CWE-94
Allowed-with-ReviewImproper Control of Generation of Code ('Code Injection')
Abstraction: Base · Status: Draft
The product constructs all or part of a code segment using externally-influenced input from an upstream component, but it does not neutralize or incorrectly neutralizes special elements that could modify the syntax or behavior of the intended code segment.
9394 vulnerabilities reference this CWE, most recent first.
GHSA-V7CP-2P68-GP8H
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2024-10-25 18:30 – Updated: 2024-10-29 21:30An issue in Total.js CMS v.1.0 allows a remote attacker to execute arbitrary code via the func.js file.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2024-48655"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-94"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2024-10-25T17:15:04Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "An issue in Total.js CMS v.1.0 allows a remote attacker to execute arbitrary code via the func.js file.",
"id": "GHSA-v7cp-2p68-gp8h",
"modified": "2024-10-29T21:30:48Z",
"published": "2024-10-25T18:30:49Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-48655"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/totaljs/cms/issues/49"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://medium.com/%400x0d0x0a/cve-2024-48655-server-side-javascript-code-injection-in-total-js-cms-c5fc18359bdc"
}
],
"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-V7MH-3JGF-R26C
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-17 01:42 – Updated: 2024-02-06 16:02OpenStack Object Storage (swift) before 1.7.0 uses the loads function in the pickle Python module unsafely when storing and loading metadata in memcached, which allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code via a crafted pickle object.
{
"affected": [
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "PyPI",
"name": "swift"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "0"
},
{
"fixed": "1.7.0"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
}
],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2012-4406"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-502",
"CWE-94"
],
"github_reviewed": true,
"github_reviewed_at": "2023-02-08T17:56:11Z",
"nvd_published_at": "2012-10-22T23:55:00Z",
"severity": "CRITICAL"
},
"details": "OpenStack Object Storage (swift) before 1.7.0 uses the loads function in the pickle Python module unsafely when storing and loading metadata in memcached, which allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code via a crafted pickle object.",
"id": "GHSA-v7mh-3jgf-r26c",
"modified": "2024-02-06T16:02:43Z",
"published": "2022-05-17T01:42:16Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2012-4406"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/openstack/swift/commit/e1ff51c04554d51616d2845f92ab726cb0e5831a"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2012:1379"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2013:0691"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://access.redhat.com/security/cve/CVE-2012-4406"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://bugs.launchpad.net/swift/+bug/1006414"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=854757"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://exchange.xforce.ibmcloud.com/vulnerabilities/79140"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://launchpad.net/swift/+milestone/1.7.0"
},
{
"type": "PACKAGE",
"url": "https://opendev.org/openstack/swift"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://web.archive.org/web/20130629092623/http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/55420"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/package-announce/2012-October/089472.html"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2012-1379.html"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2013-0691.html"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://www.openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2012/09/05/16"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://www.openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2012/09/05/4"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/55420"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
],
"summary": "OpenStack Object Storage (swift) Code Injection vulnerability"
}
GHSA-V7P7-P2FQ-44FH
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2024-10-26 00:32 – Updated: 2024-10-29 21:30An issue in ofcms 1.1.2 allows a remote attacker to execute arbitrary code via the save method of the TemplateController.java file.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2024-48235"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-94"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2024-10-25T22:15:02Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "An issue in ofcms 1.1.2 allows a remote attacker to execute arbitrary code via the save method of the TemplateController.java file.",
"id": "GHSA-v7p7-p2fq-44fh",
"modified": "2024-10-29T21:30:48Z",
"published": "2024-10-26T00:32:28Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-48235"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://gitee.com/oufu/ofcms/issues/IASIES"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-V7RM-2JJ2-CC35
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-07-31 09:31 – Updated: 2026-07-31 18:32The ElementsKit Elementor Addons WordPress plugin before 3.10.01 does not prevent a custom-widget definition saved by a user with administrative capabilities from being written verbatim into a generated PHP file that the ElementsKit Elementor Addons WordPress plugin before 3.10.01 subsequently executes, allowing arbitrary PHP code to run on the server; on a multisite network this lets a non-super subsite Administrator, who is otherwise denied code/file editing, reach host-level code execution beyond the privileges the network grants them.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2026-13392"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-94"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2026-07-31T07:16:24Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "The ElementsKit Elementor Addons WordPress plugin before 3.10.01 does not prevent a custom-widget definition saved by a user with administrative capabilities from being written verbatim into a generated PHP file that the ElementsKit Elementor Addons WordPress plugin before 3.10.01 subsequently executes, allowing arbitrary PHP code to run on the server; on a multisite network this lets a non-super subsite Administrator, who is otherwise denied code/file editing, reach host-level code execution beyond the privileges the network grants them.",
"id": "GHSA-v7rm-2jj2-cc35",
"modified": "2026-07-31T18:32:17Z",
"published": "2026-07-31T09:31:16Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-13392"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://wpscan.com/vulnerability/955cbef5-51c3-4d10-86d2-e2882bbb56a4"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-V7V7-79Q5-J8CF
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-09-16 06:31 – Updated: 2026-09-17 15:31The WP Import Export Lite WordPress plugin before 3.9.33 does not restrict which PHP function may be applied to exported field values, allowing users granted its export permission to have arbitrary functions invoked on values they control, leading to remote code execution.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2026-76551"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-94"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2026-09-16T06:16:31Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "The WP Import Export Lite WordPress plugin before 3.9.33 does not restrict which PHP function may be applied to exported field values, allowing users granted its export permission to have arbitrary functions invoked on values they control, leading to remote code execution.",
"id": "GHSA-v7v7-79q5-j8cf",
"modified": "2026-09-17T15:31:54Z",
"published": "2026-09-16T06:31:35Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-76551"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://wpscan.com/vulnerability/1ad0c536-cebd-40d2-b6a9-48c5c76e972c"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-V7VW-QWR3-VGR4
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2024-10-12 09:30 – Updated: 2024-10-12 09:30The Stackable – Page Builder Gutenberg Blocks plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to CSS Injection in all versions up to, and including, 3.13.6. This makes it possible for unauthenticated attackers to embed untrusted style information into comments resulting in a possibility of data exfiltration such as admin nonces with limited impact. These nonces could be used to perform CSRF attacks within a limited time window. The presence of other plugins may make additional nonces available, which may pose a risk in plugins that don't perform capability checks to protect AJAX actions or other actions reachable by lower-privileged users.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2024-8760"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-94"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2024-10-12T09:15:02Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "The Stackable \u2013 Page Builder Gutenberg Blocks plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to CSS Injection in all versions up to, and including, 3.13.6. This makes it possible for unauthenticated attackers to embed untrusted style information into comments resulting in a possibility of data exfiltration such as admin nonces with limited impact. These nonces could be used to perform CSRF attacks within a limited time window. The presence of other plugins may make additional nonces available, which may pose a risk in plugins that don\u0027t perform capability checks to protect AJAX actions or other actions reachable by lower-privileged users.",
"id": "GHSA-v7vw-qwr3-vgr4",
"modified": "2024-10-12T09:30:30Z",
"published": "2024-10-12T09:30:30Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-8760"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://plugins.trac.wordpress.org/changeset?sfp_email=\u0026sfph_mail=\u0026reponame=\u0026new=3158674%40stackable-ultimate-gutenberg-blocks%2Ftrunk\u0026old=3156448%40stackable-ultimate-gutenberg-blocks%2Ftrunk\u0026sfp_email=\u0026sfph_mail="
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.wordfence.com/threat-intel/vulnerabilities/id/1fd0b13c-7447-45da-9608-80b7629d9bbf?source=cve"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-V7W5-9782-QX92
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-02 03:21 – Updated: 2022-05-02 03:21Sun Java System Identity Manager (IdM) 7.0 through 8.0 on Linux, AIX, Solaris, and HP-UX permits "control characters" in the passwords of user accounts, which allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary commands via vectors involving "resource adapters."
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2009-1083"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-94"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2009-03-25T15:30:00Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "Sun Java System Identity Manager (IdM) 7.0 through 8.0 on Linux, AIX, Solaris, and HP-UX permits \"control characters\" in the passwords of user accounts, which allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary commands via vectors involving \"resource adapters.\"",
"id": "GHSA-v7w5-9782-qx92",
"modified": "2022-05-02T03:21:31Z",
"published": "2022-05-02T03:21:31Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2009-1083"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://blogs.sun.com/security/entry/sun_alert_253267_sun_java"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://secunia.com/advisories/34380"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://securitytracker.com/id?1021881"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://sunsolve.sun.com/search/document.do?assetkey=1-21-140935-01-1"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://sunsolve.sun.com/search/document.do?assetkey=1-66-253267-1"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/34191"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://www.vupen.com/english/advisories/2009/0797"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": []
}
GHSA-V838-25WW-859R
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-17 05:35 – Updated: 2022-05-17 05:35CoreMedia in Apple Mac OS X through 10.6.8 allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code or cause a denial of service (memory corruption) via a crafted QuickTime movie file.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2011-0224"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-94"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2011-10-14T10:55:00Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "CoreMedia in Apple Mac OS X through 10.6.8 allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code or cause a denial of service (memory corruption) via a crafted QuickTime movie file.",
"id": "GHSA-v838-25ww-859r",
"modified": "2022-05-17T05:35:54Z",
"published": "2022-05-17T05:35:54Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2011-0224"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://lists.apple.com/archives/Security-announce/2011//Oct/msg00003.html"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://support.apple.com/kb/HT5002"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/50085"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/50095"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": []
}
GHSA-V87R-6Q3F-2J67
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-05-06 21:58 – Updated: 2026-05-08 21:52GitConfigParser.set_value() passes values to Python's configparser without validating for newlines. GitPython's own _write() converts embedded newlines into indented continuation lines (e.g. \n becomes \n\t), but Git still accepts an indented [core] stanza as a section header — so the injected core.hooksPath becomes effective configuration. Any Git operation that invokes hooks (commit, merge, checkout) will then execute scripts from the attacker-controlled path.
The vulnerability is not merely malformed config output: GitPython's own writer converts embedded newlines into indented continuation lines, but Git still accepts an indented [core] stanza as a section header, so the injected core.hooksPath becomes effective configuration.
This was found while auditing MLRun's project.push() method, which passes author_name and author_email directly to config_writer().set_value() with no sanitization. Both parameters cross a trust boundary — they are caller-supplied API inputs that end up in .git/config.
PoC (standalone, no MLRun required):
import git, subprocess, os
repo = git.Repo("/tmp/testrepo")
with repo.config_writer() as cw:
cw.set_value("user", "name", "foo\n[core]\nhooksPath=/tmp/hooks")
r = subprocess.run(["git", "config", "core.hooksPath"], cwd="/tmp/testrepo", capture_output=True, text=True)
assert r.returncode == 0
print(r.stdout.strip()) # /tmp/hooks
os.makedirs("/tmp/hooks", exist_ok=True)
open("/tmp/hooks/pre-commit", "w").write("#!/bin/sh\nid > /tmp/pwned\n")
os.chmod("/tmp/hooks/pre-commit", 0o755)
repo.index.add(["README"])
repo.git.commit(m="test")
print(open("/tmp/pwned").read()) # uid=...
Tested on GitPython 3.1.46, git 2.39+.
Impact: This is persistent repo config poisoning. Any user who can supply author_name or author_email to an application calling config_writer().set_value() can redirect Git hook execution to an arbitrary path. In a multi-user or hosted environment (e.g. a shared MLRun server where multiple users push to the same repositories), one user can poison the .git/config of a shared repo and have their hooks run in the context of every subsequent Git operation by any user. On single-user deployments, the impact depends on whether the application later invokes Git hooks automatically.
Remediation: set_value() should raise on CR, LF, or NUL in values rather than silently pass them through:
import re
if isinstance(value, (str, bytes)) and re.search(r"[\r\n\x00]", str(value)):
raise ValueError("Git config values must not contain CR, LF, or NUL")
Rejecting is safer than stripping — a stripped newline might indicate the caller is passing unsanitized input at a higher level, and silent normalization masks that.
Affected wherever config_writer().set_value(section, key, user_input) is called with external input.** GitPython is a dependency of DVC, MLflow, Kedro, and others — worth auditing their set_value() call sites for externally influenced inputs.
{
"affected": [
{
"database_specific": {
"last_known_affected_version_range": "\u003c= 3.1.48"
},
"package": {
"ecosystem": "PyPI",
"name": "GitPython"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "0"
},
{
"fixed": "3.1.49"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
}
],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2026-44244"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-94"
],
"github_reviewed": true,
"github_reviewed_at": "2026-05-06T21:58:00Z",
"nvd_published_at": "2026-05-07T19:16:02Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "`GitConfigParser.set_value()` passes values to Python\u0027s `configparser` without validating for newlines. GitPython\u0027s own `_write()` converts embedded newlines into indented continuation lines (e.g. `\\n` becomes `\\n\\t`), but Git still accepts an indented `[core]` stanza as a section header \u2014 so the injected `core.hooksPath` becomes effective configuration. Any Git operation that invokes hooks (commit, merge, checkout) will then execute scripts from the attacker-controlled path.\n\nThe vulnerability is not merely malformed config output: GitPython\u0027s own writer converts embedded newlines into indented continuation lines, but Git still accepts an indented `[core]` stanza as a section header, so the injected `core.hooksPath` becomes effective configuration.\n\nThis was found while auditing MLRun\u0027s `project.push()` method, which passes `author_name` and `author_email` directly to `config_writer().set_value()` with no sanitization. Both parameters cross a trust boundary \u2014 they are caller-supplied API inputs that end up in `.git/config`.\n\nPoC (standalone, no MLRun required):\n\n```python\nimport git, subprocess, os\n\nrepo = git.Repo(\"/tmp/testrepo\")\n\nwith repo.config_writer() as cw:\n cw.set_value(\"user\", \"name\", \"foo\\n[core]\\nhooksPath=/tmp/hooks\")\n\nr = subprocess.run([\"git\", \"config\", \"core.hooksPath\"], cwd=\"/tmp/testrepo\", capture_output=True, text=True)\nassert r.returncode == 0\nprint(r.stdout.strip()) # /tmp/hooks\n\nos.makedirs(\"/tmp/hooks\", exist_ok=True)\nopen(\"/tmp/hooks/pre-commit\", \"w\").write(\"#!/bin/sh\\nid \u003e /tmp/pwned\\n\")\nos.chmod(\"/tmp/hooks/pre-commit\", 0o755)\n\nrepo.index.add([\"README\"])\nrepo.git.commit(m=\"test\")\nprint(open(\"/tmp/pwned\").read()) # uid=...\n```\n\nTested on GitPython 3.1.46, git 2.39+.\n\nImpact: This is persistent repo config poisoning. Any user who can supply `author_name` or `author_email` to an application calling `config_writer().set_value()` can redirect Git hook execution to an arbitrary path. In a multi-user or hosted environment (e.g. a shared MLRun server where multiple users push to the same repositories), one user can poison the `.git/config` of a shared repo and have their hooks run in the context of every subsequent Git operation by any user. On single-user deployments, the impact depends on whether the application later invokes Git hooks automatically.\n\nRemediation: `set_value()` should raise on CR, LF, or NUL in values rather than silently pass them through:\n\n```python\nimport re\n\nif isinstance(value, (str, bytes)) and re.search(r\"[\\r\\n\\x00]\", str(value)):\n raise ValueError(\"Git config values must not contain CR, LF, or NUL\")\n```\n\nRejecting is safer than stripping \u2014 a stripped newline might indicate the caller is passing unsanitized input at a higher level, and silent normalization masks that.\n\nAffected wherever `config_writer().set_value(section, key, user_input)` is called with external input.** GitPython is a dependency of DVC, MLflow, Kedro, and others \u2014 worth auditing their `set_value()` call sites for externally influenced inputs.",
"id": "GHSA-v87r-6q3f-2j67",
"modified": "2026-05-08T21:52:28Z",
"published": "2026-05-06T21:58:00Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/gitpython-developers/GitPython/security/advisories/GHSA-v87r-6q3f-2j67"
},
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-44244"
},
{
"type": "PACKAGE",
"url": "https://github.com/gitpython-developers/GitPython"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/gitpython-developers/GitPython/releases/tag/3.1.49"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
],
"summary": "GitPython: Newline injection in config_writer().set_value() enables RCE via core.hooksPath"
}
GHSA-V886-52JC-G2J8
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-01 23:27 – Updated: 2022-05-01 23:27Unspecified vulnerability in Microsoft Excel 2000 SP3 through 2003 SP2, Viewer 2003, and Office for Mac 2004 allows user-assisted remote attackers to execute arbitrary code via crafted Style records that trigger memory corruption.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2008-0114"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-94"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2008-03-11T23:44:00Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "Unspecified vulnerability in Microsoft Excel 2000 SP3 through 2003 SP2, Viewer 2003, and Office for Mac 2004 allows user-assisted remote attackers to execute arbitrary code via crafted Style records that trigger memory corruption.",
"id": "GHSA-v886-52jc-g2j8",
"modified": "2022-05-01T23:27:40Z",
"published": "2022-05-01T23:27:40Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2008-0114"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/security-updates/securitybulletins/2008/ms08-014"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://oval.cisecurity.org/repository/search/definition/oval%3Aorg.mitre.oval%3Adef%3A5456"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://marc.info/?l=bugtraq\u0026m=120585858807305\u0026w=2"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/28166"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://www.securitytracker.com/id?1019584"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://www.us-cert.gov/cas/techalerts/TA08-071A.html"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://www.vupen.com/english/advisories/2008/0846/references"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": []
}
Mitigation
Strategy: Refactoring
Refactor your program so that you do not have to dynamically generate code.
Mitigation
- Run your code in a "jail" or similar sandbox environment that enforces strict boundaries between the process and the operating system. This may effectively restrict which code can be executed by your product.
- Examples include the Unix chroot jail and AppArmor. In general, managed code may provide some protection.
- This may not be a feasible solution, and it only limits the impact to the operating system; the rest of your application may still be subject to compromise.
- Be careful to avoid CWE-243 and other weaknesses related to jails.
Mitigation MIT-5
Strategy: Input Validation
- Assume all input is malicious. Use an "accept known good" input validation strategy, i.e., use a list of acceptable inputs that strictly conform to specifications. Reject any input that does not strictly conform to specifications, or transform it into something that does.
- When performing input validation, consider all potentially relevant properties, including length, type of input, the full range of acceptable values, missing or extra inputs, syntax, consistency across related fields, and conformance to business rules. As an example of business rule logic, "boat" may be syntactically valid because it only contains alphanumeric characters, but it is not valid if the input is only expected to contain colors such as "red" or "blue."
- Do not rely exclusively on looking for malicious or malformed inputs. This is likely to miss at least one undesirable input, especially if the code's environment changes. This can give attackers enough room to bypass the intended validation. However, denylists can be useful for detecting potential attacks or determining which inputs are so malformed that they should be rejected outright.
- To reduce the likelihood of code injection, use stringent allowlists that limit which constructs are allowed. If you are dynamically constructing code that invokes a function, then verifying that the input is alphanumeric might be insufficient. An attacker might still be able to reference a dangerous function that you did not intend to allow, such as system(), exec(), or exit().
Mitigation
Use dynamic tools and techniques that interact with the product using large test suites with many diverse inputs, such as fuzz testing (fuzzing), robustness testing, and fault injection. The product's operation may slow down, but it should not become unstable, crash, or generate incorrect results.
Mitigation MIT-32
Strategy: Compilation or Build Hardening
Run the code in an environment that performs automatic taint propagation and prevents any command execution that uses tainted variables, such as Perl's "-T" switch. This will force the program to perform validation steps that remove the taint, although you must be careful to correctly validate your inputs so that you do not accidentally mark dangerous inputs as untainted (see CWE-183 and CWE-184).
Mitigation MIT-32
Strategy: Environment Hardening
Run the code in an environment that performs automatic taint propagation and prevents any command execution that uses tainted variables, such as Perl's "-T" switch. This will force the program to perform validation steps that remove the taint, although you must be careful to correctly validate your inputs so that you do not accidentally mark dangerous inputs as untainted (see CWE-183 and CWE-184).
Mitigation
For Python programs, it is frequently encouraged to use the ast.literal_eval() function instead of eval, since it is intentionally designed to avoid executing code. However, an adversary could still cause excessive memory or stack consumption via deeply nested structures [REF-1372], so the python documentation discourages use of ast.literal_eval() on untrusted data [REF-1373].
CAPEC-242: Code Injection
An adversary exploits a weakness in input validation on the target to inject new code into that which is currently executing. This differs from code inclusion in that code inclusion involves the addition or replacement of a reference to a code file, which is subsequently loaded by the target and used as part of the code of some application.
CAPEC-35: Leverage Executable Code in Non-Executable Files
An attack of this type exploits a system's trust in configuration and resource files. When the executable loads the resource (such as an image file or configuration file) the attacker has modified the file to either execute malicious code directly or manipulate the target process (e.g. application server) to execute based on the malicious configuration parameters. Since systems are increasingly interrelated mashing up resources from local and remote sources the possibility of this attack occurring is high.
CAPEC-77: Manipulating User-Controlled Variables
This attack targets user controlled variables (DEBUG=1, PHP Globals, and So Forth). An adversary can override variables leveraging user-supplied, untrusted query variables directly used on the application server without any data sanitization. In extreme cases, the adversary can change variables controlling the business logic of the application. For instance, in languages like PHP, a number of poorly set default configurations may allow the user to override variables.