CWE-94
Allowed-with-ReviewImproper Control of Generation of Code ('Code Injection')
Abstraction: Base · Status: Draft
The product constructs all or part of a code segment using externally-influenced input from an upstream component, but it does not neutralize or incorrectly neutralizes special elements that could modify the syntax or behavior of the intended code segment.
8340 vulnerabilities reference this CWE, most recent first.
GHSA-RPP3-6C33-VW2F
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-02 03:26 – Updated: 2025-01-21 18:31Unspecified vulnerability in Microsoft Internet Explorer 5.01 SP4, 6, 6 SP1, and 7 allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code via a crafted data stream header that triggers memory corruption, aka "Data Stream Header Corruption Vulnerability."
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2009-1547"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-94"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2009-10-14T10:30:00Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "Unspecified vulnerability in Microsoft Internet Explorer 5.01 SP4, 6, 6 SP1, and 7 allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code via a crafted data stream header that triggers memory corruption, aka \"Data Stream Header Corruption Vulnerability.\"",
"id": "GHSA-rpp3-6c33-vw2f",
"modified": "2025-01-21T18:31:00Z",
"published": "2022-05-02T03:26:10Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2009-1547"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/security-updates/securitybulletins/2009/ms09-054"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://oval.cisecurity.org/repository/search/definition/oval%3Aorg.mitre.oval%3Adef%3A6454"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://www.us-cert.gov/cas/techalerts/TA09-286A.html"
}
],
"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:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-RPP4-2Q2J-FC26
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-01 23:47 – Updated: 2022-05-01 23:47Static code injection vulnerability in box/minichat/boxpop.php in IT!CMS (aka itcms) 1.9 allows remote attackers to inject arbitrary PHP code into box/MiniChat/data/shouts.php via the shout parameter.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2008-2192"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-94"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2008-05-14T17:20:00Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "Static code injection vulnerability in box/minichat/boxpop.php in IT!CMS (aka itcms) 1.9 allows remote attackers to inject arbitrary PHP code into box/MiniChat/data/shouts.php via the shout parameter.",
"id": "GHSA-rpp4-2q2j-fc26",
"modified": "2022-05-01T23:47:32Z",
"published": "2022-05-01T23:47:32Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2008-2192"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://exchange.xforce.ibmcloud.com/vulnerabilities/42172"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.exploit-db.com/exploits/5532"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://secunia.com/advisories/30059"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/29028"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": []
}
GHSA-RPPR-4H7C-MC9C
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-24 17:27 – Updated: 2022-05-24 17:27A Remote Code Execution vulnerability exists in the SAP NetWeaver (ABAP Server, up to release 7.40) and ABAP Platform (> release 7.40).Because of this, an attacker can exploit these products via Code Injection, and potentially enabling to take complete control of the products, including viewing, changing, or deleting data by injecting code into the working memory which is subsequently executed by the application. It can also be used to cause a general fault in the product, causing the products to terminate.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2020-6318"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-94"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2020-09-09T13:15:00Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "A Remote Code Execution vulnerability exists in the SAP NetWeaver (ABAP Server, up to release 7.40) and ABAP Platform (\u003e release 7.40).Because of this, an attacker can exploit these products via Code Injection, and potentially enabling to take complete control of the products, including viewing, changing, or deleting data by injecting code into the working memory which is subsequently executed by the application. It can also be used to cause a general fault in the product, causing the products to terminate.",
"id": "GHSA-rppr-4h7c-mc9c",
"modified": "2022-05-24T17:27:43Z",
"published": "2022-05-24T17:27:43Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2020-6318"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://launchpad.support.sap.com/#/notes/2958563"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://wiki.scn.sap.com/wiki/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=557449700"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://packetstormsecurity.com/files/167229/SAP-Application-Server-ABAP-ABAP-Platform-Code-Injection-SQL-Injection-Missing-Authorization.html"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://seclists.org/fulldisclosure/2022/May/42"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-RPRW-C6W3-XX2Q
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-05-07 09:31 – Updated: 2026-05-13 21:31Remote Code Execution Vulnerability in Hitachi Storage Navigator and the maintenance console in Hitachi Virtual Storage Platform G130, G150, G350, G370, G700, G900, F350, F370, F700, F900, Hitachi Virtual Storage Platform E390, E590, E790, E990, E1090, E390H, E590H, E790H, E1090H, Hitachi Virtual Storage Platform One Block 23, One Block 24, One Block 26, One Block 28.
This issue affects Virtual Storage Platform G130, G150, G350, G370, G700, G900, F350, F370, F700, F900, Hitachi Virtual Storage Platform E390, E590, E790, E990, E1090, E390H, E590H, E790H, E1090H, Hitachi Virtual Storage Platform One Block 23, One Block 24, One Block 26, One Block 28 : before DKCMAIN Ver. 88-08-16-xx/00, SVP Ver. 88-08-18-xx/00, before DKCMAIN Ver. 93-07-26-xx/00, SVP Ver. 93-07-26-xx/00, before DKCMAIN Ver. A3-04-02-xx/00, MPC Ver. A3-04-02-xx/00, before DKCMAIN Ver. A3-03-41-xx/00, MPC Ver. A3-03-41-xx/00, before DKCMAIN Ver. A3-03-03-xx/00, MPC Ver. A3-03-03-xx/00.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2025-1978"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-94"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2026-05-07T09:16:26Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "Remote Code Execution Vulnerability in Hitachi Storage Navigator and the maintenance console in Hitachi Virtual Storage Platform G130, G150, G350, G370, G700, G900, F350, F370, F700, F900, Hitachi Virtual Storage Platform E390, E590, E790, E990, E1090, E390H, E590H, E790H, E1090H, Hitachi Virtual Storage Platform One Block 23, One Block 24, One Block 26, One Block 28.\n\nThis issue affects Virtual Storage Platform G130, G150, G350, G370, G700, G900, F350, F370, F700, F900,\u00a0Hitachi Virtual Storage Platform E390, E590, E790, E990, E1090, E390H, E590H, E790H, E1090H, Hitachi Virtual Storage Platform One Block 23, One Block 24, One Block 26, One Block 28\u00a0 : before DKCMAIN Ver. 88-08-16-xx/00, SVP Ver. 88-08-18-xx/00, before DKCMAIN Ver. 93-07-26-xx/00, SVP Ver. 93-07-26-xx/00, before DKCMAIN Ver. A3-04-02-xx/00, MPC Ver. A3-04-02-xx/00, before DKCMAIN Ver. A3-03-41-xx/00, MPC Ver. A3-03-41-xx/00, before DKCMAIN Ver. A3-03-03-xx/00, MPC Ver. A3-03-03-xx/00.",
"id": "GHSA-rprw-c6w3-xx2q",
"modified": "2026-05-13T21:31:58Z",
"published": "2026-05-07T09:31:26Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2025-1978"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.hitachi.com/products/it/storage-solutions/sec_info/2026/2026_307.html"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:L/I:L/A:L",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-RPX5-2JW7-FMX4
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2021-12-16 00:01 – Updated: 2022-07-13 00:01Microsoft Defender for IoT Remote Code Execution Vulnerability This CVE ID is unique from CVE-2021-41365, CVE-2021-42310, CVE-2021-42311, CVE-2021-42313, CVE-2021-42314, CVE-2021-42315, CVE-2021-43882.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2021-43889"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-94"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2021-12-15T15:15:00Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "Microsoft Defender for IoT Remote Code Execution Vulnerability This CVE ID is unique from CVE-2021-41365, CVE-2021-42310, CVE-2021-42311, CVE-2021-42313, CVE-2021-42314, CVE-2021-42315, CVE-2021-43882.",
"id": "GHSA-rpx5-2jw7-fmx4",
"modified": "2022-07-13T00:01:49Z",
"published": "2021-12-16T00:01:44Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2021-43889"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://portal.msrc.microsoft.com/en-US/security-guidance/advisory/CVE-2021-43889"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-RQ35-F7P2-6PP9
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2024-10-30 21:30 – Updated: 2024-10-31 18:31An issue in Ethereum v.1.12.2 allows remote attacker to execute arbitrary code via the PepeGxng smart contract mint function.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2024-51427"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-94"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2024-10-30T21:15:15Z",
"severity": "CRITICAL"
},
"details": "An issue in Ethereum v.1.12.2 allows remote attacker to execute arbitrary code via the PepeGxng smart contract mint function.",
"id": "GHSA-rq35-f7p2-6pp9",
"modified": "2024-10-31T18:31:18Z",
"published": "2024-10-30T21:30:41Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-51427"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/Wzy-source/Gala/blob/main/CVEs/PepeGxng_0x5d8d1f28cad84fad8d2fea9fdd4ab5022d23b0fe.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-RQ4H-CQFG-PJ23
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2025-02-22 00:33 – Updated: 2025-02-22 18:31A vulnerability in the SecureROM of some Apple devices can be exploited by an unauthenticated local attacker to execute arbitrary code upon booting those devices. This vulnerability allows arbitrary code to be executed on the device. Exploiting the vulnerability requires physical access to the device: the device must be plugged in to a computer upon booting, and it must be put into Device Firmware Update (DFU) mode. The exploit is not persistent; rebooting the device overrides any changes to the device's software that were made during an exploited session on the device. Additionally, unless an attacker has access to the device's unlock PIN or fingerprint, an attacker cannot gain access to information protected by Apple's Secure Enclave or Touch ID features.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2019-8900"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-94"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2025-02-21T22:15:10Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "A vulnerability in the SecureROM of some Apple devices can be exploited by an unauthenticated local attacker to execute arbitrary code upon booting those devices. This vulnerability allows arbitrary code to be executed on the device. Exploiting the vulnerability requires physical access to the device: the device must be plugged in to a computer upon booting, and it must be put into Device Firmware Update (DFU) mode. The exploit is not persistent; rebooting the device overrides any changes to the device\u0027s software that were made during an exploited session on the device. Additionally, unless an attacker has access to the device\u0027s unlock PIN or fingerprint, an attacker cannot gain access to information protected by Apple\u0027s Secure Enclave or Touch ID features.",
"id": "GHSA-rq4h-cqfg-pj23",
"modified": "2025-02-22T18:31:31Z",
"published": "2025-02-22T00:33:51Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2019-8900"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.kb.cert.org/vuls/id/941987"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:P/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-RQ4V-W4C3-3H29
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-01-12 00:01 – Updated: 2024-11-14 21:31Microsoft Office Remote Code Execution Vulnerability.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2022-21840"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-94"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2022-01-11T21:15:00Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "Microsoft Office Remote Code Execution Vulnerability.",
"id": "GHSA-rq4v-w4c3-3h29",
"modified": "2024-11-14T21:31:43Z",
"published": "2022-01-12T00:01:10Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2022-21840"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://msrc.microsoft.com/update-guide/vulnerability/CVE-2022-21840"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://portal.msrc.microsoft.com/en-US/security-guidance/advisory/CVE-2022-21840"
}
],
"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:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-RQ58-343G-RCP4
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-17 01:01 – Updated: 2022-05-17 01:01Adobe Reader and Acrobat 8.x before 8.3, 9.x before 9.4.5, and 10.x before 10.1 on Windows and Mac OS X do not properly restrict script, which allows attackers to execute arbitrary code via a crafted document, related to a "cross document script execution vulnerability."
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2011-2101"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-94"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2011-06-16T23:55:00Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "Adobe Reader and Acrobat 8.x before 8.3, 9.x before 9.4.5, and 10.x before 10.1 on Windows and Mac OS X do not properly restrict script, which allows attackers to execute arbitrary code via a crafted document, related to a \"cross document script execution vulnerability.\"",
"id": "GHSA-rq58-343g-rcp4",
"modified": "2022-05-17T01:01:34Z",
"published": "2022-05-17T01:01:34Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2011-2101"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://exchange.xforce.ibmcloud.com/vulnerabilities/68015"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://oval.cisecurity.org/repository/search/definition/oval%3Aorg.mitre.oval%3Adef%3A13919"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://osvdb.org/73063"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://www.adobe.com/support/security/bulletins/apsb11-16.html"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/48255"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://www.securitytracker.com/id?1025658"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://www.us-cert.gov/cas/techalerts/TA11-166A.html"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": []
}
GHSA-RQ72-G3XF-2GX3
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2023-12-17 15:30 – Updated: 2023-12-17 15:30A vulnerability classified as problematic was found in rmountjoy92 DashMachine 0.5-4. Affected by this vulnerability is an unknown functionality of the file /settings/save_config of the component Config Handler. The manipulation of the argument value_template leads to code injection. The exploit has been disclosed to the public and may be used. The identifier VDB-248257 was assigned to this vulnerability.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2023-6899"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-94"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2023-12-17T13:15:42Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "A vulnerability classified as problematic was found in rmountjoy92 DashMachine 0.5-4. Affected by this vulnerability is an unknown functionality of the file /settings/save_config of the component Config Handler. The manipulation of the argument value_template leads to code injection. The exploit has been disclosed to the public and may be used. The identifier VDB-248257 was assigned to this vulnerability.",
"id": "GHSA-rq72-g3xf-2gx3",
"modified": "2023-12-17T15:30:19Z",
"published": "2023-12-17T15:30:19Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2023-6899"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://treasure-blarney-085.notion.site/DashMachine-Unauthorized-RCE-931a35a81af9448ebe9fb4cd904d4a0c"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://vuldb.com/?ctiid.248257"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://vuldb.com/?id.248257"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
Mitigation
Strategy: Refactoring
Refactor your program so that you do not have to dynamically generate code.
Mitigation
- Run your code in a "jail" or similar sandbox environment that enforces strict boundaries between the process and the operating system. This may effectively restrict which code can be executed by your product.
- Examples include the Unix chroot jail and AppArmor. In general, managed code may provide some protection.
- This may not be a feasible solution, and it only limits the impact to the operating system; the rest of your application may still be subject to compromise.
- Be careful to avoid CWE-243 and other weaknesses related to jails.
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.
- To reduce the likelihood of code injection, use stringent allowlists that limit which constructs are allowed. If you are dynamically constructing code that invokes a function, then verifying that the input is alphanumeric might be insufficient. An attacker might still be able to reference a dangerous function that you did not intend to allow, such as system(), exec(), or exit().
Mitigation
Use dynamic tools and techniques that interact with the product using large test suites with many diverse inputs, such as fuzz testing (fuzzing), robustness testing, and fault injection. The product's operation may slow down, but it should not become unstable, crash, or generate incorrect results.
Mitigation MIT-32
Strategy: Compilation or Build Hardening
Run the code in an environment that performs automatic taint propagation and prevents any command execution that uses tainted variables, such as Perl's "-T" switch. This will force the program to perform validation steps that remove the taint, although you must be careful to correctly validate your inputs so that you do not accidentally mark dangerous inputs as untainted (see CWE-183 and CWE-184).
Mitigation MIT-32
Strategy: Environment Hardening
Run the code in an environment that performs automatic taint propagation and prevents any command execution that uses tainted variables, such as Perl's "-T" switch. This will force the program to perform validation steps that remove the taint, although you must be careful to correctly validate your inputs so that you do not accidentally mark dangerous inputs as untainted (see CWE-183 and CWE-184).
Mitigation
For Python programs, it is frequently encouraged to use the ast.literal_eval() function instead of eval, since it is intentionally designed to avoid executing code. However, an adversary could still cause excessive memory or stack consumption via deeply nested structures [REF-1372], so the python documentation discourages use of ast.literal_eval() on untrusted data [REF-1373].
CAPEC-242: Code Injection
An adversary exploits a weakness in input validation on the target to inject new code into that which is currently executing. This differs from code inclusion in that code inclusion involves the addition or replacement of a reference to a code file, which is subsequently loaded by the target and used as part of the code of some application.
CAPEC-35: Leverage Executable Code in Non-Executable Files
An attack of this type exploits a system's trust in configuration and resource files. When the executable loads the resource (such as an image file or configuration file) the attacker has modified the file to either execute malicious code directly or manipulate the target process (e.g. application server) to execute based on the malicious configuration parameters. Since systems are increasingly interrelated mashing up resources from local and remote sources the possibility of this attack occurring is high.
CAPEC-77: Manipulating User-Controlled Variables
This attack targets user controlled variables (DEBUG=1, PHP Globals, and So Forth). An adversary can override variables leveraging user-supplied, untrusted query variables directly used on the application server without any data sanitization. In extreme cases, the adversary can change variables controlling the business logic of the application. For instance, in languages like PHP, a number of poorly set default configurations may allow the user to override variables.