CWE-77
Allowed-with-ReviewImproper Neutralization of Special Elements used in a Command ('Command Injection')
Abstraction: Class · Status: Draft
The product constructs all or part of a command using externally-influenced input from an upstream component, but it does not neutralize or incorrectly neutralizes special elements that could modify the intended command when it is sent to a downstream component.
5397 vulnerabilities reference this CWE, most recent first.
GHSA-Q5F8-X86W-62VC
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-24 19:03 – Updated: 2022-05-24 19:03Multiple vulnerabilities in the web-based management interface of certain Cisco Small Business 100, 300, and 500 Series Wireless Access Points could allow an authenticated, remote attacker to perform command injection attacks against an affected device. These vulnerabilities are due to improper validation of user-supplied input. An attacker could exploit these vulnerabilities by sending crafted HTTP requests to the web-based management interface of an affected system. A successful exploit could allow the attacker to execute arbitrary commands with root privileges on the device. To exploit these vulnerabilities, the attacker must have valid administrative credentials for the device.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2021-1554"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-77"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2021-05-22T07:15:00Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "Multiple vulnerabilities in the web-based management interface of certain Cisco Small Business 100, 300, and 500 Series Wireless Access Points could allow an authenticated, remote attacker to perform command injection attacks against an affected device. These vulnerabilities are due to improper validation of user-supplied input. An attacker could exploit these vulnerabilities by sending crafted HTTP requests to the web-based management interface of an affected system. A successful exploit could allow the attacker to execute arbitrary commands with root privileges on the device. To exploit these vulnerabilities, the attacker must have valid administrative credentials for the device.",
"id": "GHSA-q5f8-x86w-62vc",
"modified": "2022-05-24T19:03:00Z",
"published": "2022-05-24T19:03:00Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2021-1554"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://tools.cisco.com/security/center/content/CiscoSecurityAdvisory/cisco-sa-sb-wap-inject-Mp9FSdG"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": []
}
GHSA-Q5GG-CMV9-H66Q
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-02-09 00:00 – Updated: 2022-03-17 00:06D-Link device DI-7200GV2.E1 v21.04.09E1 was discovered to contain a command injection vulnerability in the function wget_test.asp. This vulnerability allows attackers to execute arbitrary commands via the url parameter.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2021-46226"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-77"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2022-02-04T02:15:00Z",
"severity": "CRITICAL"
},
"details": "D-Link device DI-7200GV2.E1 v21.04.09E1 was discovered to contain a command injection vulnerability in the function wget_test.asp. This vulnerability allows attackers to execute arbitrary commands via the url parameter.",
"id": "GHSA-q5gg-cmv9-h66q",
"modified": "2022-03-17T00:06:02Z",
"published": "2022-02-09T00:00:42Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2021-46226"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/pjqwudi/my_vuln/blob/main/D-link/vuln_9/9.md"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://supportannouncement.us.dlink.com/announcement/publication.aspx?name=SAP10284"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.dlink.com/en/security-bulletin"
}
],
"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-Q5HJ-MXQH-VV77
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-04-24 16:34 – Updated: 2026-05-08 15:31Claude Code used the git worktree commondir file when determining folder trust but did not validate its contents. By crafting a repository with a commondir file pointing to a path the victim had previously trusted, an attacker could bypass the trust dialog and immediately execute malicious hooks defined in .claude/settings.json. Exploiting this required the victim to clone a malicious repository and run Claude Code within it, and for the attacker to know or guess a path the victim had already trusted.
Users on standard Claude Code auto-update have received this fix already. Users performing manual updates are advised to update to the latest version.
Claude Code thanks hackerone.com/masato_anzai for reporting this issue.
{
"affected": [
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "npm",
"name": "@anthropic-ai/claude-code"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "2.1.63"
},
{
"fixed": "2.1.84"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
}
],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2026-40068"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-20",
"CWE-77"
],
"github_reviewed": true,
"github_reviewed_at": "2026-04-24T16:34:03Z",
"nvd_published_at": "2026-05-05T21:16:23Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "Claude Code used the git worktree `commondir` file when determining folder trust but did not validate its contents. By crafting a repository with a `commondir` file pointing to a path the victim had previously trusted, an attacker could bypass the trust dialog and immediately execute malicious hooks defined in `.claude/settings.json`. Exploiting this required the victim to clone a malicious repository and run Claude Code within it, and for the attacker to know or guess a path the victim had already trusted.\n\nUsers on standard Claude Code auto-update have received this fix already. Users performing manual updates are advised to update to the latest version.\n\nClaude Code thanks [hackerone.com/masato_anzai](https://hackerone.com/masato_anzai) for reporting this issue.",
"id": "GHSA-q5hj-mxqh-vv77",
"modified": "2026-05-08T15:31:35Z",
"published": "2026-04-24T16:34:03Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/anthropics/claude-code/security/advisories/GHSA-q5hj-mxqh-vv77"
},
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-40068"
},
{
"type": "PACKAGE",
"url": "https://github.com/anthropics/claude-code"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:N/UI:P/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N",
"type": "CVSS_V4"
}
],
"summary": "Claude Code: Trust Dialog Bypass via Git Worktree Spoofing Allows Arbitrary Code Execution"
}
GHSA-Q5MQ-2XWR-J447
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2024-11-06 00:31 – Updated: 2024-11-06 18:31DCME-320 v7.4.12.90 was discovered to contain a command injection vulnerability.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2024-51115"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-77"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2024-11-05T23:15:04Z",
"severity": "CRITICAL"
},
"details": "DCME-320 v7.4.12.90 was discovered to contain a command injection vulnerability.",
"id": "GHSA-q5mq-2xwr-j447",
"modified": "2024-11-06T18:31:10Z",
"published": "2024-11-06T00:31:55Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-51115"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/CLan-nad/CVE/blob/main/dcn/ip_inter/1.md"
}
],
"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-Q5PQ-PGRV-FH89
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2017-10-24 18:33 – Updated: 2023-09-05 23:30The dns-sync module before 0.1.1 for node.js allows context-dependent attackers to execute arbitrary commands via shell metacharacters in the first argument to the resolve API function.
{
"affected": [
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "npm",
"name": "dns-sync"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "0"
},
{
"fixed": "0.1.1"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
}
],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2014-9682"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-77"
],
"github_reviewed": true,
"github_reviewed_at": "2020-06-16T21:51:07Z",
"nvd_published_at": null,
"severity": "CRITICAL"
},
"details": "The dns-sync module before 0.1.1 for node.js allows context-dependent attackers to execute arbitrary commands via shell metacharacters in the first argument to the resolve API function.",
"id": "GHSA-q5pq-pgrv-fh89",
"modified": "2023-09-05T23:30:40Z",
"published": "2017-10-24T18:33:36Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2014-9682"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/skoranga/node-dns-sync/issues/1"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/skoranga/node-dns-sync/commit/d9abaae384b198db1095735ad9c1c73d7b890a0d"
},
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://github.com/advisories/GHSA-q5pq-pgrv-fh89"
},
{
"type": "PACKAGE",
"url": "https://github.com/skoranga/node-dns-sync"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://www.openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2014/11/11/6"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [],
"summary": "dns-sync command injection vulnerability"
}
GHSA-Q5Q4-4X9X-V9Q3
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2023-03-01 09:30 – Updated: 2023-03-10 18:30There are multiple command injection vulnerabilities that could lead to unauthenticated remote code execution by sending specially crafted packets destined to the PAPI (Aruba Networks access point management protocol) UDP port (8211). Successful exploitation of these vulnerabilities result in the ability to execute arbitrary code as a privileged user on the underlying operating system.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2023-22750"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-77"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2023-03-01T08:15:00Z",
"severity": "CRITICAL"
},
"details": "There are multiple command injection vulnerabilities that could lead to unauthenticated remote code execution by sending specially crafted packets destined to the PAPI (Aruba Networks access point management protocol) UDP port (8211). Successful exploitation of these vulnerabilities result in the ability to execute arbitrary code as a privileged user on the underlying operating system.",
"id": "GHSA-q5q4-4x9x-v9q3",
"modified": "2023-03-10T18:30:22Z",
"published": "2023-03-01T09:30:29Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2023-22750"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.arubanetworks.com/assets/alert/ARUBA-PSA-2023-002.txt"
}
],
"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-Q623-2J2J-23JJ
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2024-07-29 06:30 – Updated: 2024-07-29 17:01RaspAP before 3.1.5 allows an attacker to escalate privileges: the www-data user has write access to the restapi.service file and also possesses Sudo privileges to execute several critical commands without a password.
{
"affected": [
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Packagist",
"name": "billz/raspap-webgui"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "0"
},
{
"last_affected": "3.1.4"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
}
],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2024-41637"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-269",
"CWE-77"
],
"github_reviewed": true,
"github_reviewed_at": "2024-07-29T17:01:23Z",
"nvd_published_at": "2024-07-29T06:15:02Z",
"severity": "CRITICAL"
},
"details": "RaspAP before 3.1.5 allows an attacker to escalate privileges: the www-data user has write access to the restapi.service file and also possesses Sudo privileges to execute several critical commands without a password.",
"id": "GHSA-q623-2j2j-23jj",
"modified": "2024-07-29T17:01:23Z",
"published": "2024-07-29T06:30:24Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-41637"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://blog.0xzon.dev/2024-07-27-CVE-2024-41637"
},
{
"type": "PACKAGE",
"url": "https://github.com/RaspAP/raspap-webgui"
}
],
"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:H/VI:H/VA:H/SC:H/SI:H/SA:H",
"type": "CVSS_V4"
}
],
"summary": "RaspAP allows an attacker to escalate privileges"
}
GHSA-Q66H-M87M-J2Q6
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-02-10 00:21 – Updated: 2026-02-10 00:21Summary: Remote Code Execution
Unsafe handling of request parameters in the RPC HTTP server results in command injection
Details
In lib/bitcoin/rpc/http_server.rb line 30-39, the JSON body of a POST request is parsed into command and args variables. These values are then passed to send, which is used to call an arbitrary class method. However, there is no validation that the provided command value is one of the expected RPC methods.
This means that an attacker could supply a command value such as system, and then pass arbitrary system commands into the args parameter and achieve remote code execution.
PoC
- Start the RPC server
- Send a request to the RPC server as so:
curl -X POST http://127.0.0.1:18443 -H 'Content-Type: application/json' \ -d '{"method":"eval","params":["File.write(\"/tmp/pwned\",\"owned\")"]}' - Check the /tmp folder on the machine where the RPC server is being run. If a folder /pwned now exists, the vulnerability is confirmed.
Impact
This vulnerability would impact anyone running the RPC server. The impact is higher for those who are running it publicly exposed to the internet.
Remediation
Mitigating Factors:
- The RPC server is part of the experimental SPV node feature, which is not documented and has very few users.
- The SPV-related features may be removed in future releases.
Resolution:
- Added whitelist validation to allow only RPC methods defined in RequestHandler.
- Fixed in version 1.12.0.
{
"affected": [
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "RubyGems",
"name": "bitcoinrb"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "0"
},
{
"fixed": "1.12.0"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
}
],
"aliases": [],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-77"
],
"github_reviewed": true,
"github_reviewed_at": "2026-02-10T00:21:56Z",
"nvd_published_at": null,
"severity": "LOW"
},
"details": "### Summary: Remote Code Execution\nUnsafe handling of request parameters in the RPC HTTP server results in command injection\n\n### Details\nIn lib/bitcoin/rpc/http_server.rb line 30-39, the JSON body of a POST request is parsed into `command` and `args` variables. These values are then passed to `send`, which is used to call an arbitrary class method. However, there is no validation that the provided `command` value is one of the expected RPC methods. \nThis means that an attacker could supply a `command` value such as `system`, and then pass arbitrary system commands into the `args` parameter and achieve remote code execution. \n\n### PoC\n1. Start the RPC server\n2. Send a request to the RPC server as so:\n ```\ncurl -X POST http://127.0.0.1:18443 -H \u0027Content-Type: application/json\u0027 \\\n -d \u0027{\"method\":\"eval\",\"params\":[\"File.write(\\\"/tmp/pwned\\\",\\\"owned\\\")\"]}\u0027\n```\n3. Check the /tmp folder on the machine where the RPC server is being run. If a folder /pwned now exists, the vulnerability is confirmed.\n### Impact\nThis vulnerability would impact anyone running the RPC server. The impact is higher for those who are running it publicly exposed to the internet.\n\n### Remediation \n \n **Mitigating Factors:** \n - The RPC server is part of the experimental SPV node feature, which is not documented and has very few users. \n - The SPV-related features may be removed in future releases. \n \n **Resolution:** \n - Added whitelist validation to allow only RPC methods defined in `RequestHandler`. \n - Fixed in version 1.12.0.",
"id": "GHSA-q66h-m87m-j2q6",
"modified": "2026-02-10T00:21:56Z",
"published": "2026-02-10T00:21:56Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/chaintope/bitcoinrb/security/advisories/GHSA-q66h-m87m-j2q6"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/chaintope/bitcoinrb/commit/070327133a2a3e5a6d265b2d82f06f9414c01e74"
},
{
"type": "PACKAGE",
"url": "https://github.com/chaintope/bitcoinrb"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/chaintope/bitcoinrb/releases/tag/v1.12.0"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:L/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:P",
"type": "CVSS_V4"
}
],
"summary": "Bitcoinrb Vulnerable to Command injection via RPC "
}
GHSA-Q66X-H4C5-7MF7
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-24 17:45 – Updated: 2022-05-24 17:45CONQUEST DICOM SERVER before 1.5.0 has a code execution vulnerability which can be exploited by attackers to execute malicious code.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2020-35308"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-77"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2021-03-31T20:15:00Z",
"severity": "CRITICAL"
},
"details": "CONQUEST DICOM SERVER before 1.5.0 has a code execution vulnerability which can be exploited by attackers to execute malicious code.",
"id": "GHSA-q66x-h4c5-7mf7",
"modified": "2022-05-24T17:45:56Z",
"published": "2022-05-24T17:45:56Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2020-35308"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.cnvd.org.cn/flaw/show/2017713"
}
],
"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-Q686-QG49-F6HM
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-08-29 20:06 – Updated: 2022-09-02 00:01TOTOLINK A810R V5.9c.4050_B20190424 was discovered to contain a command injection vulnerability via the component downloadFile.cgi.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2022-38511"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-77"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2022-08-29T00:15:00Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "TOTOLINK A810R V5.9c.4050_B20190424 was discovered to contain a command injection vulnerability via the component downloadFile.cgi.",
"id": "GHSA-q686-qg49-f6hm",
"modified": "2022-09-02T00:01:09Z",
"published": "2022-08-29T20:06:56Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2022-38511"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/whiter6666/CVE/blob/main/TOTOLINK_A810R/downloadFile.md"
}
],
"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"
}
]
}
Mitigation
If at all possible, use library calls rather than external processes to recreate the desired functionality.
Mitigation
If possible, ensure that all external commands called from the program are statically created.
Mitigation MIT-5
Strategy: Input Validation
- Assume all input is malicious. Use an "accept known good" input validation strategy, i.e., use a list of acceptable inputs that strictly conform to specifications. Reject any input that does not strictly conform to specifications, or transform it into something that does.
- When performing input validation, consider all potentially relevant properties, including length, type of input, the full range of acceptable values, missing or extra inputs, syntax, consistency across related fields, and conformance to business rules. As an example of business rule logic, "boat" may be syntactically valid because it only contains alphanumeric characters, but it is not valid if the input is only expected to contain colors such as "red" or "blue."
- Do not rely exclusively on looking for malicious or malformed inputs. This is likely to miss at least one undesirable input, especially if the code's environment changes. This can give attackers enough room to bypass the intended validation. However, denylists can be useful for detecting potential attacks or determining which inputs are so malformed that they should be rejected outright.
Mitigation
Run time: Run time policy enforcement may be used in an allowlist fashion to prevent use of any non-sanctioned commands.
Mitigation
Assign permissions that prevent the user from accessing/opening privileged files.
CAPEC-136: LDAP Injection
An attacker manipulates or crafts an LDAP query for the purpose of undermining the security of the target. Some applications use user input to create LDAP queries that are processed by an LDAP server. For example, a user might provide their username during authentication and the username might be inserted in an LDAP query during the authentication process. An attacker could use this input to inject additional commands into an LDAP query that could disclose sensitive information. For example, entering a * in the aforementioned query might return information about all users on the system. This attack is very similar to an SQL injection attack in that it manipulates a query to gather additional information or coerce a particular return value.
CAPEC-15: Command Delimiters
An attack of this type exploits a programs' vulnerabilities that allows an attacker's commands to be concatenated onto a legitimate command with the intent of targeting other resources such as the file system or database. The system that uses a filter or denylist input validation, as opposed to allowlist validation is vulnerable to an attacker who predicts delimiters (or combinations of delimiters) not present in the filter or denylist. As with other injection attacks, the attacker uses the command delimiter payload as an entry point to tunnel through the application and activate additional attacks through SQL queries, shell commands, network scanning, and so on.
CAPEC-183: IMAP/SMTP Command Injection
An adversary exploits weaknesses in input validation on web-mail servers to execute commands on the IMAP/SMTP server. Web-mail servers often sit between the Internet and the IMAP or SMTP mail server. User requests are received by the web-mail servers which then query the back-end mail server for the requested information and return this response to the user. In an IMAP/SMTP command injection attack, mail-server commands are embedded in parts of the request sent to the web-mail server. If the web-mail server fails to adequately sanitize these requests, these commands are then sent to the back-end mail server when it is queried by the web-mail server, where the commands are then executed. This attack can be especially dangerous since administrators may assume that the back-end server is protected against direct Internet access and therefore may not secure it adequately against the execution of malicious commands.
CAPEC-248: Command Injection
An adversary looking to execute a command of their choosing, injects new items into an existing command thus modifying interpretation away from what was intended. Commands in this context are often standalone strings that are interpreted by a downstream component and cause specific responses. This type of attack is possible when untrusted values are used to build these command strings. Weaknesses in input validation or command construction can enable the attack and lead to successful exploitation.
CAPEC-40: Manipulating Writeable Terminal Devices
This attack exploits terminal devices that allow themselves to be written to by other users. The attacker sends command strings to the target terminal device hoping that the target user will hit enter and thereby execute the malicious command with their privileges. The attacker can send the results (such as copying /etc/passwd) to a known directory and collect once the attack has succeeded.
CAPEC-43: Exploiting Multiple Input Interpretation Layers
An attacker supplies the target software with input data that contains sequences of special characters designed to bypass input validation logic. This exploit relies on the target making multiples passes over the input data and processing a "layer" of special characters with each pass. In this manner, the attacker can disguise input that would otherwise be rejected as invalid by concealing it with layers of special/escape characters that are stripped off by subsequent processing steps. The goal is to first discover cases where the input validation layer executes before one or more parsing layers. That is, user input may go through the following logic in an application: <parser1> --> <input validator> --> <parser2>. In such cases, the attacker will need to provide input that will pass through the input validator, but after passing through parser2, will be converted into something that the input validator was supposed to stop.
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.