Common Weakness Enumeration

CWE-79

Allowed

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

Abstraction: Base · Status: Stable

The product does not neutralize or incorrectly neutralizes user-controllable input before it is placed in output that is used as a web page that is served to other users.

67071 vulnerabilities reference this CWE, most recent first.

GHSA-WR8M-PRMG-JGH7

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2024-11-19 18:31 – Updated: 2026-04-01 18:32
VLAI
Details

Improper Neutralization of Input During Web Page Generation ('Cross-site Scripting') vulnerability in matorel Multi-day Booking Calendar allows DOM-Based XSS.This issue affects Multi-day Booking Calendar: from n/a through 1.0.1.

Show details on source website

{
  "affected": [],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2024-51873"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-79"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": false,
    "github_reviewed_at": null,
    "nvd_published_at": "2024-11-19T17:15:40Z",
    "severity": "MODERATE"
  },
  "details": "Improper Neutralization of Input During Web Page Generation (\u0027Cross-site Scripting\u0027) vulnerability in matorel Multi-day Booking Calendar allows DOM-Based XSS.This issue affects Multi-day Booking Calendar: from n/a through 1.0.1.",
  "id": "GHSA-wr8m-prmg-jgh7",
  "modified": "2026-04-01T18:32:32Z",
  "published": "2024-11-19T18:31:04Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-51873"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://patchstack.com/database/Wordpress/Plugin/multi-day-booking-calendar/vulnerability/wordpress-multi-day-booking-calendar-plugin-1-0-1-cross-site-scripting-xss-vulnerability?_s_id=cve"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://patchstack.com/database/vulnerability/multi-day-booking-calendar/wordpress-multi-day-booking-calendar-plugin-1-0-1-cross-site-scripting-xss-vulnerability?_s_id=cve"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": [
    {
      "score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:R/S:C/C:L/I:L/A:L",
      "type": "CVSS_V3"
    }
  ]
}

GHSA-WR8M-V75R-C6QR

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-10-01 00:00 – Updated: 2022-10-01 00:00
VLAI
Details

Adobe Experience Manager versions 6.5.13.0 (and earlier) is affected by a reflected Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) vulnerability. If an attacker is able to convince a victim to visit a URL referencing a vulnerable page, malicious JavaScript content may be executed within the context of the victim's browser. Exploitation of this issue requires low-privilege access to AEM.

Show details on source website

{
  "affected": [],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2022-28851"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-79"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": false,
    "github_reviewed_at": null,
    "nvd_published_at": "2022-09-30T17:15:00Z",
    "severity": "MODERATE"
  },
  "details": "Adobe Experience Manager versions 6.5.13.0 (and earlier) is affected by a reflected Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) vulnerability. If an attacker is able to convince a victim to visit a URL referencing a vulnerable page, malicious JavaScript content may be executed within the context of the victim\u0027s browser. Exploitation of this issue requires low-privilege access to AEM.",
  "id": "GHSA-wr8m-v75r-c6qr",
  "modified": "2022-10-01T00:00:20Z",
  "published": "2022-10-01T00:00:20Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2022-28851"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://helpx.adobe.com/security/products/experience-manager/apsb22-40.html"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": [
    {
      "score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:R/S:C/C:L/I:L/A:N",
      "type": "CVSS_V3"
    }
  ]
}

GHSA-WR8P-964C-7VGX

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-14 03:23 – Updated: 2022-05-14 03:23
VLAI
Details

YUNUCMS 1.0.7 has XSS via the content title on an admin/content/addcontent/cid/## page (aka a news center page).

Show details on source website

{
  "affected": [],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2018-9993"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-79"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": false,
    "github_reviewed_at": null,
    "nvd_published_at": "2018-04-10T21:29:00Z",
    "severity": "MODERATE"
  },
  "details": "YUNUCMS 1.0.7 has XSS via the content title on an admin/content/addcontent/cid/## page (aka a news center page).",
  "id": "GHSA-wr8p-964c-7vgx",
  "modified": "2022-05-14T03:23:29Z",
  "published": "2022-05-14T03:23:29Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2018-9993"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/imsebao/404team/blob/master/yunucms/yunucms.md"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": [
    {
      "score": "CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:H/UI:R/S:C/C:L/I:L/A:N",
      "type": "CVSS_V3"
    }
  ]
}

GHSA-WR8Q-WF72-MF6M

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2025-05-15 21:31 – Updated: 2025-05-19 15:30
VLAI
Details

The Easy Property Listings WordPress plugin before 3.5.4 does not sanitise and escape some of its settings, which could allow high privilege users such as admin to perform Stored Cross-Site Scripting attacks even when the unfiltered_html capability is disallowed (for example in multisite setup)

Show details on source website

{
  "affected": [],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2024-2869"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-79"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": false,
    "github_reviewed_at": null,
    "nvd_published_at": "2025-05-15T20:15:49Z",
    "severity": "MODERATE"
  },
  "details": "The Easy Property Listings WordPress plugin before 3.5.4 does not sanitise and escape some of its settings, which could allow high privilege users such as admin to perform Stored Cross-Site Scripting attacks even when the unfiltered_html capability is disallowed (for example in multisite setup)",
  "id": "GHSA-wr8q-wf72-mf6m",
  "modified": "2025-05-19T15:30:39Z",
  "published": "2025-05-15T21:31:31Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-2869"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://wpscan.com/vulnerability/4093c12e-f62b-4357-8893-649cd2aaeace"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": [
    {
      "score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:H/UI:R/S:C/C:L/I:L/A:N",
      "type": "CVSS_V3"
    }
  ]
}

GHSA-WR8V-9WQH-VGXP

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-17 02:34 – Updated: 2022-05-17 02:34
VLAI
Details

A vulnerability in the web-based management interface of Cisco Unified Communications Manager 10.5 through 11.5 could allow an unauthenticated, remote attacker to conduct a cross-site scripting (XSS) attack against a user of the web-based management interface of an affected device. The vulnerability is due to insufficient validation of user-supplied input by the web-based management interface of an affected device. An attacker could exploit this vulnerability by persuading a user of the interface to click a crafted link. A successful exploit could allow the attacker to execute arbitrary script code in the context of the interface or allow the attacker to access sensitive browser-based information. Cisco Bug IDs: CSCvc06608.

Show details on source website

{
  "affected": [],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2017-6654"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-79"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": false,
    "github_reviewed_at": null,
    "nvd_published_at": "2017-05-22T01:29:00Z",
    "severity": "MODERATE"
  },
  "details": "A vulnerability in the web-based management interface of Cisco Unified Communications Manager 10.5 through 11.5 could allow an unauthenticated, remote attacker to conduct a cross-site scripting (XSS) attack against a user of the web-based management interface of an affected device. The vulnerability is due to insufficient validation of user-supplied input by the web-based management interface of an affected device. An attacker could exploit this vulnerability by persuading a user of the interface to click a crafted link. A successful exploit could allow the attacker to execute arbitrary script code in the context of the interface or allow the attacker to access sensitive browser-based information. Cisco Bug IDs: CSCvc06608.",
  "id": "GHSA-wr8v-9wqh-vgxp",
  "modified": "2022-05-17T02:34:28Z",
  "published": "2022-05-17T02:34:28Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2017-6654"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://tools.cisco.com/security/center/content/CiscoSecurityAdvisory/cisco-sa-20170517-ucm"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/98527"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "http://www.securitytracker.com/id/1038512"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": [
    {
      "score": "CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:L/I:L/A:N",
      "type": "CVSS_V3"
    }
  ]
}

GHSA-WR8V-QCGQ-V7M3

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2025-10-01 18:30 – Updated: 2025-10-01 18:30
VLAI
Details

In Splunk Enterprise versions below 9.4.4, 9.3.6, and 9.2.8, and Splunk Cloud Platform versions below 9.3.2411.108, 9.3.2408.118 and 9.2.2406.123, a low privileged user that does not hold the admin or power Splunk roles could craft a malicious payload through the error messages and job inspection details of a saved search. This could result in execution of unauthorized JavaScript code in the browser of a user.

Show details on source website

{
  "affected": [],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2025-20368"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-79"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": false,
    "github_reviewed_at": null,
    "nvd_published_at": "2025-10-01T17:15:39Z",
    "severity": "MODERATE"
  },
  "details": "In Splunk Enterprise versions below 9.4.4, 9.3.6, and 9.2.8, and Splunk Cloud Platform versions below 9.3.2411.108, 9.3.2408.118 and 9.2.2406.123, a low privileged user that does not hold the admin or power Splunk roles could craft a malicious payload through the error messages and job inspection details of a saved search. This could result in execution of unauthorized JavaScript code in the browser of a user.",
  "id": "GHSA-wr8v-qcgq-v7m3",
  "modified": "2025-10-01T18:30:39Z",
  "published": "2025-10-01T18:30:39Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2025-20368"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://advisory.splunk.com/advisories/SVD-2025-1003"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": [
    {
      "score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N",
      "type": "CVSS_V3"
    }
  ]
}

GHSA-WR93-RWGM-FR53

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-13 01:37 – Updated: 2022-05-13 01:37
VLAI
Details

IBM Rational Quality Manager and IBM Rational Collaborative Lifecycle Management 5.0 through 5.0.2 and 6.0 through 6.0.5 are vulnerable to cross-site scripting. This vulnerability allows users to embed arbitrary JavaScript code in the Web UI thus altering the intended functionality potentially leading to credentials disclosure within a trusted session. IBM X-Force ID: 133088.

Show details on source website

{
  "affected": [],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2017-1621"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-79"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": false,
    "github_reviewed_at": null,
    "nvd_published_at": "2018-07-03T19:29:00Z",
    "severity": "MODERATE"
  },
  "details": "IBM Rational Quality Manager and IBM Rational Collaborative Lifecycle Management 5.0 through 5.0.2 and 6.0 through 6.0.5 are vulnerable to cross-site scripting. This vulnerability allows users to embed arbitrary JavaScript code in the Web UI thus altering the intended functionality potentially leading to credentials disclosure within a trusted session. IBM X-Force ID: 133088.",
  "id": "GHSA-wr93-rwgm-fr53",
  "modified": "2022-05-13T01:37:04Z",
  "published": "2022-05-13T01:37:04Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2017-1621"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://exchange.xforce.ibmcloud.com/vulnerabilities/133088"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://www-prd-trops.events.ibm.com/node/715749"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": [
    {
      "score": "CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:R/S:C/C:L/I:L/A:N",
      "type": "CVSS_V3"
    }
  ]
}

GHSA-WR9H-4R83-F4V6

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-06-18 15:04 – Updated: 2026-06-18 15:04
VLAI
Summary
Kirby: Cross-site scripting (XSS) from incomplete HTML/XML sanitization in `Dom::sanitize()`
Details

TL;DR

This vulnerability affects Kirby sites and plugins that use the writer or list fields or that use $dom->sanitize(), Sane::sanitize(), Sane\Html::sanitize(), Sane\Svg::sanitize(), Sane\Xml::sanitize(), Sane::sanitizeFile() or $file->sanitizeContents() with untrusted input.

It was possible to inject malicious markup as children of an unknown HTML/XML tag, which would then be passed through Dom::sanitize() without being correctly sanitized according to the provided sanitization rules, causing a cross-site scripting (XSS) risk.

This vulnerability is of high severity for affected sites.

The default file upload protection is not affected, so sites that only validate uploaded files are not exposed to this vulnerability. The vulnerability can only be exploited by authenticated users.


Introduction

Cross-site scripting (XSS) is a type of vulnerability that allows executing any kind of JavaScript code inside the site frontend or Panel session of the same or other users. In the Panel, a harmful script can, for example, trigger requests to Kirby's API with the permissions of the victim.

In a stored XSS attack, the malicious payload is saved into the content data and has the potential to affect other users or site visitors.

Such vulnerabilities are critical if you might have potential attackers in your group of authenticated Panel users. They can escalate their privileges if they get access to the Panel session of an admin user. Depending on your site, other JavaScript-powered attacks are possible.

A specific class of stored XSS is auto-firing, meaning the maliciously injected JavaScript code is executed by the browser when the page loads without the victim having to perform a specific action.

Affected components

The Dom::sanitize() method allows removing unwanted or malicious elements or attributes from DOM documents (which includes HTML, SVG or arbitrary XML data). Sanitized content is supposed to be protected against cross-site scripting (XSS) attacks by removing their impact from untrusted content input.

Dom::sanitize() internally checks all nodes and attributes of the DOM document. It removes nodes, attributes, processing instructions, doctypes and namespaces that are not allowed according to the provided configuration. Nodes with tags that have been explicitly blocklisted are removed together with their children. Nodes with explicitly allowlisted tags are kept. If a tag is neither allowlisted nor blocklisted, nodes with that tag are unwrapped by Dom::unwrap() (meaning the children are kept).

Dom::sanitize() is used in the following components:

  • The writer field sanitizes all entered content on the backend before it is saved to the content file.
  • The list field performs the same sanitization as the writer field since Kirby 5.4.1 (and in backported versions since Kirby 4.9.1).
  • The Kirby\Sane class package includes higher-level classes Sane\Html, Sane\Svg and Sane\Xml that all rely on DOM sanitization.
  • These classes are in turn also used by Sane::sanitizeFile() and $file->sanitizeContents().
  • Any of the mentioned methods could also be used in site or plugin code, for example in a file.create:before hook that cleans uploaded SVG/HTML files.

Only the sanitization path (returning a cleaned document) is affected. The validation path is not affected by this vulnerability. Kirby's default upload protection performs validation, so malicious SVG or HTML uploads continue to be rejected.

Impact

In affected releases, Dom::sanitize() did not sanitize nodes that had been unwrapped from their parent node. The affected child nodes would be copied into the resulting sanitized document without being sanitized.

An authenticated Panel user who can edit a writer or list field can store markup that survives sanitization and executes as JavaScript when the content is rendered, both in the Panel and on the site frontend. This allows a lower-privileged editor to run scripts in the context of higher-privileged users (for example admins) who view the content ("stored XSS"). Where a plugin or custom code cleans uploaded SVG/HTML with the Sane API, the same flaw leaves active content in the stored file, which executes when the file is served.

Patches

The problem has been patched in Kirby 4.9.4 and Kirby 5.4.4. Please update to one of these or a later version to fix the vulnerability.

In all of the mentioned releases, Dom::unwrap() now moves the allowed children to the parent instead of cloning them, so the exact nodes remain in the document and are covered by the sanitization pass.

Note that content that was passed through the sanitizer and stored as field content before the patch may contain malicious content that was not properly sanitized due to the vulnerable code. If you cannot rule out attackers under the authenticated users of a security-critical site, we advise reviewing the content for possible attacks or to re-sanitize all content of affected fields.

Credits

Thanks to Shafiq Aiman (@shafiqaimanx) for responsibly reporting the identified issue.

Show details on source website

{
  "affected": [
    {
      "database_specific": {
        "last_known_affected_version_range": "\u003c= 4.9.3"
      },
      "package": {
        "ecosystem": "Packagist",
        "name": "getkirby/cms"
      },
      "ranges": [
        {
          "events": [
            {
              "introduced": "0"
            },
            {
              "fixed": "4.9.4"
            }
          ],
          "type": "ECOSYSTEM"
        }
      ]
    },
    {
      "database_specific": {
        "last_known_affected_version_range": "\u003c= 5.4.3"
      },
      "package": {
        "ecosystem": "Packagist",
        "name": "getkirby/cms"
      },
      "ranges": [
        {
          "events": [
            {
              "introduced": "5.0.0-alpha.1"
            },
            {
              "fixed": "5.4.4"
            }
          ],
          "type": "ECOSYSTEM"
        }
      ]
    }
  ],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2026-54002"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-79",
      "CWE-87"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": true,
    "github_reviewed_at": "2026-06-18T15:04:52Z",
    "nvd_published_at": null,
    "severity": "HIGH"
  },
  "details": "### TL;DR\n\nThis vulnerability affects Kirby sites and plugins that use the `writer` or `list` fields or that use `$dom-\u003esanitize()`, `Sane::sanitize()`, `Sane\\Html::sanitize()`, `Sane\\Svg::sanitize()`, `Sane\\Xml::sanitize()`,  `Sane::sanitizeFile()` or `$file-\u003esanitizeContents()` with untrusted input.\n\nIt was possible to inject malicious markup as children of an unknown HTML/XML tag, which would then be passed through `Dom::sanitize()` without being correctly sanitized according to the provided sanitization rules, causing a cross-site scripting (XSS) risk.\n\n**This vulnerability is of high severity for affected sites.**\n\nThe default file upload protection is *not* affected, so sites that only *validate* uploaded files are not exposed to this vulnerability. The vulnerability can only be exploited by authenticated users.\n\n----\n\n### Introduction\n\nCross-site scripting (XSS) is a type of vulnerability that allows executing any kind of JavaScript code inside the site frontend or Panel session of the same or other users. In the Panel, a harmful script can, for example, trigger requests to Kirby\u0027s API with the permissions of the victim.\n\nIn a *stored* XSS attack, the malicious payload is saved into the content data and has the potential to affect other users or site visitors.\n\nSuch vulnerabilities are critical if you might have potential attackers in your group of authenticated Panel users. They can escalate their privileges if they get access to the Panel session of an admin user. Depending on your site, other JavaScript-powered attacks are possible.\n\nA specific class of stored XSS is auto-firing, meaning the maliciously injected JavaScript code is executed by the browser when the page loads without the victim having to perform a specific action.\n\n### Affected components\n\nThe `Dom::sanitize()` method allows removing unwanted or malicious elements or attributes from DOM documents (which includes HTML, SVG or arbitrary XML data). Sanitized content is supposed to be protected against cross-site scripting (XSS) attacks by removing their impact from untrusted content input.\n\n`Dom::sanitize()` internally checks all nodes and attributes of the DOM document. It removes nodes, attributes, processing instructions, doctypes and namespaces that are not allowed according to the provided configuration. Nodes with tags that have been explicitly blocklisted are removed together with their children. Nodes with explicitly allowlisted tags are kept. If a tag is neither allowlisted nor blocklisted, nodes with that tag are unwrapped by `Dom::unwrap()` (meaning the children are kept).\n\n`Dom::sanitize()` is used in the following components:\n\n- The `writer` field sanitizes all entered content on the backend before it is saved to the content file.\n- The `list` field performs the same sanitization as the `writer` field since Kirby 5.4.1 (and in backported versions since Kirby 4.9.1).\n- The `Kirby\\Sane` class package includes higher-level classes `Sane\\Html`, `Sane\\Svg` and `Sane\\Xml` that all rely on DOM sanitization.\n- These classes are in turn also used by `Sane::sanitizeFile()` and `$file-\u003esanitizeContents()`.\n- Any of the mentioned methods could also be used in site or plugin code, for example in a `file.create:before` hook that cleans uploaded SVG/HTML files.\n\nOnly the sanitization path (returning a cleaned document) is affected. The validation path is *not* affected by this vulnerability. Kirby\u0027s default upload protection performs validation, so malicious SVG or HTML uploads continue to be rejected.\n\n### Impact\n\nIn affected releases, `Dom::sanitize()` did not sanitize nodes that had been unwrapped from their parent node. The affected child nodes would be copied into the resulting sanitized document without being sanitized.\n\nAn authenticated Panel user who can edit a `writer` or `list` field can store markup that survives sanitization and executes as JavaScript when the content is rendered, both in the Panel and on the site frontend. This allows a lower-privileged editor to run scripts in the context of higher-privileged users (for example admins) who view the content (\"stored XSS\"). Where a plugin or custom code cleans uploaded SVG/HTML with the `Sane` API, the same flaw leaves active content in the stored file, which executes when the file is served.\n\n### Patches\n\nThe problem has been patched in [Kirby 4.9.4](https://github.com/getkirby/kirby/releases/tag/4.9.4) and [Kirby 5.4.4](https://github.com/getkirby/kirby/releases/tag/5.4.4). Please update to one of these or a [later version](https://github.com/getkirby/kirby/releases) to fix the vulnerability.\n\nIn all of the mentioned releases, `Dom::unwrap()` now *moves* the allowed children to the parent instead of cloning them, so the exact nodes remain in the document and are covered by the sanitization pass.\n\nNote that content that was passed through the sanitizer and stored as field content before the patch may contain malicious content that was not properly sanitized due to the vulnerable code. If you cannot rule out attackers under the authenticated users of a security-critical site, we advise reviewing the content for possible attacks or to re-sanitize all content of affected fields.\n\n### Credits\n\nThanks to Shafiq Aiman (@shafiqaimanx) for responsibly reporting the identified issue.",
  "id": "GHSA-wr9h-4r83-f4v6",
  "modified": "2026-06-18T15:04:52Z",
  "published": "2026-06-18T15:04:52Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/getkirby/kirby/security/advisories/GHSA-wr9h-4r83-f4v6"
    },
    {
      "type": "PACKAGE",
      "url": "https://github.com/getkirby/kirby"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/getkirby/kirby/releases/tag/4.9.4"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/getkirby/kirby/releases/tag/5.4.4"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": [
    {
      "score": "CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:P/VC:H/VI:H/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N",
      "type": "CVSS_V4"
    }
  ],
  "summary": "Kirby: Cross-site scripting (XSS) from incomplete HTML/XML sanitization in `Dom::sanitize()`"
}

GHSA-WR9R-499G-57GV

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2024-11-11 21:31 – Updated: 2024-11-12 03:30
VLAI
Details

TRENDnet TEW-651BR 2.04B1, TEW-652BRP 3.04b01, and TEW-652BRU 1.00b12 devices contain a Store Cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability via the firewallRule_Name_1.1.1.0.0 parameter on the /firewall_setting.htm page.

Show details on source website

{
  "affected": [],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2024-51187"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-79"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": false,
    "github_reviewed_at": null,
    "nvd_published_at": "2024-11-11T20:15:17Z",
    "severity": "MODERATE"
  },
  "details": "TRENDnet TEW-651BR 2.04B1, TEW-652BRP 3.04b01, and TEW-652BRU 1.00b12 devices contain a Store Cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability via the firewallRule_Name_1.1.1.0.0 parameter on the /firewall_setting.htm page.",
  "id": "GHSA-wr9r-499g-57gv",
  "modified": "2024-11-12T03:30:47Z",
  "published": "2024-11-11T21:31:48Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-51187"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/4hsien/CVE-vulns/blob/main/TRENDnet/TEW-652BRP/XSS_Firewall_Rule/README.md"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://www.trendnet.com/products/product-detail?prod=235_TEW-651BR"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://www.trendnet.com/products/product-detail?prod=235_TEW-652BRP"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://www.trendnet.com/products/product-detail?prod=245_TEW-652BRU"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": [
    {
      "score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:L/PR:L/UI:R/S:C/C:L/I:L/A:N",
      "type": "CVSS_V3"
    }
  ]
}

GHSA-WR9R-V3GV-6CJ3

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2024-06-07 06:30 – Updated: 2026-04-08 18:33
VLAI
Details

The Essential Addons for Elementor Pro plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Stored Cross-Site Scripting via the ‘eael_lightbox_open_btn_icon’ parameter within the Lightbox & Modal widget in all versions up to, and including, 5.8.15 due to insufficient input sanitization and output escaping. This makes it possible for authenticated attackers, with Contributor-level access and above, to inject arbitrary web scripts in pages that will execute whenever a user accesses an injected page.

Show details on source website

{
  "affected": [],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2024-5612"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-79"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": false,
    "github_reviewed_at": null,
    "nvd_published_at": "2024-06-07T05:15:50Z",
    "severity": "MODERATE"
  },
  "details": "The Essential Addons for Elementor Pro plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Stored Cross-Site Scripting via the \u2018eael_lightbox_open_btn_icon\u2019 parameter within the Lightbox \u0026 Modal widget in all versions up to, and including, 5.8.15 due to insufficient input sanitization and output escaping. This makes it possible for authenticated attackers, with Contributor-level access and above, to inject arbitrary web scripts in pages that will execute whenever a user accesses an injected page.",
  "id": "GHSA-wr9r-v3gv-6cj3",
  "modified": "2026-04-08T18:33:20Z",
  "published": "2024-06-07T06:30:30Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-5612"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://essential-addons.com/changelog"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://www.wordfence.com/threat-intel/vulnerabilities/id/8dbe4104-b7d1-484f-a843-a3d1fc02999d?source=cve"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": [
    {
      "score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:L/I:L/A:N",
      "type": "CVSS_V3"
    }
  ]
}

Mitigation MIT-4
Architecture and Design

Strategy: Libraries or Frameworks

  • Use a vetted library or framework that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid [REF-1482].
  • Examples of libraries and frameworks that make it easier to generate properly encoded output include Microsoft's Anti-XSS library, the OWASP ESAPI Encoding module, and Apache Wicket.
Mitigation
Implementation Architecture and Design
  • Understand the context in which your data will be used and the encoding that will be expected. This is especially important when transmitting data between different components, or when generating outputs that can contain multiple encodings at the same time, such as web pages or multi-part mail messages. Study all expected communication protocols and data representations to determine the required encoding strategies.
  • For any data that will be output to another web page, especially any data that was received from external inputs, use the appropriate encoding on all non-alphanumeric characters.
  • Parts of the same output document may require different encodings, which will vary depending on whether the output is in the:
  • etc. Note that HTML Entity Encoding is only appropriate for the HTML body.
  • Consult the XSS Prevention Cheat Sheet [REF-724] for more details on the types of encoding and escaping that are needed.
  • HTML body
  • Element attributes (such as src="XYZ")
  • URIs
  • JavaScript sections
  • Cascading Style Sheets and style property
Mitigation MIT-6
Architecture and Design Implementation

Strategy: Attack Surface Reduction

Understand all the potential areas where untrusted inputs can enter your software: parameters or arguments, cookies, anything read from the network, environment variables, reverse DNS lookups, query results, request headers, URL components, e-mail, files, filenames, databases, and any external systems that provide data to the application. Remember that such inputs may be obtained indirectly through API calls.

Mitigation MIT-15
Architecture and Design

For any security checks that are performed on the client side, ensure that these checks are duplicated on the server side, in order to avoid CWE-602. Attackers can bypass the client-side checks by modifying values after the checks have been performed, or by changing the client to remove the client-side checks entirely. Then, these modified values would be submitted to the server.

Mitigation MIT-27
Architecture and Design

Strategy: Parameterization

If available, use structured mechanisms that automatically enforce the separation between data and code. These mechanisms may be able to provide the relevant quoting, encoding, and validation automatically, instead of relying on the developer to provide this capability at every point where output is generated.

Mitigation MIT-30.1
Implementation

Strategy: Output Encoding

  • Use and specify an output encoding that can be handled by the downstream component that is reading the output. Common encodings include ISO-8859-1, UTF-7, and UTF-8. When an encoding is not specified, a downstream component may choose a different encoding, either by assuming a default encoding or automatically inferring which encoding is being used, which can be erroneous. When the encodings are inconsistent, the downstream component might treat some character or byte sequences as special, even if they are not special in the original encoding. Attackers might then be able to exploit this discrepancy and conduct injection attacks; they even might be able to bypass protection mechanisms that assume the original encoding is also being used by the downstream component.
  • The problem of inconsistent output encodings often arises in web pages. If an encoding is not specified in an HTTP header, web browsers often guess about which encoding is being used. This can open up the browser to subtle XSS attacks.
Mitigation MIT-43
Implementation

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

Mitigation MIT-31
Implementation

Strategy: Attack Surface Reduction

To help mitigate XSS attacks against the user's session cookie, set the session cookie to be HttpOnly. In browsers that support the HttpOnly feature (such as more recent versions of Internet Explorer and Firefox), this attribute can prevent the user's session cookie from being accessible to malicious client-side scripts that use document.cookie. This is not a complete solution, since HttpOnly is not supported by all browsers. More importantly, XmlHttpRequest and other powerful browser technologies provide read access to HTTP headers, including the Set-Cookie header in which the HttpOnly flag is set.

Mitigation MIT-5
Implementation

Strategy: Input Validation

  • Assume all input is malicious. Use an "accept known good" input validation strategy, i.e., use a list of acceptable inputs that strictly conform to specifications. Reject any input that does not strictly conform to specifications, or transform it into something that does.
  • When performing input validation, consider all potentially relevant properties, including length, type of input, the full range of acceptable values, missing or extra inputs, syntax, consistency across related fields, and conformance to business rules. As an example of business rule logic, "boat" may be syntactically valid because it only contains alphanumeric characters, but it is not valid if the input is only expected to contain colors such as "red" or "blue."
  • Do not rely exclusively on looking for malicious or malformed inputs. This is likely to miss at least one undesirable input, especially if the code's environment changes. This can give attackers enough room to bypass the intended validation. However, denylists can be useful for detecting potential attacks or determining which inputs are so malformed that they should be rejected outright.
  • When dynamically constructing web pages, use stringent allowlists that limit the character set based on the expected value of the parameter in the request. All input should be validated and cleansed, not just parameters that the user is supposed to specify, but all data in the request, including hidden fields, cookies, headers, the URL itself, and so forth. A common mistake that leads to continuing XSS vulnerabilities is to validate only fields that are expected to be redisplayed by the site. It is common to see data from the request that is reflected by the application server or the application that the development team did not anticipate. Also, a field that is not currently reflected may be used by a future developer. Therefore, validating ALL parts of the HTTP request is recommended.
  • Note that proper output encoding, escaping, and quoting is the most effective solution for preventing XSS, although input validation may provide some defense-in-depth. This is because it effectively limits what will appear in output. Input validation will not always prevent XSS, especially if you are required to support free-form text fields that could contain arbitrary characters. For example, in a chat application, the heart emoticon ("<3") would likely pass the validation step, since it is commonly used. However, it cannot be directly inserted into the web page because it contains the "<" character, which would need to be escaped or otherwise handled. In this case, stripping the "<" might reduce the risk of XSS, but it would produce incorrect behavior because the emoticon would not be recorded. This might seem to be a minor inconvenience, but it would be more important in a mathematical forum that wants to represent inequalities.
  • Even if you make a mistake in your validation (such as forgetting one out of 100 input fields), appropriate encoding is still likely to protect you from injection-based attacks. As long as it is not done in isolation, input validation is still a useful technique, since it may significantly reduce your attack surface, allow you to detect some attacks, and provide other security benefits that proper encoding does not address.
  • Ensure that you perform input validation at well-defined interfaces within the application. This will help protect the application even if a component is reused or moved elsewhere.
Mitigation MIT-21
Architecture and Design

Strategy: Enforcement by Conversion

When the set of acceptable objects, such as filenames or URLs, is limited or known, create a mapping from a set of fixed input values (such as numeric IDs) to the actual filenames or URLs, and reject all other inputs.

Mitigation MIT-29
Operation

Strategy: Firewall

Use an application firewall that can detect attacks against this weakness. It can be beneficial in cases in which the code cannot be fixed (because it is controlled by a third party), as an emergency prevention measure while more comprehensive software assurance measures are applied, or to provide defense in depth [REF-1481].

Mitigation MIT-16
Operation Implementation

Strategy: Environment Hardening

When using PHP, configure the application so that it does not use register_globals. During implementation, develop the application so that it does not rely on this feature, but be wary of implementing a register_globals emulation that is subject to weaknesses such as CWE-95, CWE-621, and similar issues.

CAPEC-209: XSS Using MIME Type Mismatch

An adversary creates a file with scripting content but where the specified MIME type of the file is such that scripting is not expected. The adversary tricks the victim into accessing a URL that responds with the script file. Some browsers will detect that the specified MIME type of the file does not match the actual type of its content and will automatically switch to using an interpreter for the real content type. If the browser does not invoke script filters before doing this, the adversary's script may run on the target unsanitized, possibly revealing the victim's cookies or executing arbitrary script in their browser.

CAPEC-588: DOM-Based XSS

This type of attack is a form of Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) where a malicious script is inserted into the client-side HTML being parsed by a web browser. Content served by a vulnerable web application includes script code used to manipulate the Document Object Model (DOM). This script code either does not properly validate input, or does not perform proper output encoding, thus creating an opportunity for an adversary to inject a malicious script launch a XSS attack. A key distinction between other XSS attacks and DOM-based attacks is that in other XSS attacks, the malicious script runs when the vulnerable web page is initially loaded, while a DOM-based attack executes sometime after the page loads. Another distinction of DOM-based attacks is that in some cases, the malicious script is never sent to the vulnerable web server at all. An attack like this is guaranteed to bypass any server-side filtering attempts to protect users.

CAPEC-591: Reflected XSS

This type of attack is a form of Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) where a malicious script is "reflected" off a vulnerable web application and then executed by a victim's browser. The process starts with an adversary delivering a malicious script to a victim and convincing the victim to send the script to the vulnerable web application.

CAPEC-592: Stored XSS

An adversary utilizes a form of Cross-site Scripting (XSS) where a malicious script is persistently "stored" within the data storage of a vulnerable web application as valid input.

CAPEC-63: Cross-Site Scripting (XSS)

An adversary embeds malicious scripts in content that will be served to web browsers. The goal of the attack is for the target software, the client-side browser, to execute the script with the users' privilege level. An attack of this type exploits a programs' vulnerabilities that are brought on by allowing remote hosts to execute code and scripts. Web browsers, for example, have some simple security controls in place, but if a remote attacker is allowed to execute scripts (through injecting them in to user-generated content like bulletin boards) then these controls may be bypassed. Further, these attacks are very difficult for an end user to detect.

CAPEC-85: AJAX Footprinting

This attack utilizes the frequent client-server roundtrips in Ajax conversation to scan a system. While Ajax does not open up new vulnerabilities per se, it does optimize them from an attacker point of view. A common first step for an attacker is to footprint the target environment to understand what attacks will work. Since footprinting relies on enumeration, the conversational pattern of rapid, multiple requests and responses that are typical in Ajax applications enable an attacker to look for many vulnerabilities, well-known ports, network locations and so on. The knowledge gained through Ajax fingerprinting can be used to support other attacks, such as XSS.