request when the victim's browser communicates to a destination system's web server.
CAPEC-127: Directory Indexing
An adversary crafts a request to a target that results in the target listing/indexing the content of a directory as output. One common method of triggering directory contents as output is to construct a request containing a path that terminates in a directory name rather than a file name since many applications are configured to provide a list of the directory's contents when such a request is received. An adversary can use this to explore the directory tree on a target as well as learn the names of files. This can often end up revealing test files, backup files, temporary files, hidden files, configuration files, user accounts, script contents, as well as naming conventions, all of which can be used by an attacker to mount additional attacks.
CAPEC-17: Using Malicious Files
An attack of this type exploits a system's configuration that allows an adversary to either directly access an executable file, for example through shell access; or in a possible worst case allows an adversary to upload a file and then execute it. Web servers, ftp servers, and message oriented middleware systems which have many integration points are particularly vulnerable, because both the programmers and the administrators must be in synch regarding the interfaces and the correct privileges for each interface.
CAPEC-20: Encryption Brute Forcing
An attacker, armed with the cipher text and the encryption algorithm used, performs an exhaustive (brute force) search on the key space to determine the key that decrypts the cipher text to obtain the plaintext.
CAPEC-22: Exploiting Trust in Client
An attack of this type exploits vulnerabilities in client/server communication channel authentication and data integrity. It leverages the implicit trust a server places in the client, or more importantly, that which the server believes is the client. An attacker executes this type of attack by communicating directly with the server where the server believes it is communicating only with a valid client. There are numerous variations of this type of attack.
CAPEC-237: Escaping a Sandbox by Calling Code in Another Language
The attacker may submit malicious code of another language to obtain access to privileges that were not intentionally exposed by the sandbox, thus escaping the sandbox. For instance, Java code cannot perform unsafe operations, such as modifying arbitrary memory locations, due to restrictions placed on it by the Byte code Verifier and the JVM. If allowed, Java code can call directly into native C code, which may perform unsafe operations, such as call system calls and modify arbitrary memory locations on their behalf. To provide isolation, Java does not grant untrusted code with unmediated access to native C code. Instead, the sandboxed code is typically allowed to call some subset of the pre-existing native code that is part of standard libraries.
CAPEC-36: Using Unpublished Interfaces or Functionality
An adversary searches for and invokes interfaces or functionality that the target system designers did not intend to be publicly available. If interfaces fail to authenticate requests, the attacker may be able to invoke functionality they are not authorized for.
CAPEC-477: Signature Spoofing by Mixing Signed and Unsigned Content
An attacker exploits the underlying complexity of a data structure that allows for both signed and unsigned content, to cause unsigned data to be processed as though it were signed data.
CAPEC-480: Escaping Virtualization
An adversary gains access to an application, service, or device with the privileges of an authorized or privileged user by escaping the confines of a virtualized environment. The adversary is then able to access resources or execute unauthorized code within the host environment, generally with the privileges of the user running the virtualized process. Successfully executing an attack of this type is often the first step in executing more complex attacks.
CAPEC-51: Poison Web Service Registry
SOA and Web Services often use a registry to perform look up, get schema information, and metadata about services. A poisoned registry can redirect (think phishing for servers) the service requester to a malicious service provider, provide incorrect information in schema or metadata, and delete information about service provider interfaces.
CAPEC-57: Utilizing REST's Trust in the System Resource to Obtain Sensitive Data
This attack utilizes a REST(REpresentational State Transfer)-style applications' trust in the system resources and environment to obtain sensitive data once SSL is terminated.
CAPEC-59: Session Credential Falsification through Prediction
This attack targets predictable session ID in order to gain privileges. The attacker can predict the session ID used during a transaction to perform spoofing and session hijacking.
CAPEC-65: Sniff Application Code
An adversary passively sniffs network communications and captures application code bound for an authorized client. Once obtained, they can use it as-is, or through reverse-engineering glean sensitive information or exploit the trust relationship between the client and server. Such code may belong to a dynamic update to the client, a patch being applied to a client component or any such interaction where the client is authorized to communicate with the server.
CAPEC-668: Key Negotiation of Bluetooth Attack (KNOB)
An adversary can exploit a flaw in Bluetooth key negotiation allowing them to decrypt information sent between two devices communicating via Bluetooth. The adversary uses an Adversary in the Middle setup to modify packets sent between the two devices during the authentication process, specifically the entropy bits. Knowledge of the number of entropy bits will allow the attacker to easily decrypt information passing over the line of communication.
CAPEC-74: Manipulating State
The adversary modifies state information maintained by the target software or causes a state transition in hardware. If successful, the target will use this tainted state and execute in an unintended manner.
State management is an important function within a software application. User state maintained by the application can include usernames, payment information, browsing history as well as application-specific contents such as items in a shopping cart. Manipulating user state can be employed by an adversary to elevate privilege, conduct fraudulent transactions or otherwise modify the flow of the application to derive certain benefits.
If there is a hardware logic error in a finite state machine, the adversary can use this to put the system in an undefined state which could cause a denial of service or exposure of secure data.
CAPEC-87: Forceful Browsing
An attacker employs forceful browsing (direct URL entry) to access portions of a website that are otherwise unreachable. Usually, a front controller or similar design pattern is employed to protect access to portions of a web application. Forceful browsing enables an attacker to access information, perform privileged operations and otherwise reach sections of the web application that have been improperly protected.