CWE-78
Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in an OS Command ('OS Command Injection')
The product constructs all or part of an OS command using externally-influenced input from an upstream component, but it does not neutralize or incorrectly neutralizes special elements that could modify the intended OS command when it is sent to a downstream component.
CVE-2022-39224 (GCVE-0-2022-39224)
Vulnerability from cvelistv5 – Published: 2022-09-21 23:10 – Updated: 2025-04-22 17:21
VLAI
Title
Arbitrary shell execution when extracting or listing files contained in a malicious rpm.
Summary
Arr-pm is an RPM reader/writer library written in Ruby. Versions prior to 0.0.12 are subject to OS command injection resulting in shell execution if the RPM contains a malicious "payload compressor" field. This vulnerability impacts the `extract` and `files` methods of the `RPM::File` class of this library. Version 0.0.12 patches these issues. A workaround for this issue is to ensure any RPMs being processed contain valid/known payload compressor values such as gzip, bzip2, xz, zstd, and lzma. The payload compressor field in an rpm can be checked by using the rpm command line tool.
Severity
SSVC
Exploitation: poc
Automatable: no
Technical Impact: total
CISA Coordinator (v2.0.3)
CWE
- CWE-78 - Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in an OS Command ('OS Command Injection')
Assigner
References
3 references
| URL | Tags |
|---|---|
| https://github.com/jordansissel/ruby-arr-pm/secur… | x_refsource_CONFIRM |
| https://github.com/jordansissel/ruby-arr-pm/pull/15 | x_refsource_MISC |
| https://github.com/jordansissel/ruby-arr-pm/pull/14 | x_refsource_MISC |
Impacted products
1 product
| Vendor | Product | Version | |
|---|---|---|---|
| jordansissel | ruby-arr-pm |
Affected:
< 0.0.12
|
{
"containers": {
"adp": [
{
"providerMetadata": {
"dateUpdated": "2024-08-03T12:00:43.325Z",
"orgId": "af854a3a-2127-422b-91ae-364da2661108",
"shortName": "CVE"
},
"references": [
{
"tags": [
"x_refsource_CONFIRM",
"x_transferred"
],
"url": "https://github.com/jordansissel/ruby-arr-pm/security/advisories/GHSA-88cv-mj24-8w3q"
},
{
"tags": [
"x_refsource_MISC",
"x_transferred"
],
"url": "https://github.com/jordansissel/ruby-arr-pm/pull/15"
},
{
"tags": [
"x_refsource_MISC",
"x_transferred"
],
"url": "https://github.com/jordansissel/ruby-arr-pm/pull/14"
}
],
"title": "CVE Program Container"
},
{
"metrics": [
{
"other": {
"content": {
"id": "CVE-2022-39224",
"options": [
{
"Exploitation": "poc"
},
{
"Automatable": "no"
},
{
"Technical Impact": "total"
}
],
"role": "CISA Coordinator",
"timestamp": "2025-04-22T15:41:24.618264Z",
"version": "2.0.3"
},
"type": "ssvc"
}
}
],
"providerMetadata": {
"dateUpdated": "2025-04-22T17:21:08.754Z",
"orgId": "134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0",
"shortName": "CISA-ADP"
},
"title": "CISA ADP Vulnrichment"
}
],
"cna": {
"affected": [
{
"product": "ruby-arr-pm",
"vendor": "jordansissel",
"versions": [
{
"status": "affected",
"version": "\u003c 0.0.12"
}
]
}
],
"descriptions": [
{
"lang": "en",
"value": "Arr-pm is an RPM reader/writer library written in Ruby. Versions prior to 0.0.12 are subject to OS command injection resulting in shell execution if the RPM contains a malicious \"payload compressor\" field. This vulnerability impacts the `extract` and `files` methods of the `RPM::File` class of this library. Version 0.0.12 patches these issues. A workaround for this issue is to ensure any RPMs being processed contain valid/known payload compressor values such as gzip, bzip2, xz, zstd, and lzma. The payload compressor field in an rpm can be checked by using the rpm command line tool."
}
],
"metrics": [
{
"cvssV3_1": {
"attackComplexity": "HIGH",
"attackVector": "LOCAL",
"availabilityImpact": "HIGH",
"baseScore": 7,
"baseSeverity": "HIGH",
"confidentialityImpact": "HIGH",
"integrityImpact": "HIGH",
"privilegesRequired": "NONE",
"scope": "UNCHANGED",
"userInteraction": "REQUIRED",
"vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
"version": "3.1"
}
}
],
"problemTypes": [
{
"descriptions": [
{
"cweId": "CWE-78",
"description": "CWE-78: Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in an OS Command (\u0027OS Command Injection\u0027)",
"lang": "en",
"type": "CWE"
}
]
}
],
"providerMetadata": {
"dateUpdated": "2022-09-21T23:10:08.000Z",
"orgId": "a0819718-46f1-4df5-94e2-005712e83aaa",
"shortName": "GitHub_M"
},
"references": [
{
"tags": [
"x_refsource_CONFIRM"
],
"url": "https://github.com/jordansissel/ruby-arr-pm/security/advisories/GHSA-88cv-mj24-8w3q"
},
{
"tags": [
"x_refsource_MISC"
],
"url": "https://github.com/jordansissel/ruby-arr-pm/pull/15"
},
{
"tags": [
"x_refsource_MISC"
],
"url": "https://github.com/jordansissel/ruby-arr-pm/pull/14"
}
],
"source": {
"advisory": "GHSA-88cv-mj24-8w3q",
"discovery": "UNKNOWN"
},
"title": "Arbitrary shell execution when extracting or listing files contained in a malicious rpm.",
"x_legacyV4Record": {
"CVE_data_meta": {
"ASSIGNER": "security-advisories@github.com",
"ID": "CVE-2022-39224",
"STATE": "PUBLIC",
"TITLE": "Arbitrary shell execution when extracting or listing files contained in a malicious rpm."
},
"affects": {
"vendor": {
"vendor_data": [
{
"product": {
"product_data": [
{
"product_name": "ruby-arr-pm",
"version": {
"version_data": [
{
"version_value": "\u003c 0.0.12"
}
]
}
}
]
},
"vendor_name": "jordansissel"
}
]
}
},
"data_format": "MITRE",
"data_type": "CVE",
"data_version": "4.0",
"description": {
"description_data": [
{
"lang": "eng",
"value": "Arr-pm is an RPM reader/writer library written in Ruby. Versions prior to 0.0.12 are subject to OS command injection resulting in shell execution if the RPM contains a malicious \"payload compressor\" field. This vulnerability impacts the `extract` and `files` methods of the `RPM::File` class of this library. Version 0.0.12 patches these issues. A workaround for this issue is to ensure any RPMs being processed contain valid/known payload compressor values such as gzip, bzip2, xz, zstd, and lzma. The payload compressor field in an rpm can be checked by using the rpm command line tool."
}
]
},
"impact": {
"cvss": {
"attackComplexity": "HIGH",
"attackVector": "LOCAL",
"availabilityImpact": "HIGH",
"baseScore": 7,
"baseSeverity": "HIGH",
"confidentialityImpact": "HIGH",
"integrityImpact": "HIGH",
"privilegesRequired": "NONE",
"scope": "UNCHANGED",
"userInteraction": "REQUIRED",
"vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
"version": "3.1"
}
},
"problemtype": {
"problemtype_data": [
{
"description": [
{
"lang": "eng",
"value": "CWE-78: Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in an OS Command (\u0027OS Command Injection\u0027)"
}
]
}
]
},
"references": {
"reference_data": [
{
"name": "https://github.com/jordansissel/ruby-arr-pm/security/advisories/GHSA-88cv-mj24-8w3q",
"refsource": "CONFIRM",
"url": "https://github.com/jordansissel/ruby-arr-pm/security/advisories/GHSA-88cv-mj24-8w3q"
},
{
"name": "https://github.com/jordansissel/ruby-arr-pm/pull/15",
"refsource": "MISC",
"url": "https://github.com/jordansissel/ruby-arr-pm/pull/15"
},
{
"name": "https://github.com/jordansissel/ruby-arr-pm/pull/14",
"refsource": "MISC",
"url": "https://github.com/jordansissel/ruby-arr-pm/pull/14"
}
]
},
"source": {
"advisory": "GHSA-88cv-mj24-8w3q",
"discovery": "UNKNOWN"
}
}
}
},
"cveMetadata": {
"assignerOrgId": "a0819718-46f1-4df5-94e2-005712e83aaa",
"assignerShortName": "GitHub_M",
"cveId": "CVE-2022-39224",
"datePublished": "2022-09-21T23:10:08.000Z",
"dateReserved": "2022-09-02T00:00:00.000Z",
"dateUpdated": "2025-04-22T17:21:08.754Z",
"state": "PUBLISHED"
},
"dataType": "CVE_RECORD",
"dataVersion": "5.1"
}
CVE-2022-39321 (GCVE-0-2022-39321)
Vulnerability from cvelistv5 – Published: 2022-10-25 00:00 – Updated: 2025-04-23 16:44
VLAI
Title
GitHub Actions Runner vulnerable to Docker Command Escaping
Summary
GitHub Actions Runner is the application that runs a job from a GitHub Actions workflow. The actions runner invokes the docker cli directly in order to run job containers, service containers, or container actions. A bug in the logic for how the environment is encoded into these docker commands was discovered in versions prior to 2.296.2, 2.293.1, 2.289.4, 2.285.2, and 2.283.4 that allows an input to escape the environment variable and modify that docker command invocation directly. Jobs that use container actions, job containers, or service containers alongside untrusted user inputs in environment variables may be vulnerable. The Actions Runner has been patched, both on `github.com` and hotfixes for GHES and GHAE customers in versions 2.296.2, 2.293.1, 2.289.4, 2.285.2, and 2.283.4. GHES and GHAE customers may want to patch their instance in order to have their runners automatically upgrade to these new runner versions. As a workaround, users may consider removing any container actions, job containers, or service containers from their jobs until they are able to upgrade their runner versions.
Severity
8.8 (High)
SSVC
Exploitation: none
Automatable: no
Technical Impact: total
CISA Coordinator (v2.0.3)
CWE
- CWE-78 - Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in an OS Command ('OS Command Injection')
Assigner
References
Impacted products
{
"containers": {
"adp": [
{
"providerMetadata": {
"dateUpdated": "2024-08-03T12:00:44.033Z",
"orgId": "af854a3a-2127-422b-91ae-364da2661108",
"shortName": "CVE"
},
"references": [
{
"tags": [
"x_transferred"
],
"url": "https://github.com/actions/runner/security/advisories/GHSA-2c6m-6gqh-6qg3"
},
{
"tags": [
"x_transferred"
],
"url": "https://github.com/actions/runner/pull/2107"
},
{
"tags": [
"x_transferred"
],
"url": "https://github.com/actions/runner/pull/2108"
}
],
"title": "CVE Program Container"
},
{
"metrics": [
{
"other": {
"content": {
"id": "CVE-2022-39321",
"options": [
{
"Exploitation": "none"
},
{
"Automatable": "no"
},
{
"Technical Impact": "total"
}
],
"role": "CISA Coordinator",
"timestamp": "2025-04-23T15:47:37.864606Z",
"version": "2.0.3"
},
"type": "ssvc"
}
}
],
"providerMetadata": {
"dateUpdated": "2025-04-23T16:44:36.866Z",
"orgId": "134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0",
"shortName": "CISA-ADP"
},
"title": "CISA ADP Vulnrichment"
}
],
"cna": {
"affected": [
{
"product": "runner",
"vendor": "actions",
"versions": [
{
"status": "affected",
"version": "\u003c 2.283.4"
},
{
"status": "affected",
"version": "\u003e= 2.284.0, \u003c 2.285.2"
},
{
"status": "affected",
"version": "\u003e= 2.286.0, \u003c 2.289.4"
},
{
"status": "affected",
"version": "\u003e= 2.290.0, \u003c 2.293.1"
},
{
"status": "affected",
"version": "\u003e= 2.294.0, \u003c 2.296.2"
}
]
}
],
"descriptions": [
{
"lang": "en",
"value": "GitHub Actions Runner is the application that runs a job from a GitHub Actions workflow. The actions runner invokes the docker cli directly in order to run job containers, service containers, or container actions. A bug in the logic for how the environment is encoded into these docker commands was discovered in versions prior to 2.296.2, 2.293.1, 2.289.4, 2.285.2, and 2.283.4 that allows an input to escape the environment variable and modify that docker command invocation directly. Jobs that use container actions, job containers, or service containers alongside untrusted user inputs in environment variables may be vulnerable. The Actions Runner has been patched, both on `github.com` and hotfixes for GHES and GHAE customers in versions 2.296.2, 2.293.1, 2.289.4, 2.285.2, and 2.283.4. GHES and GHAE customers may want to patch their instance in order to have their runners automatically upgrade to these new runner versions. As a workaround, users may consider removing any container actions, job containers, or service containers from their jobs until they are able to upgrade their runner versions."
}
],
"metrics": [
{
"cvssV3_1": {
"attackComplexity": "LOW",
"attackVector": "NETWORK",
"availabilityImpact": "HIGH",
"baseScore": 8.8,
"baseSeverity": "HIGH",
"confidentialityImpact": "HIGH",
"integrityImpact": "HIGH",
"privilegesRequired": "LOW",
"scope": "UNCHANGED",
"userInteraction": "NONE",
"vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
"version": "3.1"
}
}
],
"problemTypes": [
{
"descriptions": [
{
"cweId": "CWE-78",
"description": "CWE-78: Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in an OS Command (\u0027OS Command Injection\u0027)",
"lang": "en",
"type": "CWE"
}
]
}
],
"providerMetadata": {
"dateUpdated": "2022-10-25T00:00:00.000Z",
"orgId": "a0819718-46f1-4df5-94e2-005712e83aaa",
"shortName": "GitHub_M"
},
"references": [
{
"url": "https://github.com/actions/runner/security/advisories/GHSA-2c6m-6gqh-6qg3"
},
{
"url": "https://github.com/actions/runner/pull/2107"
},
{
"url": "https://github.com/actions/runner/pull/2108"
}
],
"source": {
"advisory": "GHSA-2c6m-6gqh-6qg3",
"discovery": "UNKNOWN"
},
"title": "GitHub Actions Runner vulnerable to Docker Command Escaping"
}
},
"cveMetadata": {
"assignerOrgId": "a0819718-46f1-4df5-94e2-005712e83aaa",
"assignerShortName": "GitHub_M",
"cveId": "CVE-2022-39321",
"datePublished": "2022-10-25T00:00:00.000Z",
"dateReserved": "2022-09-02T00:00:00.000Z",
"dateUpdated": "2025-04-23T16:44:36.866Z",
"state": "PUBLISHED"
},
"dataType": "CVE_RECORD",
"dataVersion": "5.1"
}
CVE-2022-39947 (GCVE-0-2022-39947)
Vulnerability from cvelistv5 – Published: 2023-01-03 16:58 – Updated: 2024-10-23 14:50
VLAI
Summary
A improper neutralization of special elements used in an os command ('os command injection') in Fortinet FortiADC version 7.0.0 through 7.0.2, FortiADC version 6.2.0 through 6.2.3, FortiADC version version 6.1.0 through 6.1.6, FortiADC version 6.0.0 through 6.0.4, FortiADC version 5.4.0 through 5.4.5 may allow an attacker to execute unauthorized code or commands via specifically crafted HTTP requests.
Severity
SSVC
Exploitation: none
Automatable: no
Technical Impact: total
CISA Coordinator (v2.0.3)
CWE
- CWE-78 - Execute unauthorized code or commands
Assigner
References
1 reference
Impacted products
{
"containers": {
"adp": [
{
"providerMetadata": {
"dateUpdated": "2024-08-03T12:07:43.042Z",
"orgId": "af854a3a-2127-422b-91ae-364da2661108",
"shortName": "CVE"
},
"references": [
{
"name": "https://fortiguard.com/psirt/FG-IR-22-061",
"tags": [
"x_transferred"
],
"url": "https://fortiguard.com/psirt/FG-IR-22-061"
}
],
"title": "CVE Program Container"
},
{
"metrics": [
{
"other": {
"content": {
"id": "CVE-2022-39947",
"options": [
{
"Exploitation": "none"
},
{
"Automatable": "no"
},
{
"Technical Impact": "total"
}
],
"role": "CISA Coordinator",
"timestamp": "2024-10-23T14:12:02.386044Z",
"version": "2.0.3"
},
"type": "ssvc"
}
}
],
"providerMetadata": {
"dateUpdated": "2024-10-23T14:50:58.743Z",
"orgId": "134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0",
"shortName": "CISA-ADP"
},
"title": "CISA ADP Vulnrichment"
}
],
"cna": {
"affected": [
{
"defaultStatus": "unaffected",
"product": "FortiADC",
"vendor": "Fortinet",
"versions": [
{
"lessThanOrEqual": "7.0.2",
"status": "affected",
"version": "7.0.0",
"versionType": "semver"
},
{
"lessThanOrEqual": "6.2.3",
"status": "affected",
"version": "6.2.0",
"versionType": "semver"
},
{
"lessThanOrEqual": "6.1.6",
"status": "affected",
"version": "6.1.0",
"versionType": "semver"
},
{
"lessThanOrEqual": "6.0.4",
"status": "affected",
"version": "6.0.0",
"versionType": "semver"
},
{
"lessThanOrEqual": "5.4.5",
"status": "affected",
"version": "5.4.0",
"versionType": "semver"
}
]
}
],
"descriptions": [
{
"lang": "en",
"value": "A improper neutralization of special elements used in an os command (\u0027os command injection\u0027) in Fortinet FortiADC version 7.0.0 through 7.0.2, FortiADC version 6.2.0 through 6.2.3, FortiADC version version 6.1.0 through 6.1.6, FortiADC version 6.0.0 through 6.0.4, FortiADC version 5.4.0 through 5.4.5 may allow an attacker to execute unauthorized code or commands via specifically crafted HTTP requests."
}
],
"metrics": [
{
"cvssV3_1": {
"attackComplexity": "LOW",
"attackVector": "NETWORK",
"availabilityImpact": "HIGH",
"baseScore": 8.6,
"baseSeverity": "HIGH",
"confidentialityImpact": "HIGH",
"integrityImpact": "HIGH",
"privilegesRequired": "LOW",
"scope": "UNCHANGED",
"userInteraction": "NONE",
"vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H/E:F/RL:U/RC:C",
"version": "3.1"
},
"format": "CVSS"
}
],
"problemTypes": [
{
"descriptions": [
{
"cweId": "CWE-78",
"description": "Execute unauthorized code or commands",
"lang": "en",
"type": "CWE"
}
]
}
],
"providerMetadata": {
"dateUpdated": "2023-01-03T16:58:37.035Z",
"orgId": "6abe59d8-c742-4dff-8ce8-9b0ca1073da8",
"shortName": "fortinet"
},
"references": [
{
"name": "https://fortiguard.com/psirt/FG-IR-22-061",
"url": "https://fortiguard.com/psirt/FG-IR-22-061"
}
],
"solutions": [
{
"lang": "en",
"value": "Please upgrade to uptoming FortiADC 7.0.2.\r\nPlease upgrade to upcoming FortiADC 6.2.4."
}
]
}
},
"cveMetadata": {
"assignerOrgId": "6abe59d8-c742-4dff-8ce8-9b0ca1073da8",
"assignerShortName": "fortinet",
"cveId": "CVE-2022-39947",
"datePublished": "2023-01-03T16:58:37.035Z",
"dateReserved": "2022-09-05T13:11:35.552Z",
"dateUpdated": "2024-10-23T14:50:58.743Z",
"state": "PUBLISHED"
},
"dataType": "CVE_RECORD",
"dataVersion": "5.1"
}
CVE-2022-39951 (GCVE-0-2022-39951)
Vulnerability from cvelistv5 – Published: 2023-03-07 16:04 – Updated: 2024-10-23 14:31
VLAI
Summary
A improper neutralization of special elements used in an os command ('os command injection') in Fortinet FortiWeb version 7.0.0 through 7.0.2, FortiWeb version 6.3.6 through 6.3.20, FortiWeb 6.4 all versions allows attacker to execute unauthorized code or commands via specifically crafted HTTP requests.
Severity
SSVC
Exploitation: none
Automatable: no
Technical Impact: total
CISA Coordinator (v2.0.3)
CWE
- CWE-78 - Execute unauthorized code or commands
Assigner
References
1 reference
Impacted products
{
"containers": {
"adp": [
{
"providerMetadata": {
"dateUpdated": "2024-08-03T12:07:42.992Z",
"orgId": "af854a3a-2127-422b-91ae-364da2661108",
"shortName": "CVE"
},
"references": [
{
"name": "https://fortiguard.com/psirt/FG-IR-22-254",
"tags": [
"x_transferred"
],
"url": "https://fortiguard.com/psirt/FG-IR-22-254"
}
],
"title": "CVE Program Container"
},
{
"metrics": [
{
"other": {
"content": {
"id": "CVE-2022-39951",
"options": [
{
"Exploitation": "none"
},
{
"Automatable": "no"
},
{
"Technical Impact": "total"
}
],
"role": "CISA Coordinator",
"timestamp": "2024-10-23T14:11:31.439982Z",
"version": "2.0.3"
},
"type": "ssvc"
}
}
],
"providerMetadata": {
"dateUpdated": "2024-10-23T14:31:46.031Z",
"orgId": "134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0",
"shortName": "CISA-ADP"
},
"title": "CISA ADP Vulnrichment"
}
],
"cna": {
"affected": [
{
"defaultStatus": "unaffected",
"product": "FortiWeb",
"vendor": "Fortinet",
"versions": [
{
"lessThanOrEqual": "7.0.2",
"status": "affected",
"version": "7.0.0",
"versionType": "semver"
},
{
"lessThanOrEqual": "6.4.2",
"status": "affected",
"version": "6.4.0",
"versionType": "semver"
},
{
"lessThanOrEqual": "6.3.20",
"status": "affected",
"version": "6.3.6",
"versionType": "semver"
}
]
}
],
"descriptions": [
{
"lang": "en",
"value": "A improper neutralization of special elements used in an os command (\u0027os command injection\u0027) in Fortinet FortiWeb version 7.0.0 through 7.0.2, FortiWeb version 6.3.6 through 6.3.20, FortiWeb 6.4 all versions allows attacker to execute unauthorized code or commands via specifically crafted HTTP requests."
}
],
"metrics": [
{
"cvssV3_1": {
"attackComplexity": "LOW",
"attackVector": "NETWORK",
"availabilityImpact": "HIGH",
"baseScore": 7.2,
"baseSeverity": "HIGH",
"confidentialityImpact": "HIGH",
"integrityImpact": "HIGH",
"privilegesRequired": "HIGH",
"scope": "UNCHANGED",
"userInteraction": "NONE",
"vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H/E:H/RL:U/RC:C",
"version": "3.1"
},
"format": "CVSS"
}
],
"problemTypes": [
{
"descriptions": [
{
"cweId": "CWE-78",
"description": "Execute unauthorized code or commands",
"lang": "en",
"type": "CWE"
}
]
}
],
"providerMetadata": {
"dateUpdated": "2023-03-07T16:04:38.353Z",
"orgId": "6abe59d8-c742-4dff-8ce8-9b0ca1073da8",
"shortName": "fortinet"
},
"references": [
{
"name": "https://fortiguard.com/psirt/FG-IR-22-254",
"url": "https://fortiguard.com/psirt/FG-IR-22-254"
}
],
"solutions": [
{
"lang": "en",
"value": "Please upgrade to FortiWeb version 7.2.0 or above Please upgrade to FortiWeb version 7.0.3 or above Please upgrade to FortiWeb version 6.3.21 or above "
}
]
}
},
"cveMetadata": {
"assignerOrgId": "6abe59d8-c742-4dff-8ce8-9b0ca1073da8",
"assignerShortName": "fortinet",
"cveId": "CVE-2022-39951",
"datePublished": "2023-03-07T16:04:38.353Z",
"dateReserved": "2022-09-05T13:11:35.553Z",
"dateUpdated": "2024-10-23T14:31:46.031Z",
"state": "PUBLISHED"
},
"dataType": "CVE_RECORD",
"dataVersion": "5.1"
}
CVE-2022-40176 (GCVE-0-2022-40176)
Vulnerability from cvelistv5 – Published: 2022-10-11 00:00 – Updated: 2024-08-03 12:14
VLAI
Summary
A vulnerability has been identified in Desigo PXM30-1 (All versions < V02.20.126.11-41), Desigo PXM30.E (All versions < V02.20.126.11-41), Desigo PXM40-1 (All versions < V02.20.126.11-41), Desigo PXM40.E (All versions < V02.20.126.11-41), Desigo PXM50-1 (All versions < V02.20.126.11-41), Desigo PXM50.E (All versions < V02.20.126.11-41), PXG3.W100-1 (All versions < V02.20.126.11-37), PXG3.W100-2 (All versions < V02.20.126.11-41), PXG3.W200-1 (All versions < V02.20.126.11-37), PXG3.W200-2 (All versions < V02.20.126.11-41). There exists an Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in an OS Command with root privileges during a restore operation due to the missing validation of the names of files included in the input package. By restoring a specifically crafted package, a remote low-privileged attacker can execute arbitrary system commands with root privileges on the device, leading to a full compromise.
Severity
No CVSS data available.
CWE
- CWE-78 - Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in an OS Command ('OS Command Injection')
Assigner
References
1 reference
Impacted products
10 products
| Vendor | Product | Version | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Siemens | Desigo PXM30-1 |
Affected:
All versions < V02.20.126.11-41
|
|
| Siemens | Desigo PXM30.E |
Affected:
All versions < V02.20.126.11-41
|
|
| Siemens | Desigo PXM40-1 |
Affected:
All versions < V02.20.126.11-41
|
|
| Siemens | Desigo PXM40.E |
Affected:
All versions < V02.20.126.11-41
|
|
| Siemens | Desigo PXM50-1 |
Affected:
All versions < V02.20.126.11-41
|
|
| Siemens | Desigo PXM50.E |
Affected:
All versions < V02.20.126.11-41
|
|
| Siemens | PXG3.W100-1 |
Affected:
All versions < V02.20.126.11-37
|
|
| Siemens | PXG3.W100-2 |
Affected:
All versions < V02.20.126.11-41
|
|
| Siemens | PXG3.W200-1 |
Affected:
All versions < V02.20.126.11-37
|
|
| Siemens | PXG3.W200-2 |
Affected:
All versions < V02.20.126.11-41
|
{
"containers": {
"adp": [
{
"providerMetadata": {
"dateUpdated": "2024-08-03T12:14:39.805Z",
"orgId": "af854a3a-2127-422b-91ae-364da2661108",
"shortName": "CVE"
},
"references": [
{
"tags": [
"x_transferred"
],
"url": "https://cert-portal.siemens.com/productcert/pdf/ssa-360783.pdf"
}
],
"title": "CVE Program Container"
}
],
"cna": {
"affected": [
{
"product": "Desigo PXM30-1",
"vendor": "Siemens",
"versions": [
{
"status": "affected",
"version": "All versions \u003c V02.20.126.11-41"
}
]
},
{
"product": "Desigo PXM30.E",
"vendor": "Siemens",
"versions": [
{
"status": "affected",
"version": "All versions \u003c V02.20.126.11-41"
}
]
},
{
"product": "Desigo PXM40-1",
"vendor": "Siemens",
"versions": [
{
"status": "affected",
"version": "All versions \u003c V02.20.126.11-41"
}
]
},
{
"product": "Desigo PXM40.E",
"vendor": "Siemens",
"versions": [
{
"status": "affected",
"version": "All versions \u003c V02.20.126.11-41"
}
]
},
{
"product": "Desigo PXM50-1",
"vendor": "Siemens",
"versions": [
{
"status": "affected",
"version": "All versions \u003c V02.20.126.11-41"
}
]
},
{
"product": "Desigo PXM50.E",
"vendor": "Siemens",
"versions": [
{
"status": "affected",
"version": "All versions \u003c V02.20.126.11-41"
}
]
},
{
"product": "PXG3.W100-1",
"vendor": "Siemens",
"versions": [
{
"status": "affected",
"version": "All versions \u003c V02.20.126.11-37"
}
]
},
{
"product": "PXG3.W100-2",
"vendor": "Siemens",
"versions": [
{
"status": "affected",
"version": "All versions \u003c V02.20.126.11-41"
}
]
},
{
"product": "PXG3.W200-1",
"vendor": "Siemens",
"versions": [
{
"status": "affected",
"version": "All versions \u003c V02.20.126.11-37"
}
]
},
{
"product": "PXG3.W200-2",
"vendor": "Siemens",
"versions": [
{
"status": "affected",
"version": "All versions \u003c V02.20.126.11-41"
}
]
}
],
"descriptions": [
{
"lang": "en",
"value": "A vulnerability has been identified in Desigo PXM30-1 (All versions \u003c V02.20.126.11-41), Desigo PXM30.E (All versions \u003c V02.20.126.11-41), Desigo PXM40-1 (All versions \u003c V02.20.126.11-41), Desigo PXM40.E (All versions \u003c V02.20.126.11-41), Desigo PXM50-1 (All versions \u003c V02.20.126.11-41), Desigo PXM50.E (All versions \u003c V02.20.126.11-41), PXG3.W100-1 (All versions \u003c V02.20.126.11-37), PXG3.W100-2 (All versions \u003c V02.20.126.11-41), PXG3.W200-1 (All versions \u003c V02.20.126.11-37), PXG3.W200-2 (All versions \u003c V02.20.126.11-41). There exists an Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in an OS Command with root privileges during a restore operation due to the missing validation of the names of files included in the input package. By restoring a specifically crafted package, a remote low-privileged attacker can execute arbitrary system commands with root privileges on the device, leading to a full compromise."
}
],
"problemTypes": [
{
"descriptions": [
{
"cweId": "CWE-78",
"description": "CWE-78: Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in an OS Command (\u0027OS Command Injection\u0027)",
"lang": "en",
"type": "CWE"
}
]
}
],
"providerMetadata": {
"dateUpdated": "2022-10-11T00:00:00.000Z",
"orgId": "cec7a2ec-15b4-4faf-bd53-b40f371f3a77",
"shortName": "siemens"
},
"references": [
{
"url": "https://cert-portal.siemens.com/productcert/pdf/ssa-360783.pdf"
}
]
}
},
"cveMetadata": {
"assignerOrgId": "cec7a2ec-15b4-4faf-bd53-b40f371f3a77",
"assignerShortName": "siemens",
"cveId": "CVE-2022-40176",
"datePublished": "2022-10-11T00:00:00.000Z",
"dateReserved": "2022-09-08T00:00:00.000Z",
"dateUpdated": "2024-08-03T12:14:39.805Z",
"state": "PUBLISHED"
},
"dataType": "CVE_RECORD",
"dataVersion": "5.1"
}
CVE-2022-40189 (GCVE-0-2022-40189)
Vulnerability from cvelistv5 – Published: 2022-11-22 00:00 – Updated: 2025-04-29 04:25
VLAI
Title
Apache Airlfow Pig Provider RCE
Summary
Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in an OS Command ('OS Command Injection') vulnerability in Apache Airflow Pig Provider, Apache Airflow allows an attacker to control commands executed in the task execution context, without write access to DAG files. This issue affects Pig Provider versions prior to 4.0.0. It also impacts any Apache Airflow versions prior to 2.3.0 in case Pig Provider is installed (Pig Provider 4.0.0 can only be installed for Airflow 2.3.0+). Note that you need to manually install the Pig Provider version 4.0.0 in order to get rid of the vulnerability on top of Airflow 2.3.0+ version.
Severity
9.8 (Critical)
SSVC
Exploitation: none
Automatable: yes
Technical Impact: total
CISA Coordinator (v2.0.3)
CWE
- CWE-78 - Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in an OS Command ('OS Command Injection')
Assigner
References
Impacted products
2 products
| Vendor | Product | Version | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Apache Software Foundation | Apache Airlfow Pig Provider |
Affected:
unspecified , < 4.0.0
(custom)
|
|
| Apache Software Foundation | Apache Airflow |
Affected:
unspecified , < 2.3.0
(custom)
|
Credits
{
"containers": {
"adp": [
{
"providerMetadata": {
"dateUpdated": "2024-08-03T12:14:39.657Z",
"orgId": "af854a3a-2127-422b-91ae-364da2661108",
"shortName": "CVE"
},
"references": [
{
"tags": [
"x_transferred"
],
"url": "https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/27644"
},
{
"tags": [
"x_transferred"
],
"url": "https://lists.apache.org/thread/yxnfzfw2w9pj5s785k3rlyly4y44sd15"
}
],
"title": "CVE Program Container"
},
{
"metrics": [
{
"cvssV3_1": {
"attackComplexity": "LOW",
"attackVector": "NETWORK",
"availabilityImpact": "HIGH",
"baseScore": 9.8,
"baseSeverity": "CRITICAL",
"confidentialityImpact": "HIGH",
"integrityImpact": "HIGH",
"privilegesRequired": "NONE",
"scope": "UNCHANGED",
"userInteraction": "NONE",
"vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
"version": "3.1"
}
},
{
"other": {
"content": {
"id": "CVE-2022-40189",
"options": [
{
"Exploitation": "none"
},
{
"Automatable": "yes"
},
{
"Technical Impact": "total"
}
],
"role": "CISA Coordinator",
"timestamp": "2025-04-29T04:24:47.927458Z",
"version": "2.0.3"
},
"type": "ssvc"
}
}
],
"providerMetadata": {
"dateUpdated": "2025-04-29T04:25:48.603Z",
"orgId": "134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0",
"shortName": "CISA-ADP"
},
"title": "CISA ADP Vulnrichment"
}
],
"cna": {
"affected": [
{
"product": "Apache Airlfow Pig Provider",
"vendor": "Apache Software Foundation",
"versions": [
{
"lessThan": "4.0.0",
"status": "affected",
"version": "unspecified",
"versionType": "custom"
}
]
},
{
"product": "Apache Airflow ",
"vendor": "Apache Software Foundation",
"versions": [
{
"lessThan": "2.3.0",
"status": "affected",
"version": "unspecified",
"versionType": "custom"
}
]
}
],
"credits": [
{
"lang": "en",
"value": "Apache Airflow PMC wants to thank id_No2015429 of 3H Security Team for reporting the issue."
}
],
"descriptions": [
{
"lang": "en",
"value": "Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in an OS Command (\u0027OS Command Injection\u0027) vulnerability in Apache Airflow Pig Provider, Apache Airflow allows an attacker to control commands executed in the task execution context, without write access to DAG files. This issue affects Pig Provider versions prior to 4.0.0. It also impacts any Apache Airflow versions prior to 2.3.0 in case Pig Provider is installed (Pig Provider 4.0.0 can only be installed for Airflow 2.3.0+). Note that you need to manually install the Pig Provider version 4.0.0 in order to get rid of the vulnerability on top of Airflow 2.3.0+ version."
}
],
"metrics": [
{
"other": {
"content": {
"other": "moderate"
},
"type": "unknown"
}
}
],
"problemTypes": [
{
"descriptions": [
{
"cweId": "CWE-78",
"description": "CWE-78 Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in an OS Command (\u0027OS Command Injection\u0027)",
"lang": "en",
"type": "CWE"
}
]
}
],
"providerMetadata": {
"dateUpdated": "2022-11-22T00:00:00.000Z",
"orgId": "f0158376-9dc2-43b6-827c-5f631a4d8d09",
"shortName": "apache"
},
"references": [
{
"url": "https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/27644"
},
{
"url": "https://lists.apache.org/thread/yxnfzfw2w9pj5s785k3rlyly4y44sd15"
}
],
"source": {
"discovery": "UNKNOWN"
},
"title": "Apache Airlfow Pig Provider RCE",
"x_generator": {
"engine": "Vulnogram 0.0.9"
}
}
},
"cveMetadata": {
"assignerOrgId": "f0158376-9dc2-43b6-827c-5f631a4d8d09",
"assignerShortName": "apache",
"cveId": "CVE-2022-40189",
"datePublished": "2022-11-22T00:00:00.000Z",
"dateReserved": "2022-09-08T00:00:00.000Z",
"dateUpdated": "2025-04-29T04:25:48.603Z",
"state": "PUBLISHED"
},
"dataType": "CVE_RECORD",
"dataVersion": "5.1"
}
CVE-2022-40220 (GCVE-0-2022-40220)
Vulnerability from cvelistv5 – Published: 2023-01-26 21:24 – Updated: 2025-03-28 19:22
VLAI
Summary
An OS command injection vulnerability exists in the httpd txt/restore.cgi functionality of Siretta QUARTZ-GOLD G5.0.1.5-210720-141020. A specially-crafted network request can lead to arbitrary command execution. An attacker can send an HTTP request to trigger this vulnerability.
Severity
7.2 (High)
SSVC
Exploitation: poc
Automatable: no
Technical Impact: total
CISA Coordinator (v2.0.3)
CWE
- CWE-78 - Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in an OS Command ('OS Command Injection')
Assigner
References
Impacted products
1 product
| Vendor | Product | Version | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Siretta | QUARTZ-GOLD |
Affected:
G5.0.1.5-210720-141020
|
{
"containers": {
"adp": [
{
"providerMetadata": {
"dateUpdated": "2024-08-03T12:14:39.961Z",
"orgId": "af854a3a-2127-422b-91ae-364da2661108",
"shortName": "CVE"
},
"references": [
{
"url": "https://www.talosintelligence.com/vulnerability_reports/TALOS-2022-1612"
},
{
"name": "https://talosintelligence.com/vulnerability_reports/TALOS-2022-1612",
"tags": [
"x_transferred"
],
"url": "https://talosintelligence.com/vulnerability_reports/TALOS-2022-1612"
}
],
"title": "CVE Program Container"
},
{
"metrics": [
{
"other": {
"content": {
"id": "CVE-2022-40220",
"options": [
{
"Exploitation": "poc"
},
{
"Automatable": "no"
},
{
"Technical Impact": "total"
}
],
"role": "CISA Coordinator",
"timestamp": "2025-03-28T19:22:14.906007Z",
"version": "2.0.3"
},
"type": "ssvc"
}
}
],
"providerMetadata": {
"dateUpdated": "2025-03-28T19:22:24.288Z",
"orgId": "134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0",
"shortName": "CISA-ADP"
},
"title": "CISA ADP Vulnrichment"
}
],
"cna": {
"affected": [
{
"product": "QUARTZ-GOLD",
"vendor": "Siretta",
"versions": [
{
"status": "affected",
"version": "G5.0.1.5-210720-141020"
}
]
}
],
"descriptions": [
{
"lang": "en",
"value": "An OS command injection vulnerability exists in the httpd txt/restore.cgi functionality of Siretta QUARTZ-GOLD G5.0.1.5-210720-141020. A specially-crafted network request can lead to arbitrary command execution. An attacker can send an HTTP request to trigger this vulnerability."
}
],
"metrics": [
{
"cvssV3_0": {
"attackComplexity": "LOW",
"attackVector": "NETWORK",
"availabilityImpact": "HIGH",
"baseScore": 7.2,
"baseSeverity": "HIGH",
"confidentialityImpact": "HIGH",
"integrityImpact": "HIGH",
"privilegesRequired": "HIGH",
"scope": "UNCHANGED",
"userInteraction": "NONE",
"vectorString": "CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
"version": "3.0"
}
}
],
"problemTypes": [
{
"descriptions": [
{
"cweId": "CWE-78",
"description": "CWE-78: Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in an OS Command (\u0027OS Command Injection\u0027)",
"lang": "en",
"type": "CWE"
}
]
}
],
"providerMetadata": {
"dateUpdated": "2023-01-26T21:24:47.750Z",
"orgId": "b86d76f8-0f8a-4a96-a78d-d8abfc7fc29b",
"shortName": "talos"
},
"references": [
{
"name": "https://talosintelligence.com/vulnerability_reports/TALOS-2022-1612",
"url": "https://talosintelligence.com/vulnerability_reports/TALOS-2022-1612"
}
]
}
},
"cveMetadata": {
"assignerOrgId": "b86d76f8-0f8a-4a96-a78d-d8abfc7fc29b",
"assignerShortName": "talos",
"cveId": "CVE-2022-40220",
"datePublished": "2023-01-26T21:24:47.750Z",
"dateReserved": "2022-09-19T18:17:33.145Z",
"dateUpdated": "2025-03-28T19:22:24.288Z",
"state": "PUBLISHED"
},
"dataType": "CVE_RECORD",
"dataVersion": "5.1"
}
CVE-2022-40222 (GCVE-0-2022-40222)
Vulnerability from cvelistv5 – Published: 2023-01-26 21:24 – Updated: 2025-04-01 14:42
VLAI
Summary
An OS command injection vulnerability exists in the m2m DELETE_FILE cmd functionality of Siretta QUARTZ-GOLD G5.0.1.5-210720-141020. A specially-crafted network request can lead to arbitrary command execution. An attacker can send a network request to trigger this vulnerability.
Severity
9.8 (Critical)
SSVC
Exploitation: none
Automatable: yes
Technical Impact: total
CISA Coordinator (v2.0.3)
CWE
- CWE-78 - Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in an OS Command ('OS Command Injection')
Assigner
References
Impacted products
1 product
| Vendor | Product | Version | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Siretta | QUARTZ-GOLD |
Affected:
G5.0.1.5-210720-141020
|
{
"containers": {
"adp": [
{
"providerMetadata": {
"dateUpdated": "2024-08-03T12:14:39.927Z",
"orgId": "af854a3a-2127-422b-91ae-364da2661108",
"shortName": "CVE"
},
"references": [
{
"url": "https://www.talosintelligence.com/vulnerability_reports/TALOS-2022-1638"
},
{
"name": "https://talosintelligence.com/vulnerability_reports/TALOS-2022-1638",
"tags": [
"x_transferred"
],
"url": "https://talosintelligence.com/vulnerability_reports/TALOS-2022-1638"
}
],
"title": "CVE Program Container"
},
{
"metrics": [
{
"other": {
"content": {
"id": "CVE-2022-40222",
"options": [
{
"Exploitation": "none"
},
{
"Automatable": "yes"
},
{
"Technical Impact": "total"
}
],
"role": "CISA Coordinator",
"timestamp": "2025-03-31T15:01:59.262583Z",
"version": "2.0.3"
},
"type": "ssvc"
}
}
],
"providerMetadata": {
"dateUpdated": "2025-04-01T14:42:30.889Z",
"orgId": "134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0",
"shortName": "CISA-ADP"
},
"title": "CISA ADP Vulnrichment"
}
],
"cna": {
"affected": [
{
"product": "QUARTZ-GOLD",
"vendor": "Siretta",
"versions": [
{
"status": "affected",
"version": "G5.0.1.5-210720-141020"
}
]
}
],
"descriptions": [
{
"lang": "en",
"value": "An OS command injection vulnerability exists in the m2m DELETE_FILE cmd functionality of Siretta QUARTZ-GOLD G5.0.1.5-210720-141020. A specially-crafted network request can lead to arbitrary command execution. An attacker can send a network request to trigger this vulnerability."
}
],
"metrics": [
{
"cvssV3_0": {
"attackComplexity": "LOW",
"attackVector": "NETWORK",
"availabilityImpact": "HIGH",
"baseScore": 9.8,
"baseSeverity": "CRITICAL",
"confidentialityImpact": "HIGH",
"integrityImpact": "HIGH",
"privilegesRequired": "NONE",
"scope": "UNCHANGED",
"userInteraction": "NONE",
"vectorString": "CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
"version": "3.0"
}
}
],
"problemTypes": [
{
"descriptions": [
{
"cweId": "CWE-78",
"description": "CWE-78: Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in an OS Command (\u0027OS Command Injection\u0027)",
"lang": "en",
"type": "CWE"
}
]
}
],
"providerMetadata": {
"dateUpdated": "2023-01-26T21:24:35.946Z",
"orgId": "b86d76f8-0f8a-4a96-a78d-d8abfc7fc29b",
"shortName": "talos"
},
"references": [
{
"name": "https://talosintelligence.com/vulnerability_reports/TALOS-2022-1638",
"url": "https://talosintelligence.com/vulnerability_reports/TALOS-2022-1638"
}
]
}
},
"cveMetadata": {
"assignerOrgId": "b86d76f8-0f8a-4a96-a78d-d8abfc7fc29b",
"assignerShortName": "talos",
"cveId": "CVE-2022-40222",
"datePublished": "2023-01-26T21:24:35.946Z",
"dateReserved": "2022-10-07T15:50:51.333Z",
"dateUpdated": "2025-04-01T14:42:30.889Z",
"state": "PUBLISHED"
},
"dataType": "CVE_RECORD",
"dataVersion": "5.1"
}
CVE-2022-40679 (GCVE-0-2022-40679)
Vulnerability from cvelistv5 – Published: 2023-04-11 16:05 – Updated: 2024-10-23 14:30
VLAI
Summary
An improper neutralization of special elements used in an OS command vulnerability [CWE-78] in FortiADC 5.x all versions, 6.0 all versions, 6.1 all versions, 6.2.0 through 6.2.4, 7.0.0 through 7.0.3, 7.1.0; FortiDDoS 4.x all versions, 5.0 all versions, 5.1 all versions, 5.2 all versions, 5.3 all versions, 5.4 all versions, 5.5 all versions, 5.6 all versions and FortiDDoS-F 6.4.0, 6.3.0 through 6.3.3, 6.2.0 through 6.2.2, 6.1.0 through 6.1.4 may allow an authenticated attacker to execute unauthorized commands via specifically crafted arguments to existing commands.
Severity
SSVC
Exploitation: none
Automatable: no
Technical Impact: total
CISA Coordinator (v2.0.3)
CWE
- CWE-78 - Execute unauthorized code or commands
Assigner
References
1 reference
Impacted products
3 products
| Vendor | Product | Version | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Fortinet | FortiDDoS |
Affected:
5.6.0 , ≤ 5.6.1
(semver)
Affected: 5.5.0 , ≤ 5.5.1 (semver) Affected: 5.4.0 , ≤ 5.4.2 (semver) Affected: 5.3.0 , ≤ 5.3.1 (semver) Affected: 5.2.0 Affected: 5.1.0 Affected: 5.0.0 Affected: 4.7.0 Affected: 4.6.0 Affected: 4.5.0 Affected: 4.4.0 , ≤ 4.4.2 (semver) Affected: 4.3.0 , ≤ 4.3.2 (semver) Affected: 4.2.1 , ≤ 4.2.2 (semver) Affected: 4.1.1 , ≤ 4.1.12 (semver) Affected: 4.0.0 , ≤ 4.0.1 (semver) |
|
| Fortinet | FortiDDoS-F |
Affected:
6.4.0
Affected: 6.3.0 , ≤ 6.3.3 (semver) Affected: 6.2.0 , ≤ 6.2.2 (semver) Affected: 6.1.0 , ≤ 6.1.4 (semver) |
|
| Fortinet | FortiADC |
Affected:
7.1.0
Affected: 7.0.0 , ≤ 7.0.3 (semver) Affected: 6.2.0 , ≤ 6.2.4 (semver) Affected: 6.1.0 , ≤ 6.1.6 (semver) Affected: 6.0.0 , ≤ 6.0.4 (semver) Affected: 5.4.0 , ≤ 5.4.5 (semver) Affected: 5.3.0 , ≤ 5.3.7 (semver) Affected: 5.2.0 , ≤ 5.2.8 (semver) Affected: 5.1.0 , ≤ 5.1.7 (semver) Affected: 5.0.0 , ≤ 5.0.4 (semver) |
{
"containers": {
"adp": [
{
"providerMetadata": {
"dateUpdated": "2024-08-03T12:21:46.383Z",
"orgId": "af854a3a-2127-422b-91ae-364da2661108",
"shortName": "CVE"
},
"references": [
{
"name": "https://fortiguard.com/psirt/FG-IR-22-335",
"tags": [
"x_transferred"
],
"url": "https://fortiguard.com/psirt/FG-IR-22-335"
}
],
"title": "CVE Program Container"
},
{
"metrics": [
{
"other": {
"content": {
"id": "CVE-2022-40679",
"options": [
{
"Exploitation": "none"
},
{
"Automatable": "no"
},
{
"Technical Impact": "total"
}
],
"role": "CISA Coordinator",
"timestamp": "2024-10-23T14:11:22.289076Z",
"version": "2.0.3"
},
"type": "ssvc"
}
}
],
"providerMetadata": {
"dateUpdated": "2024-10-23T14:30:02.463Z",
"orgId": "134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0",
"shortName": "CISA-ADP"
},
"title": "CISA ADP Vulnrichment"
}
],
"cna": {
"affected": [
{
"defaultStatus": "unaffected",
"product": "FortiDDoS",
"vendor": "Fortinet",
"versions": [
{
"lessThanOrEqual": "5.6.1",
"status": "affected",
"version": "5.6.0",
"versionType": "semver"
},
{
"lessThanOrEqual": "5.5.1",
"status": "affected",
"version": "5.5.0",
"versionType": "semver"
},
{
"lessThanOrEqual": "5.4.2",
"status": "affected",
"version": "5.4.0",
"versionType": "semver"
},
{
"lessThanOrEqual": "5.3.1",
"status": "affected",
"version": "5.3.0",
"versionType": "semver"
},
{
"status": "affected",
"version": "5.2.0"
},
{
"status": "affected",
"version": "5.1.0"
},
{
"status": "affected",
"version": "5.0.0"
},
{
"status": "affected",
"version": "4.7.0"
},
{
"status": "affected",
"version": "4.6.0"
},
{
"status": "affected",
"version": "4.5.0"
},
{
"lessThanOrEqual": "4.4.2",
"status": "affected",
"version": "4.4.0",
"versionType": "semver"
},
{
"lessThanOrEqual": "4.3.2",
"status": "affected",
"version": "4.3.0",
"versionType": "semver"
},
{
"lessThanOrEqual": "4.2.2",
"status": "affected",
"version": "4.2.1",
"versionType": "semver"
},
{
"lessThanOrEqual": "4.1.12",
"status": "affected",
"version": "4.1.1",
"versionType": "semver"
},
{
"lessThanOrEqual": "4.0.1",
"status": "affected",
"version": "4.0.0",
"versionType": "semver"
}
]
},
{
"defaultStatus": "unaffected",
"product": "FortiDDoS-F",
"vendor": "Fortinet",
"versions": [
{
"status": "affected",
"version": "6.4.0"
},
{
"lessThanOrEqual": "6.3.3",
"status": "affected",
"version": "6.3.0",
"versionType": "semver"
},
{
"lessThanOrEqual": "6.2.2",
"status": "affected",
"version": "6.2.0",
"versionType": "semver"
},
{
"lessThanOrEqual": "6.1.4",
"status": "affected",
"version": "6.1.0",
"versionType": "semver"
}
]
},
{
"defaultStatus": "unaffected",
"product": "FortiADC",
"vendor": "Fortinet",
"versions": [
{
"status": "affected",
"version": "7.1.0"
},
{
"lessThanOrEqual": "7.0.3",
"status": "affected",
"version": "7.0.0",
"versionType": "semver"
},
{
"lessThanOrEqual": "6.2.4",
"status": "affected",
"version": "6.2.0",
"versionType": "semver"
},
{
"lessThanOrEqual": "6.1.6",
"status": "affected",
"version": "6.1.0",
"versionType": "semver"
},
{
"lessThanOrEqual": "6.0.4",
"status": "affected",
"version": "6.0.0",
"versionType": "semver"
},
{
"lessThanOrEqual": "5.4.5",
"status": "affected",
"version": "5.4.0",
"versionType": "semver"
},
{
"lessThanOrEqual": "5.3.7",
"status": "affected",
"version": "5.3.0",
"versionType": "semver"
},
{
"lessThanOrEqual": "5.2.8",
"status": "affected",
"version": "5.2.0",
"versionType": "semver"
},
{
"lessThanOrEqual": "5.1.7",
"status": "affected",
"version": "5.1.0",
"versionType": "semver"
},
{
"lessThanOrEqual": "5.0.4",
"status": "affected",
"version": "5.0.0",
"versionType": "semver"
}
]
}
],
"descriptions": [
{
"lang": "en",
"value": "An improper neutralization of special elements used in an OS command vulnerability [CWE-78]\u00a0in FortiADC 5.x\u00a0all versions, 6.0 all versions, 6.1\u00a0all versions, 6.2.0 through 6.2.4, 7.0.0 through 7.0.3, 7.1.0;\u00a0FortiDDoS 4.x\u00a0all versions, 5.0\u00a0all versions, 5.1\u00a0all versions, 5.2\u00a0all versions, 5.3\u00a0all versions, 5.4\u00a0all versions, 5.5\u00a0all versions, 5.6\u00a0all versions and FortiDDoS-F 6.4.0, 6.3.0 through 6.3.3, 6.2.0 through 6.2.2, 6.1.0 through 6.1.4 may allow an authenticated attacker to execute unauthorized commands via specifically crafted arguments to existing commands."
}
],
"metrics": [
{
"cvssV3_1": {
"attackComplexity": "LOW",
"attackVector": "LOCAL",
"availabilityImpact": "HIGH",
"baseScore": 7.1,
"baseSeverity": "HIGH",
"confidentialityImpact": "HIGH",
"integrityImpact": "HIGH",
"privilegesRequired": "LOW",
"scope": "UNCHANGED",
"userInteraction": "NONE",
"vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H/E:P/RL:X/RC:R",
"version": "3.1"
},
"format": "CVSS"
}
],
"problemTypes": [
{
"descriptions": [
{
"cweId": "CWE-78",
"description": "Execute unauthorized code or commands",
"lang": "en",
"type": "CWE"
}
]
}
],
"providerMetadata": {
"dateUpdated": "2023-04-11T16:05:49.688Z",
"orgId": "6abe59d8-c742-4dff-8ce8-9b0ca1073da8",
"shortName": "fortinet"
},
"references": [
{
"name": "https://fortiguard.com/psirt/FG-IR-22-335",
"url": "https://fortiguard.com/psirt/FG-IR-22-335"
}
],
"solutions": [
{
"lang": "en",
"value": "Please upgrade to FortiDDoS-F version 6.4.1 or above\r\nPlease upgrade to FortiDDoS-F version 6.3.4 or above\r\nPlease upgrade to FortiDDoS-F version 6.2.3 or above\r\nPlease upgrade to FortiDDoS-F version 6.1.5 or above\n\r\nPlease upgrade to FortiDDoS version 5.7.0 or above\n\r\nPlease upgrade to FortiADC version 7.1.1 or above\r\nPlease upgrade to FortiADC version 7.0.4 or above\r\nPlease upgrade to FortiADC version 6.2.5 or above"
}
]
}
},
"cveMetadata": {
"assignerOrgId": "6abe59d8-c742-4dff-8ce8-9b0ca1073da8",
"assignerShortName": "fortinet",
"cveId": "CVE-2022-40679",
"datePublished": "2023-04-11T16:05:49.688Z",
"dateReserved": "2022-09-14T13:17:43.617Z",
"dateUpdated": "2024-10-23T14:30:02.463Z",
"state": "PUBLISHED"
},
"dataType": "CVE_RECORD",
"dataVersion": "5.1"
}
CVE-2022-40719 (GCVE-0-2022-40719)
Vulnerability from cvelistv5 – Published: 2023-01-26 00:00 – Updated: 2025-04-01 14:54
VLAI
Summary
This vulnerability allows network-adjacent attackers to execute arbitrary commands on affected installations of D-Link DIR-2150 4.0.1 routers. Authentication is not required to exploit this vulnerability. The specific flaw exists within the xupnpd_generic.lua plugin for the xupnpd service, which listens on TCP port 4044 by default. When parsing the feed parameter, the process does not properly validate a user-supplied string before using it to execute a system call. An attacker can leverage this vulnerability to execute code in the context of the service account. Was ZDI-CAN-15906.
Severity
8.8 (High)
SSVC
Exploitation: none
Automatable: no
Technical Impact: total
CISA Coordinator (v2.0.3)
CWE
- CWE-78 - Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in an OS Command ('OS Command Injection')
Assigner
References
Credits
{
"containers": {
"adp": [
{
"providerMetadata": {
"dateUpdated": "2024-08-03T12:21:46.665Z",
"orgId": "af854a3a-2127-422b-91ae-364da2661108",
"shortName": "CVE"
},
"references": [
{
"tags": [
"x_transferred"
],
"url": "https://supportannouncement.us.dlink.com/announcement/publication.aspx?name=SAP10304"
},
{
"tags": [
"x_transferred"
],
"url": "https://www.zerodayinitiative.com/advisories/ZDI-22-1223/"
}
],
"title": "CVE Program Container"
},
{
"metrics": [
{
"other": {
"content": {
"id": "CVE-2022-40719",
"options": [
{
"Exploitation": "none"
},
{
"Automatable": "no"
},
{
"Technical Impact": "total"
}
],
"role": "CISA Coordinator",
"timestamp": "2025-03-31T15:47:28.884488Z",
"version": "2.0.3"
},
"type": "ssvc"
}
}
],
"providerMetadata": {
"dateUpdated": "2025-04-01T14:54:48.971Z",
"orgId": "134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0",
"shortName": "CISA-ADP"
},
"title": "CISA ADP Vulnrichment"
}
],
"cna": {
"affected": [
{
"product": "DIR-2150",
"vendor": "D-Link",
"versions": [
{
"status": "affected",
"version": "4.0.1"
}
]
}
],
"credits": [
{
"lang": "en",
"value": "Anonymous"
}
],
"descriptions": [
{
"lang": "en",
"value": "This vulnerability allows network-adjacent attackers to execute arbitrary commands on affected installations of D-Link DIR-2150 4.0.1 routers. Authentication is not required to exploit this vulnerability. The specific flaw exists within the xupnpd_generic.lua plugin for the xupnpd service, which listens on TCP port 4044 by default. When parsing the feed parameter, the process does not properly validate a user-supplied string before using it to execute a system call. An attacker can leverage this vulnerability to execute code in the context of the service account. Was ZDI-CAN-15906."
}
],
"metrics": [
{
"cvssV3_0": {
"attackComplexity": "LOW",
"attackVector": "ADJACENT_NETWORK",
"availabilityImpact": "HIGH",
"baseScore": 8.8,
"baseSeverity": "HIGH",
"confidentialityImpact": "HIGH",
"integrityImpact": "HIGH",
"privilegesRequired": "NONE",
"scope": "UNCHANGED",
"userInteraction": "NONE",
"vectorString": "CVSS:3.0/AV:A/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
"version": "3.0"
}
}
],
"problemTypes": [
{
"descriptions": [
{
"cweId": "CWE-78",
"description": "CWE-78: Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in an OS Command (\u0027OS Command Injection\u0027)",
"lang": "en",
"type": "CWE"
}
]
}
],
"providerMetadata": {
"dateUpdated": "2023-01-26T00:00:00.000Z",
"orgId": "99f1926a-a320-47d8-bbb5-42feb611262e",
"shortName": "zdi"
},
"references": [
{
"url": "https://supportannouncement.us.dlink.com/announcement/publication.aspx?name=SAP10304"
},
{
"url": "https://www.zerodayinitiative.com/advisories/ZDI-22-1223/"
}
]
}
},
"cveMetadata": {
"assignerOrgId": "99f1926a-a320-47d8-bbb5-42feb611262e",
"assignerShortName": "zdi",
"cveId": "CVE-2022-40719",
"datePublished": "2023-01-26T00:00:00.000Z",
"dateReserved": "2022-09-14T00:00:00.000Z",
"dateUpdated": "2025-04-01T14:54:48.971Z",
"state": "PUBLISHED"
},
"dataType": "CVE_RECORD",
"dataVersion": "5.1"
}
Mitigation
Phase: Architecture and Design
Description:
- If at all possible, use library calls rather than external processes to recreate the desired functionality.
Mitigation ID: MIT-22
Phases: Architecture and Design, Operation
Strategy: Sandbox or Jail
Description:
- Run the code in a "jail" or similar sandbox environment that enforces strict boundaries between the process and the operating system. This may effectively restrict which files can be accessed in a particular directory or which commands can be executed by the software.
- OS-level examples include the Unix chroot jail, AppArmor, and SELinux. In general, managed code may provide some protection. For example, java.io.FilePermission in the Java SecurityManager allows the software to specify restrictions on file operations.
- This may not be a feasible solution, and it only limits the impact to the operating system; the rest of the application may still be subject to compromise.
- Be careful to avoid CWE-243 and other weaknesses related to jails.
Mitigation
Phase: Architecture and Design
Strategy: Attack Surface Reduction
Description:
- For any data that will be used to generate a command to be executed, keep as much of that data out of external control as possible. For example, in web applications, this may require storing the data locally in the session's state instead of sending it out to the client in a hidden form field.
Mitigation ID: MIT-15
Phase: Architecture and Design
Description:
- 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 ID: MIT-4.3
Phase: Architecture and Design
Strategy: Libraries or Frameworks
Description:
- Use a vetted library or framework that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid.
- For example, consider using the ESAPI Encoding control [REF-45] or a similar tool, library, or framework. These will help the programmer encode outputs in a manner less prone to error.
Mitigation ID: MIT-28
Phase: Implementation
Strategy: Output Encoding
Description:
- While it is risky to use dynamically-generated query strings, code, or commands that mix control and data together, sometimes it may be unavoidable. Properly quote arguments and escape any special characters within those arguments. The most conservative approach is to escape or filter all characters that do not pass an extremely strict allowlist (such as everything that is not alphanumeric or white space). If some special characters are still needed, such as white space, wrap each argument in quotes after the escaping/filtering step. Be careful of argument injection (CWE-88).
Mitigation
Phase: Implementation
Description:
- If the program to be executed allows arguments to be specified within an input file or from standard input, then consider using that mode to pass arguments instead of the command line.
Mitigation ID: MIT-27
Phase: Architecture and Design
Strategy: Parameterization
Description:
- 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.
- Some languages offer multiple functions that can be used to invoke commands. Where possible, identify any function that invokes a command shell using a single string, and replace it with a function that requires individual arguments. These functions typically perform appropriate quoting and filtering of arguments. For example, in C, the system() function accepts a string that contains the entire command to be executed, whereas execl(), execve(), and others require an array of strings, one for each argument. In Windows, CreateProcess() only accepts one command at a time. In Perl, if system() is provided with an array of arguments, then it will quote each of the arguments.
Mitigation ID: MIT-5
Phase: Implementation
Strategy: Input Validation
Description:
- 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 constructing OS command strings, use stringent allowlists that limit the character set based on the expected value of the parameter in the request. This will indirectly limit the scope of an attack, but this technique is less important than proper output encoding and escaping.
- Note that proper output encoding, escaping, and quoting is the most effective solution for preventing OS command injection, 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 OS command injection, especially if you are required to support free-form text fields that could contain arbitrary characters. For example, when invoking a mail program, you might need to allow the subject field to contain otherwise-dangerous inputs like ";" and ">" characters, which would need to be escaped or otherwise handled. In this case, stripping the character might reduce the risk of OS command injection, but it would produce incorrect behavior because the subject field would not be recorded as the user intended. This might seem to be a minor inconvenience, but it could be more important when the program relies on well-structured subject lines in order to pass messages to other components.
- 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.
Mitigation ID: MIT-21
Phase: Architecture and Design
Strategy: Enforcement by Conversion
Description:
- 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 ID: MIT-32
Phase: Operation
Strategy: Compilation or Build Hardening
Description:
- 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 ID: MIT-32
Phase: Operation
Strategy: Environment Hardening
Description:
- 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 ID: MIT-39
Phase: Implementation
Description:
- Ensure that error messages only contain minimal details that are useful to the intended audience and no one else. The messages need to strike the balance between being too cryptic (which can confuse users) or being too detailed (which may reveal more than intended). The messages should not reveal the methods that were used to determine the error. Attackers can use detailed information to refine or optimize their original attack, thereby increasing their chances of success.
- If errors must be captured in some detail, record them in log messages, but consider what could occur if the log messages can be viewed by attackers. Highly sensitive information such as passwords should never be saved to log files.
- Avoid inconsistent messaging that might accidentally tip off an attacker about internal state, such as whether a user account exists or not.
- In the context of OS Command Injection, error information passed back to the user might reveal whether an OS command is being executed and possibly which command is being used.
Mitigation
Phase: Operation
Strategy: Sandbox or Jail
Description:
- Use runtime policy enforcement to create an allowlist of allowable commands, then prevent use of any command that does not appear in the allowlist. Technologies such as AppArmor are available to do this.
Mitigation ID: MIT-29
Phase: Operation
Strategy: Firewall
Description:
- 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 ID: MIT-17
Phases: Architecture and Design, Operation
Strategy: Environment Hardening
Description:
- Run your code using the lowest privileges that are required to accomplish the necessary tasks [REF-76]. If possible, create isolated accounts with limited privileges that are only used for a single task. That way, a successful attack will not immediately give the attacker access to the rest of the software or its environment. For example, database applications rarely need to run as the database administrator, especially in day-to-day operations.
Mitigation ID: MIT-16
Phases: Operation, Implementation
Strategy: Environment Hardening
Description:
- 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-108: Command Line Execution through SQL Injection
An attacker uses standard SQL injection methods to inject data into the command line for execution. This could be done directly through misuse of directives such as MSSQL_xp_cmdshell or indirectly through injection of data into the database that would be interpreted as shell commands. Sometime later, an unscrupulous backend application (or could be part of the functionality of the same application) fetches the injected data stored in the database and uses this data as command line arguments without performing proper validation. The malicious data escapes that data plane by spawning new commands to be executed on the host.
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-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-6: Argument Injection
An attacker changes the behavior or state of a targeted application through injecting data or command syntax through the targets use of non-validated and non-filtered arguments of exposed services or methods.
CAPEC-88: OS Command Injection
In this type of an attack, an adversary injects operating system commands into existing application functions. An application that uses untrusted input to build command strings is vulnerable. An adversary can leverage OS command injection in an application to elevate privileges, execute arbitrary commands and compromise the underlying operating system.