Common Weakness Enumeration

CWE-20

Discouraged

Improper Input Validation

Abstraction: Class · Status: Stable

The product receives input or data, but it does not validate or incorrectly validates that the input has the properties that are required to process the data safely and correctly.

17653 vulnerabilities reference this CWE, most recent first.

CVE-2026-91134 (GCVE-0-2026-91134)

Vulnerability from cvelistv5 – Published: 2026-09-24 16:51 – Updated: 2026-09-29 02:56
VLAI
Title
Discourse: Block post iframes whose encoded userinfo bypasses the allowed_iframes allowlist
Summary
Discourse is an open-source discussion platform. Prior to 2026.1.8, 2026.6.3, 2026.7.2, and 2026.8.0, the Discourse post sanitizer allowed a stored cross-origin iframe to bypass the allowed_iframes prefix policy when the iframe src contained encoded userinfo. The sanitizer validated a decoded form differently from the stored iframe src, allowing the browser to interpret an attacker-controlled host while the allowlist check accepted the encoded URL as an allowed prefix. An authenticated user with posting privileges could persist the iframe in a post and cause attacker-controlled cross-origin content to be rendered. This issue is fixed in versions 2026.1.8, 2026.6.3, 2026.7.2, and 2026.8.0.
SSVC
Exploitation: none Automatable: no Technical Impact: partial
CISA Coordinator · CISA-ADP (v2.0.3)
Decision recorded 2026-09-29 02:56 UTC
CWE
  • CWE-20 - Improper Input Validation
Impacted products
Vendor Product Version
discourse discourse Affected: < 2026.8.0
Affected: >= 2026.7.0-latest, < 2026.7.2
Affected: >= 2026.6.0-latest, < 2026.6.3
Affected: >= 2026.1.0-latest, < 2026.1.8
Create a notification for this product.
Show details on NVD website

{
  "containers": {
    "adp": [
      {
        "metrics": [
          {
            "other": {
              "content": {
                "id": "CVE-2026-91134",
                "options": [
                  {
                    "Exploitation": "none"
                  },
                  {
                    "Automatable": "no"
                  },
                  {
                    "Technical Impact": "partial"
                  }
                ],
                "role": "CISA Coordinator",
                "timestamp": "2026-09-29T02:56:20.350456Z",
                "version": "2.0.3"
              },
              "type": "ssvc"
            }
          }
        ],
        "providerMetadata": {
          "dateUpdated": "2026-09-29T02:56:30.376Z",
          "orgId": "134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0",
          "shortName": "CISA-ADP"
        },
        "title": "CISA ADP Vulnrichment"
      }
    ],
    "cna": {
      "affected": [
        {
          "product": "discourse",
          "vendor": "discourse",
          "versions": [
            {
              "status": "affected",
              "version": "\u003c 2026.8.0"
            },
            {
              "status": "affected",
              "version": "\u003e= 2026.7.0-latest, \u003c 2026.7.2"
            },
            {
              "status": "affected",
              "version": "\u003e= 2026.6.0-latest, \u003c 2026.6.3"
            },
            {
              "status": "affected",
              "version": "\u003e= 2026.1.0-latest, \u003c 2026.1.8"
            }
          ]
        }
      ],
      "descriptions": [
        {
          "lang": "en",
          "value": "Discourse is an open-source discussion platform. Prior to 2026.1.8, 2026.6.3, 2026.7.2, and 2026.8.0, the Discourse post sanitizer allowed a stored cross-origin iframe to bypass the allowed_iframes prefix policy when the iframe src contained encoded userinfo. The sanitizer validated a decoded form differently from the stored iframe src, allowing the browser to interpret an attacker-controlled host while the allowlist check accepted the encoded URL as an allowed prefix. An authenticated user with posting privileges could persist the iframe in a post and cause attacker-controlled cross-origin content to be rendered. This issue is fixed in versions 2026.1.8, 2026.6.3, 2026.7.2, and 2026.8.0."
        }
      ],
      "metrics": [
        {
          "cvssV3_1": {
            "attackComplexity": "LOW",
            "attackVector": "NETWORK",
            "availabilityImpact": "NONE",
            "baseScore": 5.4,
            "baseSeverity": "MEDIUM",
            "confidentialityImpact": "LOW",
            "integrityImpact": "LOW",
            "privilegesRequired": "LOW",
            "scope": "UNCHANGED",
            "userInteraction": "NONE",
            "vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:N",
            "version": "3.1"
          }
        }
      ],
      "problemTypes": [
        {
          "descriptions": [
            {
              "cweId": "CWE-20",
              "description": "CWE-20: Improper Input Validation",
              "lang": "en",
              "type": "CWE"
            }
          ]
        }
      ],
      "providerMetadata": {
        "dateUpdated": "2026-09-24T16:51:34.057Z",
        "orgId": "a0819718-46f1-4df5-94e2-005712e83aaa",
        "shortName": "GitHub_M"
      },
      "references": [
        {
          "name": "https://github.com/discourse/discourse/security/advisories/GHSA-54vw-chv3-wjpv",
          "tags": [
            "x_refsource_CONFIRM"
          ],
          "url": "https://github.com/discourse/discourse/security/advisories/GHSA-54vw-chv3-wjpv"
        },
        {
          "name": "https://github.com/discourse/discourse/pull/42882",
          "tags": [
            "x_refsource_MISC"
          ],
          "url": "https://github.com/discourse/discourse/pull/42882"
        },
        {
          "name": "https://github.com/discourse/discourse/commit/0a8015e6c7a5079981843721494d30c9a91f5415",
          "tags": [
            "x_refsource_MISC"
          ],
          "url": "https://github.com/discourse/discourse/commit/0a8015e6c7a5079981843721494d30c9a91f5415"
        },
        {
          "name": "https://github.com/discourse/discourse/commit/1304b0c04f87534053b0d574ae5a9b9ba13dd590",
          "tags": [
            "x_refsource_MISC"
          ],
          "url": "https://github.com/discourse/discourse/commit/1304b0c04f87534053b0d574ae5a9b9ba13dd590"
        },
        {
          "name": "https://github.com/discourse/discourse/commit/bac7dd1201911851462483271b4567246fa1309d",
          "tags": [
            "x_refsource_MISC"
          ],
          "url": "https://github.com/discourse/discourse/commit/bac7dd1201911851462483271b4567246fa1309d"
        },
        {
          "name": "https://github.com/discourse/discourse/commit/fed3a58c48412ce7207b72a4629ddbc44482cd64",
          "tags": [
            "x_refsource_MISC"
          ],
          "url": "https://github.com/discourse/discourse/commit/fed3a58c48412ce7207b72a4629ddbc44482cd64"
        }
      ],
      "source": {
        "advisory": "GHSA-54vw-chv3-wjpv",
        "discovery": "UNKNOWN"
      },
      "title": "Discourse: Block post iframes whose encoded userinfo bypasses the allowed_iframes allowlist"
    }
  },
  "cveMetadata": {
    "assignerOrgId": "a0819718-46f1-4df5-94e2-005712e83aaa",
    "assignerShortName": "GitHub_M",
    "cveId": "CVE-2026-91134",
    "datePublished": "2026-09-24T16:51:34.057Z",
    "dateReserved": "2026-09-14T19:36:48.844Z",
    "dateUpdated": "2026-09-29T02:56:30.376Z",
    "state": "PUBLISHED"
  },
  "dataType": "CVE_RECORD",
  "dataVersion": "5.2"
}

CVE-2026-90961 (GCVE-0-2026-90961)

Vulnerability from cvelistv5 – Published: 2026-09-14 13:22 – Updated: 2026-09-14 13:55
VLAI
Title
MISP LdapAuth and LinOTPAuth Authentication Bypass via Empty or Non-String Credentials
Summary
The LdapAuth and LinOTPAuth authentication plugins in MISP contain an authentication bypass vulnerability. Both LdapAuthenticate and LinOTPAuthenticate replace CakePHP's FormAuthenticate class but fail to replicate its _checkFields() input validation guard. As a result, the email and password fields extracted from the login request are passed to downstream authentication logic without verifying that they are non-empty strings. In the LDAP authenticator, an empty or null password is forwarded to ldap_bind(). Per RFC 4513 section 5.1.2, a bind request with a valid DN and an empty password constitutes an unauthenticated bind, which many LDAP directory servers accept as successful. An attacker who knows any valid user email address in the directory can therefore authenticate as that user without possessing a password. Additionally, non-string values (null, false, arrays) are either coerced to empty strings by ldap_bind(), raise TypeErrors, or are misinterpreted as find conditions in _findUser(), all of which can lead to unintended authentication outcomes. In the LinOTP authenticator, the same missing guard allows non-string credentials to be concatenated into the LinOTP verification request, and in the mixed-authentication branch an empty password is accepted against a stored hash of the empty string. A secondary issue in the LDAP authenticator is that newly created user accounts (auto-provisioned on first LDAP login) were assigned an empty password. Because the save path skips validation, the empty string is hashed and stored. If the user later ceases to be found in LDAP and the mixed-authentication fallback is used, the stored hash of the empty string verifies against an empty password, again permitting unauthenticated access. The vulnerability requires that the affected plugin (LdapAuth or LinOTPAuth) is enabled on the MISP instance and that the attacker knows at least one valid email address registered in the directory or MISP user store. No prior authentication is required. Successful exploitation grants the attacker the full privileges of the impersonated user, which may include administrative access to threat intelligence data. Version affected: ≤2.5.45
SSVC
Exploitation: none Automatable: no Technical Impact: total
CISA Coordinator · CISA-ADP (v2.0.3)
Decision recorded 2026-09-14 13:55 UTC
CWE
  • CWE-287 - Improper Authentication
  • CWE-20 - Improper Input Validation
References
Impacted products
Vendor Product Version
MISP MISP Affected: 0 , < 2.5.46 (semver)
Create a notification for this product.
GCVE extensions
AI involvement GCVE-BCP-05-X-01
Whole record AI-generated Review: review GNA-1

Draft vulnerability metadata was generated from a git-format patch using an Ollama-hosted language model. Human validation is required before publication.

ai-computer-assisted:llm-generatedai-computer-assisted:classification
Model Source Identifier
qwen3.8:27b ollama qwen3.8:27b
Patch provenance GCVE-BCP-05-X-02
Generator
patch2vuln.py on 2026-09-14 13:14
Model
qwen3.8:27b
Input
https://github.com/MISP/MISP/commit/0ee058548.patch 01b60b396532…
Confidence
high
Commit Subject Patch SHA-256
0ee0585486cd fix: [security] Reject empty and non-string credentials in 01b60b396532…
Fix summary

The fix adds explicit type and emptiness validation for the email and password fields in both LdapAuthenticate and LinOTPAuthenticate before any authentication logic is invoked. Non-string or empty credentials are rejected with a logged error and a false return. Additionally, the LDAP authenticator now assigns a cryptographically random password to auto-provisioned user accounts instead of an empty string, preventing the stored hash of '' from being verifiable in the mixed-authentication fallback path. The LinOTP authenticator also rejects an empty password specifically in the mixed-authentication branch where the password is checked against the local database.

Patch summary

In LdapAuthenticate.php: (1) email and password are now extracted with isset() defaults to empty string; (2) a guard clause checks is_string() and non-emptiness for both fields, logging an error and returning false on failure; (3) the auto-provisioned user creation block now calls $userModel->generateRandomPassword() and stores that value in both 'password' and 'confirm_password' fields instead of empty strings. In LinOTPAuthenticate.php: (1) email, password, and otp are extracted with isset() defaults; (2) a guard clause checks is_string() and non-emptiness for email and is_string() for password, logging and returning false on failure; (3) in the mixed-authentication branch, an additional check rejects an empty password before calling _findUser().

CVSS rationale

AV:N: The vulnerability is exploitable over the network via the MISP web login endpoint. AC:L: Exploitation requires only sending a login request with an empty or non-string password field; no race conditions, specific directory configuration beyond accepting unauthenticated binds (which is common), or other special conditions are needed. AT:N: No attack target manipulation is required. PR:N: No prior authentication is needed; the attacker is attempting to authenticate. UI:N: No user interaction is required. VC:H: Successful exploitation grants the attacker the full data-access privileges of the impersonated user, potentially including all MISP threat intelligence data. VI:H: The attacker can create, modify, or delete MISP objects, tags, and configurations at the privilege level of the impersonated user. VA:N: No direct availability impact is demonstrated. SC/SI/SA:N: No separate subsequent system is identified; the impact is contained to the MISP instance itself.

Weakness rationale
  • CWE-287 The primary impact is an authentication bypass: empty or non-string credentials allow an unauthenticated attacker to be authenticated as a known directory user. The root cause is the absence of the credential validation guard that FormAuthenticate normally provides.
  • CWE-20 The underlying technical weakness is the failure to validate that user-supplied credential fields are non-empty strings before passing them to ldap_bind(), the LinOTP verifier, or _findUser(). Non-string types (null, false, arrays) and empty strings are all accepted and produce unintended authentication behavior.
Assumptions to verify
  • The LDAP directory server is configured to accept unauthenticated (empty-password) binds, which is common but not universal; if the directory rejects empty-password binds, the LDAP-specific bypass is mitigated at the directory level, though the non-string credential and empty-password-hash issues remain.
  • The attacker must know at least one valid email address that exists in the LDAP directory or MISP user store.
  • The LdapAuth or LinOTPAuth plugin is enabled on the affected MISP instance.
  • CVSS impact ratings assume the attacker can impersonate a user with high privileges (e.g., admin); actual impact scales with the privileges of the specific user impersonated.
  • The exact fixed version is not specified in the patch metadata; the fix commit is 238 commits after tag v2.5.46, suggesting the fix landed in a release after 2.5.46, but the precise version boundary is unconfirmed.
  • The LinOTP empty-password bypass in the mixed-auth branch requires the mixedauth setting to be enabled.
Model comparison

Selected qwen3.8:27b by deterministic-consensus-v1
The selected result is closest to model consensus; this heuristic does not establish factual correctness and human review remains required.

Model Score Agreement Confidence Assumptions
qwen3.8:27b 5 9 high 6
Show details on NVD website

{
  "containers": {
    "adp": [
      {
        "metrics": [
          {
            "other": {
              "content": {
                "id": "CVE-2026-90961",
                "options": [
                  {
                    "Exploitation": "none"
                  },
                  {
                    "Automatable": "no"
                  },
                  {
                    "Technical Impact": "total"
                  }
                ],
                "role": "CISA Coordinator",
                "timestamp": "2026-09-14T13:55:28.674675Z",
                "version": "2.0.3"
              },
              "type": "ssvc"
            }
          }
        ],
        "providerMetadata": {
          "dateUpdated": "2026-09-14T13:55:49.225Z",
          "orgId": "134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0",
          "shortName": "CISA-ADP"
        },
        "title": "CISA ADP Vulnrichment"
      }
    ],
    "cna": {
      "affected": [
        {
          "modules": [
            "LdapAuth plugin (app/Plugin/LdapAuth/Controller/Component/Auth/LdapAuthenticate.php)",
            "LinOTPAuth plugin (app/Plugin/LinOTPAuth/Controller/Component/Auth/LinOTPAuthenticate.php)"
          ],
          "product": "MISP",
          "programFiles": [
            "app/Plugin/LdapAuth/Controller/Component/Auth/LdapAuthenticate.php",
            "app/Plugin/LinOTPAuth/Controller/Component/Auth/LinOTPAuthenticate.php"
          ],
          "repo": "https://github.com/MISP/MISP",
          "vendor": "MISP",
          "versions": [
            {
              "lessThan": "2.5.46",
              "status": "affected",
              "version": "0",
              "versionType": "semver"
            }
          ]
        }
      ],
      "credits": [
        {
          "lang": "en",
          "type": "reporter",
          "value": "elhoim (David Andr\u00e9)"
        },
        {
          "lang": "en",
          "type": "remediation developer",
          "value": "iglocska"
        },
        {
          "lang": "en",
          "type": "remediation developer",
          "value": "Claude Opus 5 (1M context)"
        }
      ],
      "descriptions": [
        {
          "lang": "en",
          "supportingMedia": [
            {
              "base64": false,
              "type": "text/html",
              "value": "\u003cp\u003eThe LdapAuth and LinOTPAuth authentication plugins in MISP contain an authentication bypass vulnerability. Both LdapAuthenticate and LinOTPAuthenticate replace CakePHP\u0027s FormAuthenticate class but fail to replicate its _checkFields() input validation guard. As a result, the email and password fields extracted from the login request are passed to downstream authentication logic without verifying that they are non-empty strings.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eIn the LDAP authenticator, an empty or null password is forwarded to ldap_bind(). Per RFC 4513 section 5.1.2, a bind request with a valid DN and an empty password constitutes an unauthenticated bind, which many LDAP directory servers accept as successful. An attacker who knows any valid user email address in the directory can therefore authenticate as that user without possessing a password. Additionally, non-string values (null, false, arrays) are either coerced to empty strings by ldap_bind(), raise TypeErrors, or are misinterpreted as find conditions in _findUser(), all of which can lead to unintended authentication outcomes.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eIn the LinOTP authenticator, the same missing guard allows non-string credentials to be concatenated into the LinOTP verification request, and in the mixed-authentication branch an empty password is accepted against a stored hash of the empty string.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eA secondary issue in the LDAP authenticator is that newly created user accounts (auto-provisioned on first LDAP login) were assigned an empty password. Because the save path skips validation, the empty string is hashed and stored. If the user later ceases to be found in LDAP and the mixed-authentication fallback is used, the stored hash of the empty string verifies against an empty password, again permitting unauthenticated access.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe vulnerability requires that the affected plugin (LdapAuth or LinOTPAuth) is enabled on the MISP instance and that the attacker knows at least one valid email address registered in the directory or MISP user store. No prior authentication is required. Successful exploitation grants the attacker the full privileges of the impersonated user, which may include administrative access to threat intelligence data.\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eVersion affected: \u22642.5.45\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/p\u003e"
            }
          ],
          "value": "The LdapAuth and LinOTPAuth authentication plugins in MISP contain an authentication bypass vulnerability. Both LdapAuthenticate and LinOTPAuthenticate replace CakePHP\u0027s FormAuthenticate class but fail to replicate its _checkFields() input validation guard. As a result, the email and password fields extracted from the login request are passed to downstream authentication logic without verifying that they are non-empty strings.\n\nIn the LDAP authenticator, an empty or null password is forwarded to ldap_bind(). Per RFC 4513 section 5.1.2, a bind request with a valid DN and an empty password constitutes an unauthenticated bind, which many LDAP directory servers accept as successful. An attacker who knows any valid user email address in the directory can therefore authenticate as that user without possessing a password. Additionally, non-string values (null, false, arrays) are either coerced to empty strings by ldap_bind(), raise TypeErrors, or are misinterpreted as find conditions in _findUser(), all of which can lead to unintended authentication outcomes.\n\nIn the LinOTP authenticator, the same missing guard allows non-string credentials to be concatenated into the LinOTP verification request, and in the mixed-authentication branch an empty password is accepted against a stored hash of the empty string.\n\nA secondary issue in the LDAP authenticator is that newly created user accounts (auto-provisioned on first LDAP login) were assigned an empty password. Because the save path skips validation, the empty string is hashed and stored. If the user later ceases to be found in LDAP and the mixed-authentication fallback is used, the stored hash of the empty string verifies against an empty password, again permitting unauthenticated access.\n\nThe vulnerability requires that the affected plugin (LdapAuth or LinOTPAuth) is enabled on the MISP instance and that the attacker knows at least one valid email address registered in the directory or MISP user store. No prior authentication is required. Successful exploitation grants the attacker the full privileges of the impersonated user, which may include administrative access to threat intelligence data.\n\n\nVersion affected: \u22642.5.45"
        }
      ],
      "impacts": [
        {
          "capecId": "CAPEC-115",
          "descriptions": [
            {
              "lang": "en",
              "value": "CAPEC-115 Authentication Bypass"
            }
          ]
        }
      ],
      "metrics": [
        {
          "cvssV4_0": {
            "Automatable": "NOT_DEFINED",
            "Recovery": "NOT_DEFINED",
            "Safety": "NOT_DEFINED",
            "attackComplexity": "LOW",
            "attackRequirements": "NONE",
            "attackVector": "NETWORK",
            "baseScore": 9.3,
            "baseSeverity": "CRITICAL",
            "privilegesRequired": "NONE",
            "providerUrgency": "NOT_DEFINED",
            "subAvailabilityImpact": "NONE",
            "subConfidentialityImpact": "NONE",
            "subIntegrityImpact": "NONE",
            "userInteraction": "NONE",
            "valueDensity": "NOT_DEFINED",
            "vectorString": "CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:L/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N",
            "version": "4.0",
            "vulnAvailabilityImpact": "LOW",
            "vulnConfidentialityImpact": "HIGH",
            "vulnIntegrityImpact": "HIGH",
            "vulnerabilityResponseEffort": "NOT_DEFINED"
          },
          "format": "CVSS",
          "scenarios": [
            {
              "lang": "en",
              "value": "GENERAL"
            }
          ]
        }
      ],
      "problemTypes": [
        {
          "descriptions": [
            {
              "cweId": "CWE-287",
              "description": "CWE-287 Improper Authentication",
              "lang": "en",
              "type": "CWE"
            }
          ]
        },
        {
          "descriptions": [
            {
              "cweId": "CWE-20",
              "description": "CWE-20 Improper Input Validation",
              "lang": "en",
              "type": "CWE"
            }
          ]
        }
      ],
      "providerMetadata": {
        "dateUpdated": "2026-09-14T13:22:07.185Z",
        "orgId": "5a6e4751-2f3f-4070-9419-94fb35b644e8",
        "shortName": "CIRCL"
      },
      "references": [
        {
          "name": "Security patch",
          "tags": [
            "patch"
          ],
          "url": "https://github.com/MISP/MISP/commit/0ee058548"
        }
      ],
      "solutions": [
        {
          "lang": "en",
          "supportingMedia": [
            {
              "base64": false,
              "type": "text/html",
              "value": "\u003cp\u003eThe fix adds explicit type and emptiness validation for the email and password fields in both LdapAuthenticate and LinOTPAuthenticate before any authentication logic is invoked. Non-string or empty credentials are rejected with a logged error and a false return. Additionally, the LDAP authenticator now assigns a cryptographically random password to auto-provisioned user accounts instead of an empty string, preventing the stored hash of \u0027\u0027 from being verifiable in the mixed-authentication fallback path. The LinOTP authenticator also rejects an empty password specifically in the mixed-authentication branch where the password is checked against the local database.\u003c/p\u003e"
            }
          ],
          "value": "The fix adds explicit type and emptiness validation for the email and password fields in both LdapAuthenticate and LinOTPAuthenticate before any authentication logic is invoked. Non-string or empty credentials are rejected with a logged error and a false return. Additionally, the LDAP authenticator now assigns a cryptographically random password to auto-provisioned user accounts instead of an empty string, preventing the stored hash of \u0027\u0027 from being verifiable in the mixed-authentication fallback path. The LinOTP authenticator also rejects an empty password specifically in the mixed-authentication branch where the password is checked against the local database."
        }
      ],
      "title": "MISP LdapAuth and LinOTPAuth Authentication Bypass via Empty or Non-String Credentials",
      "x_gcve": [
        {
          "extensions": {
            "bcp-05-x-01": {
              "ai_annotations": [
                {
                  "ai_level": "generated",
                  "description": "Draft vulnerability metadata was generated from a git-format patch using an Ollama-hosted language model. Human validation is required before publication.",
                  "gna_source": 1,
                  "models": [
                    {
                      "gna_source": 1,
                      "identifier": "qwen3.8:27b",
                      "name": "qwen3.8:27b",
                      "source": "ollama"
                    }
                  ],
                  "review_status": "review",
                  "scope": "record",
                  "tags": [
                    "ai-computer-assisted:llm-generated",
                    "ai-computer-assisted:classification"
                  ]
                }
              ]
            },
            "bcp-05-x-02": {
              "x_patch2vuln": {
                "assumptions": [
                  "The LDAP directory server is configured to accept unauthenticated (empty-password) binds, which is common but not universal; if the directory rejects empty-password binds, the LDAP-specific bypass is mitigated at the directory level, though the non-string credential and empty-password-hash issues remain.",
                  "The attacker must know at least one valid email address that exists in the LDAP directory or MISP user store.",
                  "The LdapAuth or LinOTPAuth plugin is enabled on the affected MISP instance.",
                  "CVSS impact ratings assume the attacker can impersonate a user with high privileges (e.g., admin); actual impact scales with the privileges of the specific user impersonated.",
                  "The exact fixed version is not specified in the patch metadata; the fix commit is 238 commits after tag v2.5.46, suggesting the fix landed in a release after 2.5.46, but the precise version boundary is unconfirmed.",
                  "The LinOTP empty-password bypass in the mixed-auth branch requires the mixedauth setting to be enabled."
                ],
                "commit": "0ee0585486cd2c9df49e4f14d48a32a953666e3a",
                "confidence": "high",
                "credits": [
                  {
                    "lang": "en",
                    "type": "reporter",
                    "value": "elhoim (David Andr\u00e9)"
                  },
                  {
                    "lang": "en",
                    "type": "remediation developer",
                    "value": "iglocska"
                  },
                  {
                    "lang": "en",
                    "type": "remediation developer",
                    "value": "Claude Opus 5 (1M context)"
                  }
                ],
                "cvssRationale": "AV:N: The vulnerability is exploitable over the network via the MISP web login endpoint. AC:L: Exploitation requires only sending a login request with an empty or non-string password field; no race conditions, specific directory configuration beyond accepting unauthenticated binds (which is common), or other special conditions are needed. AT:N: No attack target manipulation is required. PR:N: No prior authentication is needed; the attacker is attempting to authenticate. UI:N: No user interaction is required. VC:H: Successful exploitation grants the attacker the full data-access privileges of the impersonated user, potentially including all MISP threat intelligence data. VI:H: The attacker can create, modify, or delete MISP objects, tags, and configurations at the privilege level of the impersonated user. VA:N: No direct availability impact is demonstrated. SC/SI/SA:N: No separate subsequent system is identified; the impact is contained to the MISP instance itself.",
                "draft": false,
                "fixSummary": "The fix adds explicit type and emptiness validation for the email and password fields in both LdapAuthenticate and LinOTPAuthenticate before any authentication logic is invoked. Non-string or empty credentials are rejected with a logged error and a false return. Additionally, the LDAP authenticator now assigns a cryptographically random password to auto-provisioned user accounts instead of an empty string, preventing the stored hash of \u0027\u0027 from being verifiable in the mixed-authentication fallback path. The LinOTP authenticator also rejects an empty password specifically in the mixed-authentication branch where the password is checked against the local database.",
                "generatedAt": "2026-09-14T13:14:35.161935Z",
                "generator": "patch2vuln.py",
                "model": "qwen3.8:27b",
                "modelComparison": {
                  "rankings": [
                    {
                      "agreementScore": 9,
                      "assumptionCount": 6,
                      "confidence": "high",
                      "model": "qwen3.8:27b",
                      "score": 5
                    }
                  ],
                  "selectedModel": "qwen3.8:27b",
                  "selectionMethod": "deterministic-consensus-v1",
                  "selectionNotice": "The selected result is closest to model consensus; this heuristic does not establish factual correctness and human review remains required."
                },
                "patchSha256": "01b60b396532e5f6ff5efca8c41961e701b7b6c539edcf49ad29aba06a906149",
                "patchSummary": "In LdapAuthenticate.php: (1) email and password are now extracted with isset() defaults to empty string; (2) a guard clause checks is_string() and non-emptiness for both fields, logging an error and returning false on failure; (3) the auto-provisioned user creation block now calls $userModel-\u003egenerateRandomPassword() and stores that value in both \u0027password\u0027 and \u0027confirm_password\u0027 fields instead of empty strings. In LinOTPAuthenticate.php: (1) email, password, and otp are extracted with isset() defaults; (2) a guard clause checks is_string() and non-emptiness for email and is_string() for password, logging and returning false on failure; (3) in the mixed-authentication branch, an additional check rejects an empty password before calling _findUser().",
                "patchTruncated": false,
                "patches": [
                  {
                    "commit": "0ee0585486cd2c9df49e4f14d48a32a953666e3a",
                    "patchSha256": "01b60b396532e5f6ff5efca8c41961e701b7b6c539edcf49ad29aba06a906149",
                    "source": "https://github.com/MISP/MISP/commit/0ee058548.patch",
                    "sourceUrl": "https://github.com/MISP/MISP/commit/0ee058548.patch",
                    "subject": "fix: [security] Reject empty and non-string credentials in"
                  }
                ],
                "source": "https://github.com/MISP/MISP/commit/0ee058548.patch",
                "subject": "fix: [security] Reject empty and non-string credentials in",
                "tagVersionBoundary": {
                  "commits_after_fix": 238,
                  "repository": "https://github.com/MISP/MISP",
                  "tag": "v2.5.46",
                  "version": "2.5.46",
                  "version_type": "semver"
                },
                "weaknessRationale": [
                  {
                    "cweId": "CWE-287",
                    "rationale": "The primary impact is an authentication bypass: empty or non-string credentials allow an unauthenticated attacker to be authenticated as a known directory user. The root cause is the absence of the credential validation guard that FormAuthenticate normally provides."
                  },
                  {
                    "cweId": "CWE-20",
                    "rationale": "The underlying technical weakness is the failure to validate that user-supplied credential fields are non-empty strings before passing them to ldap_bind(), the LinOTP verifier, or _findUser(). Non-string types (null, false, arrays) and empty strings are all accepted and produce unintended authentication behavior."
                  }
                ]
              }
            }
          },
          "recordType": "advisory",
          "vulnId": "GCVE-1-2026-20246"
        }
      ]
    }
  },
  "cveMetadata": {
    "assignerOrgId": "5a6e4751-2f3f-4070-9419-94fb35b644e8",
    "assignerShortName": "CIRCL",
    "cveId": "CVE-2026-90961",
    "datePublished": "2026-09-14T13:22:07.185Z",
    "dateReserved": "2026-09-14T13:22:04.165Z",
    "dateUpdated": "2026-09-14T13:55:49.225Z",
    "state": "PUBLISHED"
  },
  "dataType": "CVE_RECORD",
  "dataVersion": "5.2"
}

CVE-2026-90614 (GCVE-0-2026-90614)

Vulnerability from cvelistv5 – Published: 2026-09-14 01:45 – Updated: 2026-09-14 15:01
VLAI
Title
FedML-AI FedML MQTT+S3 Communication Backend remote_storage.py S3Storage.read_model deserialization
Summary
A weakness has been identified in FedML-AI FedML up to 0.9.6. Affected by this issue is the function S3Storage.read_model of the file fedml/core/distributed/communication/s3/remote_storage.py of the component MQTT+S3 Communication Backend. This manipulation of the argument s3_key_str causes deserialization. Remote exploitation of the attack is possible. The project was informed of the problem early through an issue report but has not responded yet.
SSVC
Exploitation: none Automatable: no Technical Impact: partial
CISA Coordinator · CISA-ADP (v2.0.3)
Decision recorded 2026-09-14 15:01 UTC
CWE
References
URL Tags
https://vuldb.com/vuln/403196 vdb-entrytechnical-description
https://vuldb.com/vuln/403196/cti signaturepermissions-required
https://vuldb.com/cve/CVE-2026-90614 third-party-advisory
https://vuldb.com/submit/914219 third-party-advisory
https://github.com/FedML-AI/FedML/issues/2267 issue-tracking
https://github.com/FedML-AI/FedML/ product
Impacted products
Vendor Product Version
FedML-AI FedML Affected: 0.9.0
Affected: 0.9.1
Affected: 0.9.2
Affected: 0.9.3
Affected: 0.9.4
Affected: 0.9.5
Affected: 0.9.6
    cpe:2.3:a:fedml-ai:fedml:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*
Create a notification for this product.
Show details on NVD website

{
  "containers": {
    "adp": [
      {
        "metrics": [
          {
            "other": {
              "content": {
                "id": "CVE-2026-90614",
                "options": [
                  {
                    "Exploitation": "none"
                  },
                  {
                    "Automatable": "no"
                  },
                  {
                    "Technical Impact": "partial"
                  }
                ],
                "role": "CISA Coordinator",
                "timestamp": "2026-09-14T15:01:46.162945Z",
                "version": "2.0.3"
              },
              "type": "ssvc"
            }
          }
        ],
        "providerMetadata": {
          "dateUpdated": "2026-09-14T15:01:55.444Z",
          "orgId": "134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0",
          "shortName": "CISA-ADP"
        },
        "title": "CISA ADP Vulnrichment"
      }
    ],
    "cna": {
      "affected": [
        {
          "cpes": [
            "cpe:2.3:a:fedml-ai:fedml:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*"
          ],
          "modules": [
            "MQTT+S3 Communication Backend"
          ],
          "product": "FedML",
          "vendor": "FedML-AI",
          "versions": [
            {
              "status": "affected",
              "version": "0.9.0"
            },
            {
              "status": "affected",
              "version": "0.9.1"
            },
            {
              "status": "affected",
              "version": "0.9.2"
            },
            {
              "status": "affected",
              "version": "0.9.3"
            },
            {
              "status": "affected",
              "version": "0.9.4"
            },
            {
              "status": "affected",
              "version": "0.9.5"
            },
            {
              "status": "affected",
              "version": "0.9.6"
            }
          ]
        }
      ],
      "credits": [
        {
          "lang": "en",
          "type": "reporter",
          "value": "Mohammedix88 (VulDB User)"
        },
        {
          "lang": "en",
          "type": "coordinator",
          "value": "VulDB CNA Team"
        }
      ],
      "descriptions": [
        {
          "lang": "en",
          "value": "A weakness has been identified in FedML-AI FedML up to 0.9.6. Affected by this issue is the function S3Storage.read_model of the file fedml/core/distributed/communication/s3/remote_storage.py of the component MQTT+S3 Communication Backend. This manipulation of the argument s3_key_str causes deserialization. Remote exploitation of the attack is possible. The project was informed of the problem early through an issue report but has not responded yet."
        }
      ],
      "metrics": [
        {
          "cvssV4_0": {
            "baseScore": 5.3,
            "baseSeverity": "MEDIUM",
            "vectorString": "CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/VA:L/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:X",
            "version": "4.0"
          }
        },
        {
          "cvssV3_1": {
            "baseScore": 6.3,
            "baseSeverity": "MEDIUM",
            "vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L/E:X/RL:X/RC:R",
            "version": "3.1"
          }
        },
        {
          "cvssV3_0": {
            "baseScore": 6.3,
            "baseSeverity": "MEDIUM",
            "vectorString": "CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L/E:X/RL:X/RC:R",
            "version": "3.0"
          }
        },
        {
          "cvssV2_0": {
            "baseScore": 6.5,
            "vectorString": "AV:N/AC:L/Au:S/C:P/I:P/A:P/E:ND/RL:ND/RC:UR",
            "version": "2.0"
          }
        }
      ],
      "problemTypes": [
        {
          "descriptions": [
            {
              "cweId": "CWE-502",
              "description": "Deserialization",
              "lang": "en",
              "type": "CWE"
            }
          ]
        },
        {
          "descriptions": [
            {
              "cweId": "CWE-20",
              "description": "Improper Input Validation",
              "lang": "en",
              "type": "CWE"
            }
          ]
        }
      ],
      "providerMetadata": {
        "dateUpdated": "2026-09-14T01:45:10.541Z",
        "orgId": "1af790b2-7ee1-4545-860a-a788eba489b5",
        "shortName": "VulDB"
      },
      "references": [
        {
          "name": "VDB-403196 | FedML-AI FedML MQTT+S3 Communication Backend remote_storage.py S3Storage.read_model deserialization",
          "tags": [
            "vdb-entry",
            "technical-description"
          ],
          "url": "https://vuldb.com/vuln/403196"
        },
        {
          "name": "VDB-403196 | CTI Indicators (IOB, IOC, IOA)",
          "tags": [
            "signature",
            "permissions-required"
          ],
          "url": "https://vuldb.com/vuln/403196/cti"
        },
        {
          "name": "CVE-2026-90614 | CVE Analysis and Report",
          "tags": [
            "third-party-advisory"
          ],
          "url": "https://vuldb.com/cve/CVE-2026-90614"
        },
        {
          "name": "Submit #914219 | FedML-AI FedML 0.9.6 Deserialization",
          "tags": [
            "third-party-advisory"
          ],
          "url": "https://vuldb.com/submit/914219"
        },
        {
          "tags": [
            "issue-tracking"
          ],
          "url": "https://github.com/FedML-AI/FedML/issues/2267"
        },
        {
          "tags": [
            "product"
          ],
          "url": "https://github.com/FedML-AI/FedML/"
        }
      ],
      "timeline": [
        {
          "lang": "en",
          "time": "2026-09-12T00:00:00.000Z",
          "value": "Advisory disclosed"
        },
        {
          "lang": "en",
          "time": "2026-09-12T02:00:00.000Z",
          "value": "VulDB entry created"
        },
        {
          "lang": "en",
          "time": "2026-09-12T21:47:59.000Z",
          "value": "VulDB entry last update"
        }
      ],
      "title": "FedML-AI FedML MQTT+S3 Communication Backend remote_storage.py S3Storage.read_model deserialization",
      "x_generator": [
        "VulDB PVTS v202609"
      ]
    }
  },
  "cveMetadata": {
    "assignerOrgId": "1af790b2-7ee1-4545-860a-a788eba489b5",
    "assignerShortName": "VulDB",
    "cveId": "CVE-2026-90614",
    "datePublished": "2026-09-14T01:45:10.541Z",
    "dateReserved": "2026-09-12T19:42:51.777Z",
    "dateUpdated": "2026-09-14T15:01:55.444Z",
    "state": "PUBLISHED"
  },
  "dataType": "CVE_RECORD",
  "dataVersion": "5.2"
}

CVE-2026-90575 (GCVE-0-2026-90575)

Vulnerability from cvelistv5 – Published: 2026-09-13 18:00 – Updated: 2026-09-16 14:13 X_Freeware
VLAI
Title
PHPGurukul Small CRM Login Success login.php unserialize deserialization
Summary
A weakness has been identified in PHPGurukul Small CRM 4.0. This impacts the function unserialize of the file /crm/login.php of the component Login Success Handler. This manipulation of the argument geopluginURL causes deserialization. It is possible to initiate the attack remotely. The complexity of an attack is rather high. The exploitability is said to be difficult. The exploit has been made available to the public and could be used for attacks.
SSVC
Exploitation: poc Automatable: no Technical Impact: partial
CISA Coordinator · CISA-ADP (v2.0.3)
Decision recorded 2026-09-16 14:13 UTC
CWE
References
Impacted products
Vendor Product Version
PHPGurukul Small CRM Affected: 4.0
    cpe:2.3:a:phpgurukul:small_crm:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*
Create a notification for this product.
Show details on NVD website

{
  "containers": {
    "adp": [
      {
        "metrics": [
          {
            "other": {
              "content": {
                "id": "CVE-2026-90575",
                "options": [
                  {
                    "Exploitation": "poc"
                  },
                  {
                    "Automatable": "no"
                  },
                  {
                    "Technical Impact": "partial"
                  }
                ],
                "role": "CISA Coordinator",
                "timestamp": "2026-09-16T14:13:32.875464Z",
                "version": "2.0.3"
              },
              "type": "ssvc"
            }
          }
        ],
        "providerMetadata": {
          "dateUpdated": "2026-09-16T14:13:42.873Z",
          "orgId": "134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0",
          "shortName": "CISA-ADP"
        },
        "title": "CISA ADP Vulnrichment"
      }
    ],
    "cna": {
      "affected": [
        {
          "cpes": [
            "cpe:2.3:a:phpgurukul:small_crm:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*"
          ],
          "modules": [
            "Login Success Handler"
          ],
          "product": "Small CRM",
          "vendor": "PHPGurukul",
          "versions": [
            {
              "status": "affected",
              "version": "4.0"
            }
          ]
        }
      ],
      "credits": [
        {
          "lang": "en",
          "type": "reporter",
          "value": "jdexploit (VulDB User)"
        }
      ],
      "descriptions": [
        {
          "lang": "en",
          "value": "A weakness has been identified in PHPGurukul Small CRM 4.0. This impacts the function unserialize of the file /crm/login.php of the component Login Success Handler. This manipulation of the argument geopluginURL causes deserialization. It is possible to initiate the attack remotely. The complexity of an attack is rather high. The exploitability is said to be difficult. The exploit has been made available to the public and could be used for attacks."
        }
      ],
      "metrics": [
        {
          "cvssV4_0": {
            "baseScore": 6.3,
            "baseSeverity": "MEDIUM",
            "vectorString": "CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:H/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:L/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:P",
            "version": "4.0"
          }
        },
        {
          "cvssV3_1": {
            "baseScore": 3.7,
            "baseSeverity": "LOW",
            "vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N/E:P/RL:X/RC:R",
            "version": "3.1"
          }
        },
        {
          "cvssV3_0": {
            "baseScore": 3.7,
            "baseSeverity": "LOW",
            "vectorString": "CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N/E:P/RL:X/RC:R",
            "version": "3.0"
          }
        },
        {
          "cvssV2_0": {
            "baseScore": 2.6,
            "vectorString": "AV:N/AC:H/Au:N/C:N/I:P/A:N/E:POC/RL:ND/RC:UR",
            "version": "2.0"
          }
        }
      ],
      "problemTypes": [
        {
          "descriptions": [
            {
              "cweId": "CWE-502",
              "description": "Deserialization",
              "lang": "en",
              "type": "CWE"
            }
          ]
        },
        {
          "descriptions": [
            {
              "cweId": "CWE-20",
              "description": "Improper Input Validation",
              "lang": "en",
              "type": "CWE"
            }
          ]
        }
      ],
      "providerMetadata": {
        "dateUpdated": "2026-09-13T18:00:13.071Z",
        "orgId": "1af790b2-7ee1-4545-860a-a788eba489b5",
        "shortName": "VulDB"
      },
      "references": [
        {
          "name": "VDB-403160 | PHPGurukul Small CRM Login Success login.php unserialize deserialization",
          "tags": [
            "vdb-entry",
            "technical-description"
          ],
          "url": "https://vuldb.com/vuln/403160"
        },
        {
          "name": "VDB-403160 | CTI Indicators (IOB, IOC, IOA)",
          "tags": [
            "signature",
            "permissions-required"
          ],
          "url": "https://vuldb.com/vuln/403160/cti"
        },
        {
          "name": "CVE-2026-90575 | CVE Analysis and Report",
          "tags": [
            "third-party-advisory"
          ],
          "url": "https://vuldb.com/cve/CVE-2026-90575"
        },
        {
          "name": "Submit #913188 | PHPGurukul Small CRM 4.0 Code Injection",
          "tags": [
            "third-party-advisory"
          ],
          "url": "https://vuldb.com/submit/913188"
        },
        {
          "tags": [
            "exploit"
          ],
          "url": "https://github.com/JdExploit/small-crm-login-unserialize"
        },
        {
          "tags": [
            "product"
          ],
          "url": "https://phpgurukul.com/"
        }
      ],
      "tags": [
        "x_freeware"
      ],
      "timeline": [
        {
          "lang": "en",
          "time": "2026-09-12T00:00:00.000Z",
          "value": "Advisory disclosed"
        },
        {
          "lang": "en",
          "time": "2026-09-12T02:00:00.000Z",
          "value": "VulDB entry created"
        },
        {
          "lang": "en",
          "time": "2026-09-12T18:32:50.000Z",
          "value": "VulDB entry last update"
        }
      ],
      "title": "PHPGurukul Small CRM Login Success login.php unserialize deserialization",
      "x_generator": [
        "VulDB PVTS v202609"
      ]
    }
  },
  "cveMetadata": {
    "assignerOrgId": "1af790b2-7ee1-4545-860a-a788eba489b5",
    "assignerShortName": "VulDB",
    "cveId": "CVE-2026-90575",
    "datePublished": "2026-09-13T18:00:13.071Z",
    "dateReserved": "2026-09-12T16:27:45.733Z",
    "dateUpdated": "2026-09-16T14:13:42.873Z",
    "state": "PUBLISHED"
  },
  "dataType": "CVE_RECORD",
  "dataVersion": "5.2"
}

CVE-2026-90490 (GCVE-0-2026-90490)

Vulnerability from cvelistv5 – Published: 2026-09-13 00:45 – Updated: 2026-09-14 18:15
VLAI
Title
lenve vhr MailReceiver deserialization
Summary
A security flaw has been discovered in lenve vhr 1.0-SNAPSHOT. This issue affects some unknown processing of the component MailReceiver. Performing a manipulation results in deserialization. The attack is possible to be carried out remotely. The exploit has been released to the public and may be used for attacks. The vendor was contacted early about this disclosure but did not respond in any way.
SSVC
Exploitation: poc Automatable: no Technical Impact: partial
CISA Coordinator · CISA-ADP (v2.0.3)
Decision recorded 2026-09-14 18:14 UTC
CWE
References
Impacted products
Vendor Product Version
lenve vhr Affected: 1.0-SNAPSHOT
    cpe:2.3:a:lenve:vhr:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*
Create a notification for this product.
Show details on NVD website

{
  "containers": {
    "adp": [
      {
        "metrics": [
          {
            "other": {
              "content": {
                "id": "CVE-2026-90490",
                "options": [
                  {
                    "Exploitation": "poc"
                  },
                  {
                    "Automatable": "no"
                  },
                  {
                    "Technical Impact": "partial"
                  }
                ],
                "role": "CISA Coordinator",
                "timestamp": "2026-09-14T18:14:17.666387Z",
                "version": "2.0.3"
              },
              "type": "ssvc"
            }
          }
        ],
        "providerMetadata": {
          "dateUpdated": "2026-09-14T18:15:49.280Z",
          "orgId": "134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0",
          "shortName": "CISA-ADP"
        },
        "title": "CISA ADP Vulnrichment"
      }
    ],
    "cna": {
      "affected": [
        {
          "cpes": [
            "cpe:2.3:a:lenve:vhr:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*"
          ],
          "modules": [
            "MailReceiver"
          ],
          "product": "vhr",
          "vendor": "lenve",
          "versions": [
            {
              "status": "affected",
              "version": "1.0-SNAPSHOT"
            }
          ]
        }
      ],
      "credits": [
        {
          "lang": "en",
          "type": "reporter",
          "value": "huluwa888 (VulDB User)"
        },
        {
          "lang": "en",
          "type": "coordinator",
          "value": "VulDB CNA Team"
        }
      ],
      "descriptions": [
        {
          "lang": "en",
          "value": "A security flaw has been discovered in lenve vhr 1.0-SNAPSHOT. This issue affects some unknown processing of the component MailReceiver. Performing a manipulation results in deserialization. The attack is possible to be carried out remotely. The exploit has been released to the public and may be used for attacks. The vendor was contacted early about this disclosure but did not respond in any way."
        }
      ],
      "metrics": [
        {
          "cvssV4_0": {
            "baseScore": 5.3,
            "baseSeverity": "MEDIUM",
            "vectorString": "CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/VA:L/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:P",
            "version": "4.0"
          }
        },
        {
          "cvssV3_1": {
            "baseScore": 6.3,
            "baseSeverity": "MEDIUM",
            "vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L/E:P/RL:X/RC:R",
            "version": "3.1"
          }
        },
        {
          "cvssV3_0": {
            "baseScore": 6.3,
            "baseSeverity": "MEDIUM",
            "vectorString": "CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L/E:P/RL:X/RC:R",
            "version": "3.0"
          }
        },
        {
          "cvssV2_0": {
            "baseScore": 6.5,
            "vectorString": "AV:N/AC:L/Au:S/C:P/I:P/A:P/E:POC/RL:ND/RC:UR",
            "version": "2.0"
          }
        }
      ],
      "problemTypes": [
        {
          "descriptions": [
            {
              "cweId": "CWE-502",
              "description": "Deserialization",
              "lang": "en",
              "type": "CWE"
            }
          ]
        },
        {
          "descriptions": [
            {
              "cweId": "CWE-20",
              "description": "Improper Input Validation",
              "lang": "en",
              "type": "CWE"
            }
          ]
        }
      ],
      "providerMetadata": {
        "dateUpdated": "2026-09-13T00:45:17.567Z",
        "orgId": "1af790b2-7ee1-4545-860a-a788eba489b5",
        "shortName": "VulDB"
      },
      "references": [
        {
          "name": "VDB-403078 | lenve vhr MailReceiver deserialization",
          "tags": [
            "vdb-entry"
          ],
          "url": "https://vuldb.com/vuln/403078"
        },
        {
          "name": "VDB-403078 | CTI Indicators (IOB, IOC)",
          "tags": [
            "signature",
            "permissions-required"
          ],
          "url": "https://vuldb.com/vuln/403078/cti"
        },
        {
          "name": "CVE-2026-90490 | CVE Analysis and Report",
          "tags": [
            "third-party-advisory"
          ],
          "url": "https://vuldb.com/cve/CVE-2026-90490"
        },
        {
          "name": "Submit #888617 | vhr\u4eba\u4e8b\u7ba1\u7406\u7cfb\u7edf 1.0-SNAPSHOT Deserialization",
          "tags": [
            "third-party-advisory"
          ],
          "url": "https://vuldb.com/submit/888617"
        },
        {
          "tags": [
            "exploit"
          ],
          "url": "https://github.com/ArrestX/vhr-advisories/blob/main/poc/VHR-VULN-006/YAKIT-PoC.md"
        }
      ],
      "timeline": [
        {
          "lang": "en",
          "time": "2026-09-12T00:00:00.000Z",
          "value": "Advisory disclosed"
        },
        {
          "lang": "en",
          "time": "2026-09-12T02:00:00.000Z",
          "value": "VulDB entry created"
        },
        {
          "lang": "en",
          "time": "2026-09-12T10:24:28.000Z",
          "value": "VulDB entry last update"
        }
      ],
      "title": "lenve vhr MailReceiver deserialization",
      "x_generator": [
        "VulDB PVTS v202609"
      ]
    }
  },
  "cveMetadata": {
    "assignerOrgId": "1af790b2-7ee1-4545-860a-a788eba489b5",
    "assignerShortName": "VulDB",
    "cveId": "CVE-2026-90490",
    "datePublished": "2026-09-13T00:45:17.567Z",
    "dateReserved": "2026-09-12T08:03:40.929Z",
    "dateUpdated": "2026-09-14T18:15:49.280Z",
    "state": "PUBLISHED"
  },
  "dataType": "CVE_RECORD",
  "dataVersion": "5.2"
}

CVE-2026-88771 (GCVE-0-2026-88771)

Vulnerability from cvelistv5 – Published: 2026-09-27 16:02 – Updated: 2026-09-29 03:55
VLAI
Title
A remote code execution vulnerability exists due to improper input validation, which can allow an unauthenticated attacker to execute arbitrary commands
Summary
Improper input validation vulnerability in Citrix NetScaler ADC and Citrix NetScaler Gateway. This issue affects ADC: before 14.1-73.37, before 13.1-64.23, before 14.1-73.37 FIPS, and before 13.1.37.279 FIPS and NDcPP; Gateway: before 14.1-73.37 and before 13.1-64.23 leading to an unauthenticated attacker to execute arbitrary commands.
SSVC
Exploitation: active Automatable: yes Technical Impact: total
CISA Coordinator · CISA-ADP (v2.0.3)
Decision recorded 2026-09-27 00:00 UTC
CWE
  • CWE-20 - Improper input validation
Impacted products
Vendor Product Version
Citrix NetScaler ADC Affected: 0 , < 14.1-73.37 (patch)
Affected: 0 , < 13.1-64.23 (patch)
Affected: 0 , < 14.1-73.37 FIPS (patch)
Affected: 0 , < 13.1.37.279 FIPS and NDcPP (patch)
Create a notification for this product.
Citrix NetScaler Gateway Affected: 0 , < 14.1-73.37 (patch)
Affected: 0 , < 13.1-64.23 (patch)
Create a notification for this product.
Date Public
2026-09-27 15:51
Show details on NVD website

{
  "containers": {
    "adp": [
      {
        "metrics": [
          {
            "other": {
              "content": {
                "id": "CVE-2026-88771",
                "options": [
                  {
                    "Exploitation": "active"
                  },
                  {
                    "Automatable": "yes"
                  },
                  {
                    "Technical Impact": "total"
                  }
                ],
                "role": "CISA Coordinator",
                "timestamp": "2026-09-27T00:00:00+00:00",
                "version": "2.0.3"
              },
              "type": "ssvc"
            }
          },
          {
            "other": {
              "content": {
                "dateAdded": "2026-09-27",
                "reference": "https://www.cisa.gov/known-exploited-vulnerabilities-catalog?field_cve=CVE-2026-88771"
              },
              "type": "kev"
            }
          }
        ],
        "providerMetadata": {
          "dateUpdated": "2026-09-29T03:55:15.090Z",
          "orgId": "134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0",
          "shortName": "CISA-ADP"
        },
        "references": [
          {
            "tags": [
              "government-resource"
            ],
            "url": "https://www.cisa.gov/known-exploited-vulnerabilities-catalog?field_cve=CVE-2026-88771"
          }
        ],
        "title": "CISA ADP Vulnrichment"
      }
    ],
    "cna": {
      "affected": [
        {
          "defaultStatus": "unaffected",
          "product": "ADC",
          "vendor": "Citrix NetScaler",
          "versions": [
            {
              "lessThan": "14.1-73.37",
              "status": "affected",
              "version": "0",
              "versionType": "patch"
            },
            {
              "lessThan": "13.1-64.23",
              "status": "affected",
              "version": "0",
              "versionType": "patch"
            },
            {
              "lessThan": "14.1-73.37 FIPS",
              "status": "affected",
              "version": "0",
              "versionType": "patch"
            },
            {
              "lessThan": "13.1.37.279 FIPS and NDcPP",
              "status": "affected",
              "version": "0",
              "versionType": "patch"
            }
          ]
        },
        {
          "defaultStatus": "unaffected",
          "product": "Gateway",
          "vendor": "Citrix NetScaler",
          "versions": [
            {
              "lessThan": "14.1-73.37",
              "status": "affected",
              "version": "0",
              "versionType": "patch"
            },
            {
              "lessThan": "13.1-64.23",
              "status": "affected",
              "version": "0",
              "versionType": "patch"
            }
          ]
        }
      ],
      "datePublic": "2026-09-27T15:51:00.000Z",
      "descriptions": [
        {
          "lang": "en",
          "supportingMedia": [
            {
              "base64": false,
              "type": "text/html",
              "value": "Improper input validation vulnerability in Citrix NetScaler ADC and Citrix NetScaler Gateway.\u003cp\u003eThis issue affects ADC: before 14.1-73.37, before 13.1-64.23, before 14.1-73.37 FIPS, and before 13.1.37.279 FIPS and NDcPP; Gateway: before 14.1-73.37 and before 13.1-64.23 leading to\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan\u003ean unauthenticated attacker to execute arbitrary commands.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/p\u003e"
            }
          ],
          "value": "Improper input validation vulnerability in Citrix NetScaler ADC and Citrix NetScaler Gateway.\n\nThis issue affects ADC: before 14.1-73.37, before 13.1-64.23, before 14.1-73.37 FIPS, and before 13.1.37.279 FIPS and NDcPP; Gateway: before 14.1-73.37 and before 13.1-64.23 leading to\u00a0an unauthenticated attacker to execute arbitrary commands."
        }
      ],
      "metrics": [
        {
          "cvssV4_0": {
            "Automatable": "NOT_DEFINED",
            "Recovery": "NOT_DEFINED",
            "Safety": "NOT_DEFINED",
            "attackComplexity": "LOW",
            "attackRequirements": "PRESENT",
            "attackVector": "NETWORK",
            "baseScore": 9.5,
            "baseSeverity": "CRITICAL",
            "exploitMaturity": "NOT_DEFINED",
            "privilegesRequired": "NONE",
            "providerUrgency": "NOT_DEFINED",
            "subAvailabilityImpact": "HIGH",
            "subConfidentialityImpact": "HIGH",
            "subIntegrityImpact": "HIGH",
            "userInteraction": "NONE",
            "valueDensity": "NOT_DEFINED",
            "vectorString": "CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/SC:H/SI:H/SA:H",
            "version": "4.0",
            "vulnAvailabilityImpact": "HIGH",
            "vulnConfidentialityImpact": "HIGH",
            "vulnIntegrityImpact": "HIGH",
            "vulnerabilityResponseEffort": "NOT_DEFINED"
          },
          "format": "CVSS",
          "scenarios": [
            {
              "lang": "en",
              "value": "GENERAL"
            }
          ]
        }
      ],
      "problemTypes": [
        {
          "descriptions": [
            {
              "cweId": "CWE-20",
              "description": "CWE-20 Improper input validation",
              "lang": "en",
              "type": "CWE"
            }
          ]
        }
      ],
      "providerMetadata": {
        "dateUpdated": "2026-09-27T16:02:07.001Z",
        "orgId": "50a63c94-1ea7-4568-8c11-eb79e7c5a2b5",
        "shortName": "NetScaler"
      },
      "references": [
        {
          "url": "https://support.citrix.com/support-home/kbsearch/article?articleNumber=CTX697096"
        }
      ],
      "source": {
        "discovery": "UNKNOWN"
      },
      "title": "A remote code execution vulnerability exists due to improper input validation, which can allow an unauthenticated attacker to execute arbitrary commands",
      "x_generator": {
        "engine": "Vulnogram 1.0.4"
      }
    }
  },
  "cveMetadata": {
    "assignerOrgId": "50a63c94-1ea7-4568-8c11-eb79e7c5a2b5",
    "assignerShortName": "NetScaler",
    "cveId": "CVE-2026-88771",
    "datePublished": "2026-09-27T16:02:07.001Z",
    "dateReserved": "2026-09-10T07:14:57.369Z",
    "dateUpdated": "2026-09-29T03:55:15.090Z",
    "state": "PUBLISHED"
  },
  "dataType": "CVE_RECORD",
  "dataVersion": "5.2"
}

CVE-2026-88261 (GCVE-0-2026-88261)

Vulnerability from cvelistv5 – Published: 2026-09-15 02:13 – Updated: 2026-09-15 17:31
VLAI
Summary
Improper input validation vulnerability in bizwell xClick allows Stored XSS. This issue affects xClick: R2, R3, and R3.1.
SSVC
Exploitation: none Automatable: no Technical Impact: partial
CISA Coordinator · CISA-ADP (v2.0.3)
Decision recorded 2026-09-15 17:18 UTC
CWE
  • CWE-20 - Improper input validation
Assigner
References
Impacted products
Vendor Product Version
bizwell xClick Affected: R2 (custom)
Affected: R3 (custom)
Affected: R3.1 (custom)
Create a notification for this product.
Credits
Show details on NVD website

{
  "containers": {
    "adp": [
      {
        "metrics": [
          {
            "other": {
              "content": {
                "id": "CVE-2026-88261",
                "options": [
                  {
                    "Exploitation": "none"
                  },
                  {
                    "Automatable": "no"
                  },
                  {
                    "Technical Impact": "partial"
                  }
                ],
                "role": "CISA Coordinator",
                "timestamp": "2026-09-15T17:18:30.451625Z",
                "version": "2.0.3"
              },
              "type": "ssvc"
            }
          }
        ],
        "providerMetadata": {
          "dateUpdated": "2026-09-15T17:31:45.976Z",
          "orgId": "134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0",
          "shortName": "CISA-ADP"
        },
        "title": "CISA ADP Vulnrichment"
      }
    ],
    "cna": {
      "affected": [
        {
          "defaultStatus": "unknown",
          "product": "xClick",
          "vendor": "bizwell",
          "versions": [
            {
              "status": "affected",
              "version": "R2",
              "versionType": "custom"
            },
            {
              "status": "affected",
              "version": "R3",
              "versionType": "custom"
            },
            {
              "status": "affected",
              "version": "R3.1",
              "versionType": "custom"
            }
          ]
        }
      ],
      "credits": [
        {
          "lang": "en",
          "type": "finder",
          "value": "jalnik"
        }
      ],
      "descriptions": [
        {
          "lang": "en",
          "supportingMedia": [
            {
              "base64": false,
              "type": "text/html",
              "value": "Improper input validation vulnerability in bizwell xClick allows Stored XSS.\u003cp\u003eThis issue affects xClick: R2, R3, and R3.1.\u003c/p\u003e"
            }
          ],
          "value": "Improper input validation vulnerability in bizwell xClick allows Stored XSS.\n\nThis issue affects xClick: R2, R3, and R3.1."
        }
      ],
      "impacts": [
        {
          "capecId": "CAPEC-592",
          "descriptions": [
            {
              "lang": "en",
              "value": "CAPEC-592 Stored XSS"
            }
          ]
        }
      ],
      "metrics": [
        {
          "cvssV4_0": {
            "Automatable": "NOT_DEFINED",
            "Recovery": "NOT_DEFINED",
            "Safety": "NOT_DEFINED",
            "attackComplexity": "LOW",
            "attackRequirements": "NONE",
            "attackVector": "NETWORK",
            "baseScore": 5.1,
            "baseSeverity": "MEDIUM",
            "exploitMaturity": "NOT_DEFINED",
            "privilegesRequired": "LOW",
            "providerUrgency": "NOT_DEFINED",
            "subAvailabilityImpact": "NONE",
            "subConfidentialityImpact": "NONE",
            "subIntegrityImpact": "NONE",
            "userInteraction": "PASSIVE",
            "valueDensity": "NOT_DEFINED",
            "vectorString": "CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:P/VC:L/VI:N/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N",
            "version": "4.0",
            "vulnAvailabilityImpact": "NONE",
            "vulnConfidentialityImpact": "LOW",
            "vulnIntegrityImpact": "NONE",
            "vulnerabilityResponseEffort": "NOT_DEFINED"
          },
          "format": "CVSS",
          "scenarios": [
            {
              "lang": "en",
              "value": "GENERAL"
            }
          ]
        }
      ],
      "problemTypes": [
        {
          "descriptions": [
            {
              "cweId": "CWE-20",
              "description": "CWE-20 Improper input validation",
              "lang": "en",
              "type": "CWE"
            }
          ]
        }
      ],
      "providerMetadata": {
        "dateUpdated": "2026-09-15T05:34:08.191Z",
        "orgId": "09832df1-09c1-45b4-8a85-16c601d30feb",
        "shortName": "FSI"
      },
      "references": [
        {
          "url": "https://www.bizwell.net/solutions/groupware"
        }
      ],
      "source": {
        "discovery": "UNKNOWN"
      },
      "x_generator": {
        "engine": "Vulnogram 1.0.5"
      }
    }
  },
  "cveMetadata": {
    "assignerOrgId": "09832df1-09c1-45b4-8a85-16c601d30feb",
    "assignerShortName": "FSI",
    "cveId": "CVE-2026-88261",
    "datePublished": "2026-09-15T02:13:55.729Z",
    "dateReserved": "2026-09-10T00:46:51.887Z",
    "dateUpdated": "2026-09-15T17:31:45.976Z",
    "state": "PUBLISHED"
  },
  "dataType": "CVE_RECORD",
  "dataVersion": "5.2"
}

CVE-2026-88064 (GCVE-0-2026-88064)

Vulnerability from cvelistv5 – Published: 2026-09-16 14:13 – Updated: 2026-09-16 15:46
VLAI
Title
Backstage: Improper input validation in TechDocs MkDocs configuration
Summary
Backstage is an open framework for building developer portals. Prior to 1.14.6 and from 1.15.0 until 1.15.4, the @backstage/plugin-techdocs-node package insufficiently validates mkdocs.yml supplied by an authenticated user who can register or modify a TechDocs source. Unsafe Python YAML tags, markdown_extensions names and configuration, theme options, and extra_templates values can reach the documentation generator and cause unintended code execution. The resulting impact is limited to the files, credentials, network access, and other resources available to the TechDocs backend or build container. This issue is fixed in versions 1.14.6 and 1.15.4.
SSVC
Exploitation: none Automatable: no Technical Impact: total
CISA Coordinator · CISA-ADP (v2.0.3)
Decision recorded 2026-09-16 15:46 UTC
CWE
  • CWE-20 - Improper Input Validation
  • CWE-1336 - Improper Neutralization of Special Elements Used in a Template Engine
Impacted products
Vendor Product Version
backstage backstage Affected: < 1.14.6
Affected: >= 1.15.0, < 1.15.4
Create a notification for this product.
Show details on NVD website

{
  "containers": {
    "adp": [
      {
        "metrics": [
          {
            "other": {
              "content": {
                "id": "CVE-2026-88064",
                "options": [
                  {
                    "Exploitation": "none"
                  },
                  {
                    "Automatable": "no"
                  },
                  {
                    "Technical Impact": "total"
                  }
                ],
                "role": "CISA Coordinator",
                "timestamp": "2026-09-16T15:46:28.697895Z",
                "version": "2.0.3"
              },
              "type": "ssvc"
            }
          }
        ],
        "providerMetadata": {
          "dateUpdated": "2026-09-16T15:46:46.830Z",
          "orgId": "134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0",
          "shortName": "CISA-ADP"
        },
        "title": "CISA ADP Vulnrichment"
      }
    ],
    "cna": {
      "affected": [
        {
          "product": "backstage",
          "vendor": "backstage",
          "versions": [
            {
              "status": "affected",
              "version": "\u003c 1.14.6"
            },
            {
              "status": "affected",
              "version": "\u003e= 1.15.0, \u003c 1.15.4"
            }
          ]
        }
      ],
      "descriptions": [
        {
          "lang": "en",
          "value": "Backstage is an open framework for building developer portals. Prior to 1.14.6 and from 1.15.0 until 1.15.4, the @backstage/plugin-techdocs-node package insufficiently validates mkdocs.yml supplied by an authenticated user who can register or modify a TechDocs source. Unsafe Python YAML tags, markdown_extensions names and configuration, theme options, and extra_templates values can reach the documentation generator and cause unintended code execution. The resulting impact is limited to the files, credentials, network access, and other resources available to the TechDocs backend or build container. This issue is fixed in versions 1.14.6 and 1.15.4."
        }
      ],
      "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-20",
              "description": "CWE-20: Improper Input Validation",
              "lang": "en",
              "type": "CWE"
            }
          ]
        },
        {
          "descriptions": [
            {
              "cweId": "CWE-1336",
              "description": "CWE-1336: Improper Neutralization of Special Elements Used in a Template Engine",
              "lang": "en",
              "type": "CWE"
            }
          ]
        }
      ],
      "providerMetadata": {
        "dateUpdated": "2026-09-16T14:13:26.950Z",
        "orgId": "a0819718-46f1-4df5-94e2-005712e83aaa",
        "shortName": "GitHub_M"
      },
      "references": [
        {
          "name": "https://github.com/backstage/backstage/security/advisories/GHSA-292q-8mf5-h6g3",
          "tags": [
            "x_refsource_CONFIRM"
          ],
          "url": "https://github.com/backstage/backstage/security/advisories/GHSA-292q-8mf5-h6g3"
        },
        {
          "name": "https://github.com/backstage/backstage/commit/017ace52d9b327ededc6704cf17799c875ae0f29",
          "tags": [
            "x_refsource_MISC"
          ],
          "url": "https://github.com/backstage/backstage/commit/017ace52d9b327ededc6704cf17799c875ae0f29"
        },
        {
          "name": "https://github.com/backstage/backstage/commit/02cd7cdbb18b687446277b5602adaee7f1d53cbb",
          "tags": [
            "x_refsource_MISC"
          ],
          "url": "https://github.com/backstage/backstage/commit/02cd7cdbb18b687446277b5602adaee7f1d53cbb"
        },
        {
          "name": "https://github.com/backstage/backstage/commit/25125ee727a3de3418a8fa6a9e458cd5b73ecf26",
          "tags": [
            "x_refsource_MISC"
          ],
          "url": "https://github.com/backstage/backstage/commit/25125ee727a3de3418a8fa6a9e458cd5b73ecf26"
        },
        {
          "name": "https://github.com/backstage/backstage/commit/a7d995f11a5d27f0efbdbe8bb6c21b06988c79c9",
          "tags": [
            "x_refsource_MISC"
          ],
          "url": "https://github.com/backstage/backstage/commit/a7d995f11a5d27f0efbdbe8bb6c21b06988c79c9"
        },
        {
          "name": "https://github.com/backstage/backstage/commit/a900a9953c8f7ad3ba1906d1d257725a9996cc9d",
          "tags": [
            "x_refsource_MISC"
          ],
          "url": "https://github.com/backstage/backstage/commit/a900a9953c8f7ad3ba1906d1d257725a9996cc9d"
        },
        {
          "name": "https://github.com/backstage/backstage/releases/tag/v1.50.5",
          "tags": [
            "x_refsource_MISC"
          ],
          "url": "https://github.com/backstage/backstage/releases/tag/v1.50.5"
        },
        {
          "name": "https://github.com/backstage/backstage/releases/tag/v1.54.6",
          "tags": [
            "x_refsource_MISC"
          ],
          "url": "https://github.com/backstage/backstage/releases/tag/v1.54.6"
        }
      ],
      "source": {
        "advisory": "GHSA-292q-8mf5-h6g3",
        "discovery": "UNKNOWN"
      },
      "title": "Backstage: Improper input validation in TechDocs MkDocs configuration"
    }
  },
  "cveMetadata": {
    "assignerOrgId": "a0819718-46f1-4df5-94e2-005712e83aaa",
    "assignerShortName": "GitHub_M",
    "cveId": "CVE-2026-88064",
    "datePublished": "2026-09-16T14:13:26.950Z",
    "dateReserved": "2026-09-09T21:22:45.434Z",
    "dateUpdated": "2026-09-16T15:46:46.830Z",
    "state": "PUBLISHED"
  },
  "dataType": "CVE_RECORD",
  "dataVersion": "5.2"
}

CVE-2026-87083 (GCVE-0-2026-87083)

Vulnerability from cvelistv5 – Published: 2026-09-09 01:15 – Updated: 2026-09-09 15:38 X_Open Source
VLAI
Title
tile-ai tilelang Kernel Cache kernel_cache.py KernelCache._load_kernel_from_disk deserialization
Summary
A weakness has been identified in tile-ai tilelang up to 0.1.14. This impacts the function KernelCache._load_kernel_from_disk of the file tilelang/cache/kernel_cache.py of the component Kernel Cache. Executing a manipulation can lead to deserialization. The attack may be performed from remote. This patch is called 11ec2397fe942e8b422d026af4a03d6e0a55ae6c. Applying a patch is advised to resolve this issue. Based on the release information, the fix has not been included in any official release yet.
SSVC
Exploitation: none Automatable: no Technical Impact: partial
CISA Coordinator · CISA-ADP (v2.0.3)
Decision recorded 2026-09-09 15:37 UTC
CWE
Impacted products
Vendor Product Version
tile-ai tilelang Affected: 0.1.0
Affected: 0.1.1
Affected: 0.1.2
Affected: 0.1.3
Affected: 0.1.4
Affected: 0.1.5
Affected: 0.1.6
Affected: 0.1.7
Affected: 0.1.8
Affected: 0.1.9
Affected: 0.1.10
Affected: 0.1.11
Affected: 0.1.12
Affected: 0.1.13
Affected: 0.1.14
    cpe:2.3:a:tile-ai:tilelang:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*
Create a notification for this product.
Show details on NVD website

{
  "containers": {
    "adp": [
      {
        "metrics": [
          {
            "other": {
              "content": {
                "id": "CVE-2026-87083",
                "options": [
                  {
                    "Exploitation": "none"
                  },
                  {
                    "Automatable": "no"
                  },
                  {
                    "Technical Impact": "partial"
                  }
                ],
                "role": "CISA Coordinator",
                "timestamp": "2026-09-09T15:37:57.801940Z",
                "version": "2.0.3"
              },
              "type": "ssvc"
            }
          }
        ],
        "providerMetadata": {
          "dateUpdated": "2026-09-09T15:38:14.232Z",
          "orgId": "134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0",
          "shortName": "CISA-ADP"
        },
        "title": "CISA ADP Vulnrichment"
      }
    ],
    "cna": {
      "affected": [
        {
          "cpes": [
            "cpe:2.3:a:tile-ai:tilelang:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*"
          ],
          "modules": [
            "Kernel Cache"
          ],
          "product": "tilelang",
          "vendor": "tile-ai",
          "versions": [
            {
              "status": "affected",
              "version": "0.1.0"
            },
            {
              "status": "affected",
              "version": "0.1.1"
            },
            {
              "status": "affected",
              "version": "0.1.2"
            },
            {
              "status": "affected",
              "version": "0.1.3"
            },
            {
              "status": "affected",
              "version": "0.1.4"
            },
            {
              "status": "affected",
              "version": "0.1.5"
            },
            {
              "status": "affected",
              "version": "0.1.6"
            },
            {
              "status": "affected",
              "version": "0.1.7"
            },
            {
              "status": "affected",
              "version": "0.1.8"
            },
            {
              "status": "affected",
              "version": "0.1.9"
            },
            {
              "status": "affected",
              "version": "0.1.10"
            },
            {
              "status": "affected",
              "version": "0.1.11"
            },
            {
              "status": "affected",
              "version": "0.1.12"
            },
            {
              "status": "affected",
              "version": "0.1.13"
            },
            {
              "status": "affected",
              "version": "0.1.14"
            }
          ]
        }
      ],
      "credits": [
        {
          "lang": "en",
          "type": "reporter",
          "value": "Customeres (VulDB User)"
        },
        {
          "lang": "en",
          "type": "coordinator",
          "value": "VulDB CNA Team"
        }
      ],
      "descriptions": [
        {
          "lang": "en",
          "value": "A weakness has been identified in tile-ai tilelang up to 0.1.14. This impacts the function KernelCache._load_kernel_from_disk of the file tilelang/cache/kernel_cache.py of the component Kernel Cache. Executing a manipulation can lead to deserialization. The attack may be performed from remote. This patch is called 11ec2397fe942e8b422d026af4a03d6e0a55ae6c. Applying a patch is advised to resolve this issue. Based on the release information, the fix has not been included in any official release yet."
        }
      ],
      "metrics": [
        {
          "cvssV4_0": {
            "baseScore": 5.1,
            "baseSeverity": "MEDIUM",
            "vectorString": "CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:P/VC:L/VI:L/VA:L/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:X",
            "version": "4.0"
          }
        },
        {
          "cvssV3_1": {
            "baseScore": 5.5,
            "baseSeverity": "MEDIUM",
            "vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:R/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L/E:X/RL:O/RC:C",
            "version": "3.1"
          }
        },
        {
          "cvssV3_0": {
            "baseScore": 5.5,
            "baseSeverity": "MEDIUM",
            "vectorString": "CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:R/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L/E:X/RL:O/RC:C",
            "version": "3.0"
          }
        },
        {
          "cvssV2_0": {
            "baseScore": 6.5,
            "vectorString": "AV:N/AC:L/Au:S/C:P/I:P/A:P/E:ND/RL:OF/RC:C",
            "version": "2.0"
          }
        }
      ],
      "problemTypes": [
        {
          "descriptions": [
            {
              "cweId": "CWE-502",
              "description": "Deserialization",
              "lang": "en",
              "type": "CWE"
            }
          ]
        },
        {
          "descriptions": [
            {
              "cweId": "CWE-20",
              "description": "Improper Input Validation",
              "lang": "en",
              "type": "CWE"
            }
          ]
        }
      ],
      "providerMetadata": {
        "dateUpdated": "2026-09-09T01:15:11.418Z",
        "orgId": "1af790b2-7ee1-4545-860a-a788eba489b5",
        "shortName": "VulDB"
      },
      "references": [
        {
          "name": "VDB-400289 | tile-ai tilelang Kernel Cache kernel_cache.py KernelCache._load_kernel_from_disk deserialization",
          "tags": [
            "vdb-entry",
            "technical-description"
          ],
          "url": "https://vuldb.com/vuln/400289"
        },
        {
          "name": "VDB-400289 | CTI Indicators (IOB, IOC, IOA)",
          "tags": [
            "signature",
            "permissions-required"
          ],
          "url": "https://vuldb.com/vuln/400289/cti"
        },
        {
          "name": "CVE-2026-87083 | CVE Analysis and Report",
          "tags": [
            "third-party-advisory"
          ],
          "url": "https://vuldb.com/cve/CVE-2026-87083"
        },
        {
          "name": "Submit #911126 | tile-ai tilelang main Remote Code Executio",
          "tags": [
            "third-party-advisory"
          ],
          "url": "https://vuldb.com/submit/911126"
        },
        {
          "tags": [
            "issue-tracking"
          ],
          "url": "https://github.com/tile-ai/tilelang/issues/2817"
        },
        {
          "tags": [
            "issue-tracking",
            "patch"
          ],
          "url": "https://github.com/tile-ai/tilelang/pull/3143"
        },
        {
          "tags": [
            "patch"
          ],
          "url": "https://github.com/tile-ai/tilelang/commit/11ec2397fe942e8b422d026af4a03d6e0a55ae6c"
        },
        {
          "tags": [
            "product"
          ],
          "url": "https://github.com/tile-ai/tilelang/"
        }
      ],
      "tags": [
        "x_open-source"
      ],
      "timeline": [
        {
          "lang": "en",
          "time": "2026-09-08T00:00:00.000Z",
          "value": "Advisory disclosed"
        },
        {
          "lang": "en",
          "time": "2026-09-08T02:00:00.000Z",
          "value": "VulDB entry created"
        },
        {
          "lang": "en",
          "time": "2026-09-08T21:29:04.000Z",
          "value": "VulDB entry last update"
        }
      ],
      "title": "tile-ai tilelang Kernel Cache kernel_cache.py KernelCache._load_kernel_from_disk deserialization",
      "x_generator": [
        "VulDB PVTS v202609"
      ]
    }
  },
  "cveMetadata": {
    "assignerOrgId": "1af790b2-7ee1-4545-860a-a788eba489b5",
    "assignerShortName": "VulDB",
    "cveId": "CVE-2026-87083",
    "datePublished": "2026-09-09T01:15:11.418Z",
    "dateReserved": "2026-09-08T19:23:59.560Z",
    "dateUpdated": "2026-09-09T15:38:14.232Z",
    "state": "PUBLISHED"
  },
  "dataType": "CVE_RECORD",
  "dataVersion": "5.2"
}

CVE-2026-86768 (GCVE-0-2026-86768)

Vulnerability from cvelistv5 – Published: 2026-09-09 13:32 – Updated: 2026-09-09 14:31
VLAI
Title
Snipe-IT before 8.7.0 Improper Input Validation via API Checkout
Summary
Snipe-IT before 8.7.0 fails to validate soft-deleted state in API checkout endpoints, allowing authenticated users with checkout permissions to bind live inventory to trashed targets. Attackers can submit POST requests to hardware, component, or consumable checkout endpoints with soft-deleted user, asset, or location IDs to create orphaned references that corrupt the asset ledger and audit trails.
SSVC
Exploitation: poc Automatable: no Technical Impact: partial
CISA Coordinator · CISA-ADP (v2.0.3)
Decision recorded 2026-09-09 14:31 UTC
CWE
  • CWE-20 - Improper Input Validation
References
Impacted products
Vendor Product Version
grokability snipe-it Affected: 8.6.3 , < 8.7.0 (semver)
Unaffected: 8.7.0 (semver)
    cpe:2.3:a:snipeitapp:snipe-it:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*
Create a notification for this product.
Date Public
2026-08-24 00:00
Credits
Show details on NVD website

{
  "containers": {
    "adp": [
      {
        "metrics": [
          {
            "other": {
              "content": {
                "id": "CVE-2026-86768",
                "options": [
                  {
                    "Exploitation": "poc"
                  },
                  {
                    "Automatable": "no"
                  },
                  {
                    "Technical Impact": "partial"
                  }
                ],
                "role": "CISA Coordinator",
                "timestamp": "2026-09-09T14:31:10.631933Z",
                "version": "2.0.3"
              },
              "type": "ssvc"
            }
          }
        ],
        "providerMetadata": {
          "dateUpdated": "2026-09-09T14:31:38.683Z",
          "orgId": "134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0",
          "shortName": "CISA-ADP"
        },
        "references": [
          {
            "tags": [
              "exploit"
            ],
            "url": "https://github.com/grokability/snipe-it/security/advisories/GHSA-qffp-xpqv-gqr4"
          }
        ],
        "title": "CISA ADP Vulnrichment"
      }
    ],
    "cna": {
      "affected": [
        {
          "defaultStatus": "unaffected",
          "product": "snipe-it",
          "vendor": "grokability",
          "versions": [
            {
              "lessThan": "8.7.0",
              "status": "affected",
              "version": "8.6.3",
              "versionType": "semver"
            },
            {
              "status": "unaffected",
              "version": "8.7.0",
              "versionType": "semver"
            }
          ]
        }
      ],
      "cpeApplicability": [
        {
          "nodes": [
            {
              "cpeMatch": [
                {
                  "criteria": "cpe:2.3:a:snipeitapp:snipe-it:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*",
                  "versionEndExcluding": "8.7.0",
                  "versionStartIncluding": "8.6.3",
                  "vulnerable": true
                }
              ],
              "negate": false,
              "operator": "OR"
            }
          ]
        }
      ],
      "credits": [
        {
          "lang": "en",
          "type": "reporter",
          "value": "5h1kh4r"
        }
      ],
      "datePublic": "2026-08-24T00:00:00.000Z",
      "descriptions": [
        {
          "lang": "en",
          "value": "Snipe-IT before 8.7.0 fails to validate soft-deleted state in API checkout endpoints, allowing authenticated users with checkout permissions to bind live inventory to trashed targets. Attackers can submit POST requests to hardware, component, or consumable checkout endpoints with soft-deleted user, asset, or location IDs to create orphaned references that corrupt the asset ledger and audit trails."
        }
      ],
      "metrics": [
        {
          "cvssV4_0": {
            "attackComplexity": "LOW",
            "attackRequirements": "NONE",
            "attackVector": "NETWORK",
            "baseScore": 5.3,
            "baseSeverity": "MEDIUM",
            "privilegesRequired": "LOW",
            "subAvailabilityImpact": "NONE",
            "subConfidentialityImpact": "NONE",
            "subIntegrityImpact": "NONE",
            "userInteraction": "NONE",
            "vectorString": "CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:N/VI:L/VA:L/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N",
            "version": "4.0",
            "vulnAvailabilityImpact": "LOW",
            "vulnConfidentialityImpact": "NONE",
            "vulnIntegrityImpact": "LOW"
          },
          "format": "CVSS"
        },
        {
          "cvssV3_1": {
            "attackComplexity": "LOW",
            "attackVector": "NETWORK",
            "availabilityImpact": "LOW",
            "baseScore": 5.4,
            "baseSeverity": "MEDIUM",
            "confidentialityImpact": "NONE",
            "integrityImpact": "LOW",
            "privilegesRequired": "LOW",
            "scope": "UNCHANGED",
            "userInteraction": "NONE",
            "vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:L",
            "version": "3.1"
          },
          "format": "CVSS"
        }
      ],
      "problemTypes": [
        {
          "descriptions": [
            {
              "cweId": "CWE-20",
              "description": "Improper Input Validation",
              "lang": "en",
              "type": "CWE"
            }
          ]
        }
      ],
      "providerMetadata": {
        "dateUpdated": "2026-09-09T13:32:25.880Z",
        "orgId": "83251b91-4cc7-4094-a5c7-464a1b83ea10",
        "shortName": "VulnCheck"
      },
      "references": [
        {
          "name": "GitHub Security Advisory (GHSA-qffp-xpqv-gqr4)",
          "tags": [
            "vendor-advisory"
          ],
          "url": "https://github.com/grokability/snipe-it/security/advisories/GHSA-qffp-xpqv-gqr4"
        },
        {
          "name": "VulnCheck Advisory: Snipe-IT before 8.7.0 Improper Input Validation via API Checkout",
          "tags": [
            "third-party-advisory"
          ],
          "url": "https://www.vulncheck.com/advisories/snipe-it-before-8.7.0-improper-input-validation-via-api-checkout"
        }
      ],
      "title": "Snipe-IT before 8.7.0 Improper Input Validation via API Checkout",
      "x_generator": {
        "engine": "vulncheck-endgame"
      }
    }
  },
  "cveMetadata": {
    "assignerOrgId": "83251b91-4cc7-4094-a5c7-464a1b83ea10",
    "assignerShortName": "VulnCheck",
    "cveId": "CVE-2026-86768",
    "datePublished": "2026-09-09T13:32:25.880Z",
    "dateReserved": "2026-09-08T11:35:02.617Z",
    "dateUpdated": "2026-09-09T14:31:38.683Z",
    "state": "PUBLISHED"
  },
  "dataType": "CVE_RECORD",
  "dataVersion": "5.2"
}

Mitigation
Architecture and Design

Strategy: Attack Surface Reduction

Consider using language-theoretic security (LangSec) techniques that characterize inputs using a formal language and build "recognizers" for that language. This effectively requires parsing to be a distinct layer that effectively enforces a boundary between raw input and internal data representations, instead of allowing parser code to be scattered throughout the program, where it could be subject to errors or inconsistencies that create weaknesses. [REF-1109] [REF-1110] [REF-1111]

Mitigation MIT-7
Architecture and Design

Strategy: Libraries or Frameworks

Use an input validation framework such as Struts or the OWASP ESAPI Validation API. Note that using a framework does not automatically address all input validation problems; be mindful of weaknesses that could arise from misusing the framework itself (CWE-1173).

Mitigation MIT-6
Architecture and Design Implementation

Strategy: Attack Surface Reduction

Understand all the potential areas where untrusted inputs can enter the product, including but not limited to: 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-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.
Mitigation
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.
  • Even though client-side checks provide minimal benefits with respect to server-side security, they are still useful. First, they can support intrusion detection. If the server receives input that should have been rejected by the client, then it may be an indication of an attack. Second, client-side error-checking can provide helpful feedback to the user about the expectations for valid input. Third, there may be a reduction in server-side processing time for accidental input errors, although this is typically a small savings.
Mitigation
Implementation

When your application combines data from multiple sources, perform the validation after the sources have been combined. The individual data elements may pass the validation step but violate the intended restrictions after they have been combined.

Mitigation MIT-35
Implementation

Be especially careful to validate all input when invoking code that crosses language boundaries, such as from an interpreted language to native code. This could create an unexpected interaction between the language boundaries. Ensure that you are not violating any of the expectations of the language with which you are interfacing. For example, even though Java may not be susceptible to buffer overflows, providing a large argument in a call to native code might trigger an overflow.

Mitigation
Implementation

Directly convert your input type into the expected data type, such as using a conversion function that translates a string into a number. After converting to the expected data type, ensure that the input's values fall within the expected range of allowable values and that multi-field consistencies are maintained.

Mitigation
Implementation
  • Inputs should be decoded and canonicalized to the application's current internal representation before being validated (CWE-180, CWE-181). Make sure that your application does not inadvertently decode the same input twice (CWE-174). Such errors could be used to bypass allowlist schemes by introducing dangerous inputs after they have been checked. Use libraries such as the OWASP ESAPI Canonicalization control.
  • Consider performing repeated canonicalization until your input does not change any more. This will avoid double-decoding and similar scenarios, but it might inadvertently modify inputs that are allowed to contain properly-encoded dangerous content.
Mitigation
Implementation

When exchanging data between components, ensure that both components are using the same character encoding. Ensure that the proper encoding is applied at each interface. Explicitly set the encoding you are using whenever the protocol allows you to do so.

CAPEC-10: Buffer Overflow via Environment Variables

This attack pattern involves causing a buffer overflow through manipulation of environment variables. Once the adversary finds that they can modify an environment variable, they may try to overflow associated buffers. This attack leverages implicit trust often placed in environment variables.

CAPEC-101: Server Side Include (SSI) Injection

An attacker can use Server Side Include (SSI) Injection to send code to a web application that then gets executed by the web server. Doing so enables the attacker to achieve similar results to Cross Site Scripting, viz., arbitrary code execution and information disclosure, albeit on a more limited scale, since the SSI directives are nowhere near as powerful as a full-fledged scripting language. Nonetheless, the attacker can conveniently gain access to sensitive files, such as password files, and execute shell commands.

CAPEC-104: Cross Zone Scripting

An attacker is able to cause a victim to load content into their web-browser that bypasses security zone controls and gain access to increased privileges to execute scripting code or other web objects such as unsigned ActiveX controls or applets. This is a privilege elevation attack targeted at zone-based web-browser security.

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-109: Object Relational Mapping Injection

An attacker leverages a weakness present in the database access layer code generated with an Object Relational Mapping (ORM) tool or a weakness in the way that a developer used a persistence framework to inject their own SQL commands to be executed against the underlying database. The attack here is similar to plain SQL injection, except that the application does not use JDBC to directly talk to the database, but instead it uses a data access layer generated by an ORM tool or framework (e.g. Hibernate). While most of the time code generated by an ORM tool contains safe access methods that are immune to SQL injection, sometimes either due to some weakness in the generated code or due to the fact that the developer failed to use the generated access methods properly, SQL injection is still possible.

CAPEC-110: SQL Injection through SOAP Parameter Tampering

An attacker modifies the parameters of the SOAP message that is sent from the service consumer to the service provider to initiate a SQL injection attack. On the service provider side, the SOAP message is parsed and parameters are not properly validated before being used to access a database in a way that does not use parameter binding, thus enabling the attacker to control the structure of the executed SQL query. This pattern describes a SQL injection attack with the delivery mechanism being a SOAP message.

CAPEC-120: Double Encoding

The adversary utilizes a repeating of the encoding process for a set of characters (that is, character encoding a character encoding of a character) to obfuscate the payload of a particular request. This may allow the adversary to bypass filters that attempt to detect illegal characters or strings, such as those that might be used in traversal or injection attacks. Filters may be able to catch illegal encoded strings, but may not catch doubly encoded strings. For example, a dot (.), often used in path traversal attacks and therefore often blocked by filters, could be URL encoded as %2E. However, many filters recognize this encoding and would still block the request. In a double encoding, the % in the above URL encoding would be encoded again as %25, resulting in %252E which some filters might not catch, but which could still be interpreted as a dot (.) by interpreters on the target.

CAPEC-13: Subverting Environment Variable Values

The adversary directly or indirectly modifies environment variables used by or controlling the target software. The adversary's goal is to cause the target software to deviate from its expected operation in a manner that benefits the adversary.

CAPEC-135: Format String Injection

An adversary includes formatting characters in a string input field on the target application. Most applications assume that users will provide static text and may respond unpredictably to the presence of formatting character. For example, in certain functions of the C programming languages such as printf, the formatting character %s will print the contents of a memory location expecting this location to identify a string and the formatting character %n prints the number of DWORD written in the memory. An adversary can use this to read or write to memory locations or files, or simply to manipulate the value of the resulting text in unexpected ways. Reading or writing memory may result in program crashes and writing memory could result in the execution of arbitrary code if the adversary can write to the program stack.

CAPEC-136: LDAP Injection

An attacker manipulates or crafts an LDAP query for the purpose of undermining the security of the target. Some applications use user input to create LDAP queries that are processed by an LDAP server. For example, a user might provide their username during authentication and the username might be inserted in an LDAP query during the authentication process. An attacker could use this input to inject additional commands into an LDAP query that could disclose sensitive information. For example, entering a * in the aforementioned query might return information about all users on the system. This attack is very similar to an SQL injection attack in that it manipulates a query to gather additional information or coerce a particular return value.

CAPEC-14: Client-side Injection-induced Buffer Overflow

This type of attack exploits a buffer overflow vulnerability in targeted client software through injection of malicious content from a custom-built hostile service. This hostile service is created to deliver the correct content to the client software. For example, if the client-side application is a browser, the service will host a webpage that the browser loads.

CAPEC-153: Input Data Manipulation

An attacker exploits a weakness in input validation by controlling the format, structure, and composition of data to an input-processing interface. By supplying input of a non-standard or unexpected form an attacker can adversely impact the security of the target.

CAPEC-182: Flash Injection

An attacker tricks a victim to execute malicious flash content that executes commands or makes flash calls specified by the attacker. One example of this attack is cross-site flashing, an attacker controlled parameter to a reference call loads from content specified by the attacker.

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-22: Exploiting Trust in Client

An attack of this type exploits vulnerabilities in client/server communication channel authentication and data integrity. It leverages the implicit trust a server places in the client, or more importantly, that which the server believes is the client. An attacker executes this type of attack by communicating directly with the server where the server believes it is communicating only with a valid client. There are numerous variations of this type of attack.

CAPEC-23: File Content Injection

An adversary poisons files with a malicious payload (targeting the file systems accessible by the target software), which may be passed through by standard channels such as via email, and standard web content like PDF and multimedia files. The adversary exploits known vulnerabilities or handling routines in the target processes, in order to exploit the host's trust in executing remote content, including binary files.

CAPEC-230: Serialized Data with Nested Payloads

Applications often need to transform data in and out of a data format (e.g., XML and YAML) by using a parser. It may be possible for an adversary to inject data that may have an adverse effect on the parser when it is being processed. Many data format languages allow the definition of macro-like structures that can be used to simplify the creation of complex structures. By nesting these structures, causing the data to be repeatedly substituted, an adversary can cause the parser to consume more resources while processing, causing excessive memory consumption and CPU utilization.

CAPEC-231: Oversized Serialized Data Payloads

An adversary injects oversized serialized data payloads into a parser during data processing to produce adverse effects upon the parser such as exhausting system resources and arbitrary code execution.

CAPEC-24: Filter Failure through Buffer Overflow

In this attack, the idea is to cause an active filter to fail by causing an oversized transaction. An attacker may try to feed overly long input strings to the program in an attempt to overwhelm the filter (by causing a buffer overflow) and hoping that the filter does not fail securely (i.e. the user input is let into the system unfiltered).

CAPEC-250: XML Injection

An attacker utilizes crafted XML user-controllable input to probe, attack, and inject data into the XML database, using techniques similar to SQL injection. The user-controllable input can allow for unauthorized viewing of data, bypassing authentication or the front-end application for direct XML database access, and possibly altering database information.

CAPEC-261: Fuzzing for garnering other adjacent user/sensitive data

An adversary who is authorized to send queries to a target sends variants of expected queries in the hope that these modified queries might return information (directly or indirectly through error logs) beyond what the expected set of queries should provide.

CAPEC-267: Leverage Alternate Encoding

An adversary leverages the possibility to encode potentially harmful input or content used by applications such that the applications are ineffective at validating this encoding standard.

CAPEC-28: Fuzzing

In this attack pattern, the adversary leverages fuzzing to try to identify weaknesses in the system. Fuzzing is a software security and functionality testing method that feeds randomly constructed input to the system and looks for an indication that a failure in response to that input has occurred. Fuzzing treats the system as a black box and is totally free from any preconceptions or assumptions about the system. Fuzzing can help an attacker discover certain assumptions made about user input in the system. Fuzzing gives an attacker a quick way of potentially uncovering some of these assumptions despite not necessarily knowing anything about the internals of the system. These assumptions can then be turned against the system by specially crafting user input that may allow an attacker to achieve their goals.

CAPEC-3: Using Leading 'Ghost' Character Sequences to Bypass Input Filters

Some APIs will strip certain leading characters from a string of parameters. An adversary can intentionally introduce leading "ghost" characters (extra characters that don't affect the validity of the request at the API layer) that enable the input to pass the filters and therefore process the adversary's input. This occurs when the targeted API will accept input data in several syntactic forms and interpret it in the equivalent semantic way, while the filter does not take into account the full spectrum of the syntactic forms acceptable to the targeted API.

CAPEC-31: Accessing/Intercepting/Modifying HTTP Cookies

This attack relies on the use of HTTP Cookies to store credentials, state information and other critical data on client systems. There are several different forms of this attack. The first form of this attack involves accessing HTTP Cookies to mine for potentially sensitive data contained therein. The second form involves intercepting this data as it is transmitted from client to server. This intercepted information is then used by the adversary to impersonate the remote user/session. The third form is when the cookie's content is modified by the adversary before it is sent back to the server. Here the adversary seeks to convince the target server to operate on this falsified information.

CAPEC-42: MIME Conversion

An attacker exploits a weakness in the MIME conversion routine to cause a buffer overflow and gain control over the mail server machine. The MIME system is designed to allow various different information formats to be interpreted and sent via e-mail. Attack points exist when data are converted to MIME compatible format and back.

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-45: Buffer Overflow via Symbolic Links

This type of attack leverages the use of symbolic links to cause buffer overflows. An adversary can try to create or manipulate a symbolic link file such that its contents result in out of bounds data. When the target software processes the symbolic link file, it could potentially overflow internal buffers with insufficient bounds checking.

CAPEC-46: Overflow Variables and Tags

This type of attack leverages the use of tags or variables from a formatted configuration data to cause buffer overflow. The adversary crafts a malicious HTML page or configuration file that includes oversized strings, thus causing an overflow.

CAPEC-47: Buffer Overflow via Parameter Expansion

In this attack, the target software is given input that the adversary knows will be modified and expanded in size during processing. This attack relies on the target software failing to anticipate that the expanded data may exceed some internal limit, thereby creating a buffer overflow.

CAPEC-473: Signature Spoof

An attacker generates a message or datablock that causes the recipient to believe that the message or datablock was generated and cryptographically signed by an authoritative or reputable source, misleading a victim or victim operating system into performing malicious actions.

CAPEC-52: Embedding NULL Bytes

An adversary embeds one or more null bytes in input to the target software. This attack relies on the usage of a null-valued byte as a string terminator in many environments. The goal is for certain components of the target software to stop processing the input when it encounters the null byte(s).

CAPEC-53: Postfix, Null Terminate, and Backslash

If a string is passed through a filter of some kind, then a terminal NULL may not be valid. Using alternate representation of NULL allows an adversary to embed the NULL mid-string while postfixing the proper data so that the filter is avoided. One example is a filter that looks for a trailing slash character. If a string insertion is possible, but the slash must exist, an alternate encoding of NULL in mid-string may be used.

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-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-64: Using Slashes and URL Encoding Combined to Bypass Validation Logic

This attack targets the encoding of the URL combined with the encoding of the slash characters. An attacker can take advantage of the multiple ways of encoding a URL and abuse the interpretation of the URL. A URL may contain special character that need special syntax handling in order to be interpreted. Special characters are represented using a percentage character followed by two digits representing the octet code of the original character (%HEX-CODE). For instance US-ASCII space character would be represented with %20. This is often referred as escaped ending or percent-encoding. Since the server decodes the URL from the requests, it may restrict the access to some URL paths by validating and filtering out the URL requests it received. An attacker will try to craft an URL with a sequence of special characters which once interpreted by the server will be equivalent to a forbidden URL. It can be difficult to protect against this attack since the URL can contain other format of encoding such as UTF-8 encoding, Unicode-encoding, etc.

CAPEC-664: Server Side Request Forgery

An adversary exploits improper input validation by submitting maliciously crafted input to a target application running on a server, with the goal of forcing the server to make a request either to itself, to web services running in the server’s internal network, or to external third parties. If successful, the adversary’s request will be made with the server’s privilege level, bypassing its authentication controls. This ultimately allows the adversary to access sensitive data, execute commands on the server’s network, and make external requests with the stolen identity of the server. Server Side Request Forgery attacks differ from Cross Site Request Forgery attacks in that they target the server itself, whereas CSRF attacks exploit an insecure user authentication mechanism to perform unauthorized actions on the user's behalf.

CAPEC-67: String Format Overflow in syslog()

This attack targets applications and software that uses the syslog() function insecurely. If an application does not explicitely use a format string parameter in a call to syslog(), user input can be placed in the format string parameter leading to a format string injection attack. Adversaries can then inject malicious format string commands into the function call leading to a buffer overflow. There are many reported software vulnerabilities with the root cause being a misuse of the syslog() function.

CAPEC-7: Blind SQL Injection

Blind SQL Injection results from an insufficient mitigation for SQL Injection. Although suppressing database error messages are considered best practice, the suppression alone is not sufficient to prevent SQL Injection. Blind SQL Injection is a form of SQL Injection that overcomes the lack of error messages. Without the error messages that facilitate SQL Injection, the adversary constructs input strings that probe the target through simple Boolean SQL expressions. The adversary can determine if the syntax and structure of the injection was successful based on whether the query was executed or not. Applied iteratively, the adversary determines how and where the target is vulnerable to SQL Injection.

CAPEC-71: Using Unicode Encoding to Bypass Validation Logic

An attacker may provide a Unicode string to a system component that is not Unicode aware and use that to circumvent the filter or cause the classifying mechanism to fail to properly understanding the request. That may allow the attacker to slip malicious data past the content filter and/or possibly cause the application to route the request incorrectly.

CAPEC-72: URL Encoding

This attack targets the encoding of the URL. An adversary can take advantage of the multiple way of encoding an URL and abuse the interpretation of the URL.

CAPEC-73: User-Controlled Filename

An attack of this type involves an adversary inserting malicious characters (such as a XSS redirection) into a filename, directly or indirectly that is then used by the target software to generate HTML text or other potentially executable content. Many websites rely on user-generated content and dynamically build resources like files, filenames, and URL links directly from user supplied data. In this attack pattern, the attacker uploads code that can execute in the client browser and/or redirect the client browser to a site that the attacker owns. All XSS attack payload variants can be used to pass and exploit these vulnerabilities.

CAPEC-78: Using Escaped Slashes in Alternate Encoding

This attack targets the use of the backslash in alternate encoding. An adversary can provide a backslash as a leading character and causes a parser to believe that the next character is special. This is called an escape. By using that trick, the adversary tries to exploit alternate ways to encode the same character which leads to filter problems and opens avenues to attack.

CAPEC-79: Using Slashes in Alternate Encoding

This attack targets the encoding of the Slash characters. An adversary would try to exploit common filtering problems related to the use of the slashes characters to gain access to resources on the target host. Directory-driven systems, such as file systems and databases, typically use the slash character to indicate traversal between directories or other container components. For murky historical reasons, PCs (and, as a result, Microsoft OSs) choose to use a backslash, whereas the UNIX world typically makes use of the forward slash. The schizophrenic result is that many MS-based systems are required to understand both forms of the slash. This gives the adversary many opportunities to discover and abuse a number of common filtering problems. The goal of this pattern is to discover server software that only applies filters to one version, but not the other.

CAPEC-8: Buffer Overflow in an API Call

This attack targets libraries or shared code modules which are vulnerable to buffer overflow attacks. An adversary who has knowledge of known vulnerable libraries or shared code can easily target software that makes use of these libraries. All clients that make use of the code library thus become vulnerable by association. This has a very broad effect on security across a system, usually affecting more than one software process.

CAPEC-80: Using UTF-8 Encoding to Bypass Validation Logic

This attack is a specific variation on leveraging alternate encodings to bypass validation logic. This attack leverages the possibility to encode potentially harmful input in UTF-8 and submit it to applications not expecting or effective at validating this encoding standard making input filtering difficult. UTF-8 (8-bit UCS/Unicode Transformation Format) is a variable-length character encoding for Unicode. Legal UTF-8 characters are one to four bytes long. However, early version of the UTF-8 specification got some entries wrong (in some cases it permitted overlong characters). UTF-8 encoders are supposed to use the "shortest possible" encoding, but naive decoders may accept encodings that are longer than necessary. According to the RFC 3629, a particularly subtle form of this attack can be carried out against a parser which performs security-critical validity checks against the UTF-8 encoded form of its input, but interprets certain illegal octet sequences as characters.

CAPEC-81: Web Server Logs Tampering

Web Logs Tampering attacks involve an attacker injecting, deleting or otherwise tampering with the contents of web logs typically for the purposes of masking other malicious behavior. Additionally, writing malicious data to log files may target jobs, filters, reports, and other agents that process the logs in an asynchronous attack pattern. This pattern of attack is similar to "Log Injection-Tampering-Forging" except that in this case, the attack is targeting the logs of the web server and not the application.

CAPEC-83: XPath Injection

An attacker can craft special user-controllable input consisting of XPath expressions to inject the XML database and bypass authentication or glean information that they normally would not be able to. XPath Injection enables an attacker to talk directly to the XML database, thus bypassing the application completely. XPath Injection results from the failure of an application to properly sanitize input used as part of dynamic XPath expressions used to query an XML database.

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.

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.

CAPEC-9: Buffer Overflow in Local Command-Line Utilities

This attack targets command-line utilities available in a number of shells. An adversary can leverage a vulnerability found in a command-line utility to escalate privilege to root.