CWE-346
Allowed-with-ReviewOrigin Validation Error
Abstraction: Class · Status: Draft
The product does not properly verify that the source of data or communication is valid.
790 vulnerabilities reference this CWE, most recent first.
GHSA-5Q9F-4PXQ-X2GV
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2023-06-23 18:30 – Updated: 2024-04-04 05:07This issue was addressed with improved redaction of sensitive information. This issue is fixed in watchOS 9.5, macOS Ventura 13.4, tvOS 16.5, iOS 16.5 and iPadOS 16.5, macOS Big Sur 11.7.7, macOS Monterey 12.6.6. An app may be able to bypass Privacy preferences
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2023-28191"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-346"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2023-06-23T18:15:11Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "This issue was addressed with improved redaction of sensitive information. This issue is fixed in watchOS 9.5, macOS Ventura 13.4, tvOS 16.5, iOS 16.5 and iPadOS 16.5, macOS Big Sur 11.7.7, macOS Monterey 12.6.6. An app may be able to bypass Privacy preferences",
"id": "GHSA-5q9f-4pxq-x2gv",
"modified": "2024-04-04T05:07:19Z",
"published": "2023-06-23T18:30:23Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2023-28191"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT213757"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT213758"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT213759"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT213760"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT213761"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT213764"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-5V8V-XVJV-57X7
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-04-06 09:31 – Updated: 2026-07-15 18:38A flaw was found in Keycloak. A remote attacker can exploit a Cross-Origin Resource Sharing (CORS) header injection vulnerability in Keycloak's User-Managed Access (UMA) token endpoint. This flaw occurs because the azp claim from a client-supplied JSON Web Token (JWT) is used to set the Access-Control-Allow-Origin header before the JWT signature is validated. When a specially crafted JWT with an attacker-controlled azp value is processed, this value is reflected as the CORS origin, even if the grant is later rejected. This can lead to the exposure of low-sensitivity information from authorization server error responses, weakening origin isolation, but only when a target client is misconfigured with webOrigins: ["*"].
{
"affected": [
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Maven",
"name": "org.keycloak:keycloak-services"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "0"
},
{
"fixed": "26.4.13"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
},
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Maven",
"name": "org.keycloak:keycloak-services"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "26.5.0"
},
{
"fixed": "26.6.3"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
}
],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2026-37977"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-346"
],
"github_reviewed": true,
"github_reviewed_at": "2026-04-08T00:08:09Z",
"nvd_published_at": "2026-04-06T09:16:17Z",
"severity": "LOW"
},
"details": "A flaw was found in Keycloak. A remote attacker can exploit a Cross-Origin Resource Sharing (CORS) header injection vulnerability in Keycloak\u0027s User-Managed Access (UMA) token endpoint. This flaw occurs because the `azp` claim from a client-supplied JSON Web Token (JWT) is used to set the `Access-Control-Allow-Origin` header before the JWT signature is validated. When a specially crafted JWT with an attacker-controlled `azp` value is processed, this value is reflected as the CORS origin, even if the grant is later rejected. This can lead to the exposure of low-sensitivity information from authorization server error responses, weakening origin isolation, but only when a target client is misconfigured with `webOrigins: [\"*\"]`.",
"id": "GHSA-5v8v-xvjv-57x7",
"modified": "2026-07-15T18:38:09Z",
"published": "2026-04-06T09:31:42Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-37977"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/keycloak/keycloak/issues/48036"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/keycloak/keycloak/pull/49512"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/keycloak/keycloak/commit/1439bd58a9f25b0d28d0400015f49f35f227ce04"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/keycloak/keycloak/commit/461ce79a6cd6bfef7ca7fa41da287a3127f47ae4"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/keycloak/keycloak/commit/ad34724a5d1ba8b6edf7a2c8c83826b1c20539e7"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2026:25097"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2026:25098"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2026:30049"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2026:30050"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://access.redhat.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-37977"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2455324"
},
{
"type": "PACKAGE",
"url": "https://github.com/keycloak/keycloak"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
],
"summary": "Keycloak vulnerable to information disclosure via CORS header injection due to unvalidated JWT azp claim"
}
GHSA-5WCW-8JJV-M286
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-03-12 20:32 – Updated: 2026-03-16 17:07Summary
In affected versions of openclaw, browser-originated WebSocket connections could bypass origin validation when gateway.auth.mode was set to trusted-proxy and the request arrived with proxy headers. A page served from an untrusted origin could connect through a trusted reverse proxy, inherit proxy-authenticated identity, and establish a privileged operator session.
Impact
This issue affects deployments that expose the Gateway behind a trusted reverse proxy and rely on browser origin checks such as controlUi.allowedOrigins to restrict browser access. An attacker who can cause a victim browser to load a malicious page that can reach the proxy endpoint could establish a cross-site WebSocket connection and call privileged Gateway methods.
In verified impact, the attacker-origin page was able to request operator.admin and successfully call config.get, exposing sensitive configuration. Depending on the deployment, the same authenticated operator path could also permit other privileged reads or mutations available to operator-class callers.
Affected Packages and Versions
- Package:
openclaw(npm) - Affected versions:
< 2026.3.11 - Fixed in:
2026.3.11
Technical Details
The WebSocket handshake logic treated proxy-delivered requests as exempt from the generic browser origin check whenever an Origin header was present alongside proxy headers. In trusted-proxy mode, that exemption allowed browser-originated connections to skip the normal origin-validation path even though they were still browser requests.
Because trusted-proxy authentication can produce a shared authenticated operator context, the affected path could retain requested operator scopes after the handshake. That made the browser origin check the missing boundary between an untrusted origin and an authenticated operator-class session.
Fix
OpenClaw now enforces browser origin validation for any browser-originated WebSocket connection regardless of whether proxy headers are present. The fix shipped in openclaw@2026.3.11.
Fixed commit: ebed3bbde1a72a1aaa9b87b63b91e7c04a50036b
Release tag: v2026.3.11
Workarounds
Upgrade to 2026.3.11 or later.
If you cannot upgrade immediately, avoid exposing browser-reachable Gateway WebSocket endpoints in trusted-proxy mode to untrusted origins, and ensure reverse-proxy/browser reachability is restricted to trusted origins only.
{
"affected": [
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "npm",
"name": "openclaw"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "0"
},
{
"fixed": "2026.3.11"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
}
],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2026-32302"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-346"
],
"github_reviewed": true,
"github_reviewed_at": "2026-03-12T20:32:59Z",
"nvd_published_at": "2026-03-13T19:54:41Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "## Summary\nIn affected versions of `openclaw`, browser-originated WebSocket connections could bypass origin validation when `gateway.auth.mode` was set to `trusted-proxy` and the request arrived with proxy headers. A page served from an untrusted origin could connect through a trusted reverse proxy, inherit proxy-authenticated identity, and establish a privileged operator session.\n\n## Impact\nThis issue affects deployments that expose the Gateway behind a trusted reverse proxy and rely on browser origin checks such as `controlUi.allowedOrigins` to restrict browser access. An attacker who can cause a victim browser to load a malicious page that can reach the proxy endpoint could establish a cross-site WebSocket connection and call privileged Gateway methods.\n\nIn verified impact, the attacker-origin page was able to request `operator.admin` and successfully call `config.get`, exposing sensitive configuration. Depending on the deployment, the same authenticated operator path could also permit other privileged reads or mutations available to operator-class callers.\n\n## Affected Packages and Versions\n- Package: `openclaw` (npm)\n- Affected versions: `\u003c 2026.3.11`\n- Fixed in: `2026.3.11`\n\n## Technical Details\nThe WebSocket handshake logic treated proxy-delivered requests as exempt from the generic browser origin check whenever an `Origin` header was present alongside proxy headers. In `trusted-proxy` mode, that exemption allowed browser-originated connections to skip the normal origin-validation path even though they were still browser requests.\n\nBecause trusted-proxy authentication can produce a shared authenticated operator context, the affected path could retain requested operator scopes after the handshake. That made the browser origin check the missing boundary between an untrusted origin and an authenticated operator-class session.\n\n## Fix\nOpenClaw now enforces browser origin validation for any browser-originated WebSocket connection regardless of whether proxy headers are present. The fix shipped in `openclaw@2026.3.11`.\n\nFixed commit: `ebed3bbde1a72a1aaa9b87b63b91e7c04a50036b`\nRelease tag: `v2026.3.11`\n\n## Workarounds\nUpgrade to `2026.3.11` or later.\n\nIf you cannot upgrade immediately, avoid exposing browser-reachable Gateway WebSocket endpoints in `trusted-proxy` mode to untrusted origins, and ensure reverse-proxy/browser reachability is restricted to trusted origins only.",
"id": "GHSA-5wcw-8jjv-m286",
"modified": "2026-03-16T17:07:26Z",
"published": "2026-03-12T20:32:59Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/openclaw/openclaw/security/advisories/GHSA-5wcw-8jjv-m286"
},
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-32302"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/openclaw/openclaw/commit/ebed3bbde1a72a1aaa9b87b63b91e7c04a50036b"
},
{
"type": "PACKAGE",
"url": "https://github.com/openclaw/openclaw"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/openclaw/openclaw/releases/tag/v2026.3.11"
}
],
"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:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
],
"summary": "OpenClaw: Untrusted web origins can obtain authenticated operator.admin access in trusted-proxy mode"
}
GHSA-5WG6-JMQ2-53PW
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-07-06 21:14 – Updated: 2026-07-06 21:14Summary
Coder's subdomain-based workspace app proxy allowed the same-owner CORS check to be bypassed. When a workspace-name subdomain segment parsed as a UUID, the workspace was resolved by ID without confirming the URL's username matched the real owner, while the CORS middleware trusted the unverified username in the hostname.
Note: Practical exploitation requires subdomain app routing (wildcard hostname) enabled and a victim who visits the attacker's crafted app URL while authenticated.
Impact
An authenticated user could craft a subdomain encoding their own workspace UUID and a victim's username. If the victim visited the attacker's URL, the attacker's JavaScript could issue credentialed cross-origin fetch() requests to the victim's workspace apps and read the responses, exfiltrating data accessible through those apps.
Patches
The fix validates the subdomain username against the resolved workspace's actual owner and bases the same-owner CORS decision on the authoritative owner identity.
The fix was backported to all supported release lines:
| Release line | Patched version |
|---|---|
| 2.34 | v2.34.2 |
| 2.33 | v2.33.8 |
| 2.32 | v2.32.7 |
| 2.29 (ESR) | v2.29.17 |
Workarounds
None.
Resources
- Fix: #26086, #26085
Credits
Coder would like to thank Anthropic's Security Team (ANT-2026-22434) for independently disclosing this issue!
{
"affected": [
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Go",
"name": "github.com/coder/coder/v2"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "2.34.0"
},
{
"fixed": "2.34.2"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
},
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Go",
"name": "github.com/coder/coder/v2"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "2.33.0"
},
{
"fixed": "2.33.8"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
},
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Go",
"name": "github.com/coder/coder/v2"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "2.30.0"
},
{
"fixed": "2.32.7"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
},
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Go",
"name": "github.com/coder/coder/v2"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "0"
},
{
"fixed": "2.29.17"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
}
],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2026-55438"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-346"
],
"github_reviewed": true,
"github_reviewed_at": "2026-07-06T21:14:49Z",
"nvd_published_at": null,
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "### Summary\n\nCoder\u0027s subdomain-based workspace app proxy allowed the same-owner CORS check to be bypassed. When a workspace-name subdomain segment parsed as a UUID, the workspace was resolved by ID without confirming the URL\u0027s username matched the real owner, while the CORS middleware trusted the unverified username in the hostname.\n\n\u003e **Note:** Practical exploitation requires subdomain app routing (wildcard hostname) enabled and a victim who visits the attacker\u0027s crafted app URL while authenticated.\n\n### Impact\n\nAn authenticated user could craft a subdomain encoding their own workspace UUID and a victim\u0027s username. If the victim visited the attacker\u0027s URL, the attacker\u0027s JavaScript could issue credentialed cross-origin `fetch()` requests to the victim\u0027s workspace apps and read the responses, exfiltrating data accessible through those apps.\n\n### Patches\n\nThe fix validates the subdomain username against the resolved workspace\u0027s actual owner and bases the same-owner CORS decision on the authoritative owner identity.\n\nThe fix was backported to all supported release lines:\n\n| Release line | Patched version |\n|---|---|\n| 2.34 | [v2.34.2](https://github.com/coder/coder/releases/tag/v2.34.2) |\n| 2.33 | [v2.33.8](https://github.com/coder/coder/releases/tag/v2.33.8) |\n| 2.32 | [v2.32.7](https://github.com/coder/coder/releases/tag/v2.32.7) |\n| 2.29 (ESR) | [v2.29.17](https://github.com/coder/coder/releases/tag/v2.29.17) |\n\n### Workarounds\n\nNone.\n\n### Resources\n\n- Fix: #26086, #26085\n\n### Credits\n\nCoder would like to thank Anthropic\u0027s Security Team (ANT-2026-22434) for independently disclosing this issue!",
"id": "GHSA-5wg6-jmq2-53pw",
"modified": "2026-07-06T21:14:49Z",
"published": "2026-07-06T21:14:49Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/coder/coder/security/advisories/GHSA-5wg6-jmq2-53pw"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/coder/coder/pull/26085"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/coder/coder/pull/26086"
},
{
"type": "PACKAGE",
"url": "https://github.com/coder/coder"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:R/S:C/C:H/I:N/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
],
"summary": "Coder\u0027s workspace app CORS origin check can be bypassed via UUID-based subdomain spoofing"
}
GHSA-5WX6-MG75-V57R
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-06-26 23:18 – Updated: 2026-06-26 23:18Summary
Keep build approval for opaque dependency sources byte-exact for GHSA-5wx6-mg75-v57r / CAND-PNPM-123.
Merged upstream commit bf1b731ee6 fixed the original name-only approval bypass by making build policy consume the resolved dependency identity. One collision remained: the generic peer-suffix normalizer also stripped parenthesized text from git, URL, tarball, file, and other opaque locators. Approval for one source string could therefore authorize a different attacker-controlled source whose locator normalized to the same value.
Security boundary
- Registry dependency identities still normalize legitimate peer suffixes and retain patch hashes.
- Git, URL, tarball, file, directory, and otherwise opaque identities must match the complete resolved locator byte for byte.
- Explicit denials use the same normalization as approvals.
- Ignored-build output preserves the exact opaque identity, so the key pnpm asks a user to approve is the key policy later checks.
- TypeScript pnpm and pacquet implement the same distinction between registry and opaque identities.
Exploit replay
- With
allowBuildsapprovingfoo@https://host/pkg.tgz, the upstream implementation also acceptedfoo@https://host/pkg.tgz(evil)because both passed through peer-suffix removal. - An independent review found a second Rust-only form:
foo@https://host/pkg@1.0.0(good)andfoo@https://host/pkg@1.0.0(evil)collided because the parser selected the final@and misclassified the opaque URL as a registry package. - A final review found the same parser hazard in source-only locators ending in a semver-looking tail: approval for
https://host/pkg@1.0.0could collapsehttps://host/pkg@1.0.0(evil). - The final patch rejects all three collision forms, applies the same exactness to deny rules, accepts exact opaque keys as positive controls, and continues to accept registry packages approved without their peer suffixes.
Files changed
building/policy/src/index.tsandbuilding/policy/test/index.tsnormalize only parsed registry identities and retain exact opaque keys.pacquet/crates/package-manager/src/build_modules.rspasses snapshot identities to policy, matches TypeScript package-separator parsing, and preserves opaque locators.pacquet/crates/package-manager/src/build_modules/tests.rscovers exact approval and denial, all three collision forms, ignored-build output, and registry peer compatibility..changeset/quiet-opaque-build-identities.mdrecords patch releases for@pnpm/building.policyandpnpm.
Commands run
$ jest building/policy/test/index.ts --runInBand
16 passed
$ cargo test -p pacquet-package-manager build_modules::tests -- --nocapture
49 passed
$ cargo fmt --all -- --check
PASS
$ git diff --check 84bb4b1a046f3a659de1c9aab1d45dcf814124ce...HEAD
PASS
Validation
- The TypeScript policy suite passed all 16 tests.
- The final pacquet build-policy suite passed all 49 tests.
- The new Rust regression reproduced the extra-
@collision before the additive fix and passed afterward. - Exact opaque approval and denial, source-only semver-tail collision rejection, registry peer normalization, and ignored-build reporting all have paired tests.
- ESLint passed on the changed TypeScript source and test files.
- Rust formatting and diff checks passed; the branch is clean and consists of three focused security commits plus additive merges of upstream through
84bb4b1a046f3a659de1c9aab1d45dcf814124ce. - The focused TypeScript suite and ESLint ran directly through the installed harness. The isolated project build cannot resolve workspace packages without a local install, and the configured registry gateway returns HTTP 403 while fetching
@pnpm/pacquet@0.11.2; no candidate-focused test failed.
Patches
10.34.2: https://github.com/pnpm/pnpm/commit/14bceb1e0b2a71f4f670774db261feb03f38ec23
11.5.3: https://github.com/pnpm/pnpm/commit/bf1b731ee6c0ea98709e671ff0f46bf654480ab8
Compatibility
Registry package approvals keep their existing form. Opaque dependencies that were approved through a normalized parenthesized variant must now use the exact key shown in pnpm's ignored-build output. This is the intended trust-boundary change; no package-resolution or artifact format changes.
CI note
GitHub intentionally does not run status checks on temporary private-fork pull requests. The complete policy suites, formatting, and diff checks above are the applicable validation: https://docs.github.com/code-security/security-advisories/collaborating-in-a-temporary-private-fork-to-resolve-a-security-vulnerability
Written by an agent (Codex, GPT-5).
{
"affected": [
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "npm",
"name": "pnpm"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "0"
},
{
"fixed": "10.34.2"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
},
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "npm",
"name": "pnpm"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "11.0.0"
},
{
"fixed": "11.5.3"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
}
],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2026-55487"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-346",
"CWE-693",
"CWE-829"
],
"github_reviewed": true,
"github_reviewed_at": "2026-06-26T23:18:13Z",
"nvd_published_at": "2026-06-25T18:16:40Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "## Summary\n\nKeep build approval for opaque dependency sources byte-exact for GHSA-5wx6-mg75-v57r / CAND-PNPM-123.\n\nMerged upstream commit `bf1b731ee6` fixed the original name-only approval bypass by making build policy consume the resolved dependency identity. One collision remained: the generic peer-suffix normalizer also stripped parenthesized text from git, URL, tarball, file, and other opaque locators. Approval for one source string could therefore authorize a different attacker-controlled source whose locator normalized to the same value.\n\n## Security boundary\n\n- Registry dependency identities still normalize legitimate peer suffixes and retain patch hashes.\n- Git, URL, tarball, file, directory, and otherwise opaque identities must match the complete resolved locator byte for byte.\n- Explicit denials use the same normalization as approvals.\n- Ignored-build output preserves the exact opaque identity, so the key pnpm asks a user to approve is the key policy later checks.\n- TypeScript pnpm and pacquet implement the same distinction between registry and opaque identities.\n\n## Exploit replay\n\n- With `allowBuilds` approving `foo@https://host/pkg.tgz`, the upstream implementation also accepted `foo@https://host/pkg.tgz(evil)` because both passed through peer-suffix removal.\n- An independent review found a second Rust-only form: `foo@https://host/pkg@1.0.0(good)` and `foo@https://host/pkg@1.0.0(evil)` collided because the parser selected the final `@` and misclassified the opaque URL as a registry package.\n- A final review found the same parser hazard in source-only locators ending in a semver-looking tail: approval for `https://host/pkg@1.0.0` could collapse `https://host/pkg@1.0.0(evil)`.\n- The final patch rejects all three collision forms, applies the same exactness to deny rules, accepts exact opaque keys as positive controls, and continues to accept registry packages approved without their peer suffixes.\n\n## Files changed\n\n- `building/policy/src/index.ts` and `building/policy/test/index.ts` normalize only parsed registry identities and retain exact opaque keys.\n- `pacquet/crates/package-manager/src/build_modules.rs` passes snapshot identities to policy, matches TypeScript package-separator parsing, and preserves opaque locators.\n- `pacquet/crates/package-manager/src/build_modules/tests.rs` covers exact approval and denial, all three collision forms, ignored-build output, and registry peer compatibility.\n- `.changeset/quiet-opaque-build-identities.md` records patch releases for `@pnpm/building.policy` and `pnpm`.\n\n## Commands run\n\n```text\n$ jest building/policy/test/index.ts --runInBand\n16 passed\n$ cargo test -p pacquet-package-manager build_modules::tests -- --nocapture\n49 passed\n$ cargo fmt --all -- --check\nPASS\n$ git diff --check 84bb4b1a046f3a659de1c9aab1d45dcf814124ce...HEAD\nPASS\n```\n\n## Validation\n\n- The TypeScript policy suite passed all 16 tests.\n- The final pacquet build-policy suite passed all 49 tests.\n- The new Rust regression reproduced the extra-`@` collision before the additive fix and passed afterward.\n- Exact opaque approval and denial, source-only semver-tail collision rejection, registry peer normalization, and ignored-build reporting all have paired tests.\n- ESLint passed on the changed TypeScript source and test files.\n- Rust formatting and diff checks passed; the branch is clean and consists of three focused security commits plus additive merges of upstream through `84bb4b1a046f3a659de1c9aab1d45dcf814124ce`.\n- The focused TypeScript suite and ESLint ran directly through the installed harness. The isolated project build cannot resolve workspace packages without a local install, and the configured registry gateway returns HTTP 403 while fetching `@pnpm/pacquet@0.11.2`; no candidate-focused test failed.\n\n## Patches\n\n`10.34.2`: https://github.com/pnpm/pnpm/commit/14bceb1e0b2a71f4f670774db261feb03f38ec23\n`11.5.3`: https://github.com/pnpm/pnpm/commit/bf1b731ee6c0ea98709e671ff0f46bf654480ab8\n\n## Compatibility\n\nRegistry package approvals keep their existing form. Opaque dependencies that were approved through a normalized parenthesized variant must now use the exact key shown in pnpm\u0027s ignored-build output. This is the intended trust-boundary change; no package-resolution or artifact format changes.\n\n## CI note\n\nGitHub intentionally does not run status checks on temporary private-fork pull requests. The complete policy suites, formatting, and diff checks above are the applicable validation: https://docs.github.com/code-security/security-advisories/collaborating-in-a-temporary-private-fork-to-resolve-a-security-vulnerability\n\n---\nWritten by an agent (Codex, GPT-5).",
"id": "GHSA-5wx6-mg75-v57r",
"modified": "2026-06-26T23:18:14Z",
"published": "2026-06-26T23:18:13Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/pnpm/pnpm/security/advisories/GHSA-5wx6-mg75-v57r"
},
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-55487"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/pnpm/pnpm/commit/bf1b731ee6c0ea98709e671ff0f46bf654480ab8"
},
{
"type": "PACKAGE",
"url": "https://github.com/pnpm/pnpm"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/pnpm/pnpm/releases/tag/v10.34.2"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/pnpm/pnpm/releases/tag/v11.5.3"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
],
"summary": "pnpm: Manifest identity spoof satisfies allowBuilds and runs attacker lifecycle"
}
GHSA-5X99-R8PC-WJJ3
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2025-12-30 03:30 – Updated: 2025-12-31 18:30Whale browser before 4.35.351.12 allows an attacker to bypass the Same-Origin Policy in a sidebar environment.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2025-69235"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-346"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2025-12-30T02:16:16Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "Whale browser before 4.35.351.12 allows an attacker to bypass the Same-Origin Policy in a sidebar environment.",
"id": "GHSA-5x99-r8pc-wjj3",
"modified": "2025-12-31T18:30:23Z",
"published": "2025-12-30T03:30:16Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2025-69235"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://cve.naver.com/detail/cve-2025-69235.html"
}
],
"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-5XC2-GX42-84WF
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-14 03:11 – Updated: 2022-05-14 03:11Response header name interning does not have same-origin protections and these headers are stored in a global registry. This allows stored header names to be available cross-origin. This vulnerability affects Firefox < 55.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2017-7797"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-346"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2018-06-11T21:29:00Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "Response header name interning does not have same-origin protections and these headers are stored in a global registry. This allows stored header names to be available cross-origin. This vulnerability affects Firefox \u003c 55.",
"id": "GHSA-5xc2-gx42-84wf",
"modified": "2022-05-14T03:11:49Z",
"published": "2022-05-14T03:11:49Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2017-7797"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1334776"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.mozilla.org/security/advisories/mfsa2017-18"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://www.securitytracker.com/id/1039124"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-62WQ-CW97-CRGG
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-24 17:43 – Updated: 2022-05-24 17:43Inappropriate implementation in performance APIs in Google Chrome prior to 89.0.4389.72 allowed a remote attacker to leak cross-origin data via a crafted HTML page.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2021-21184"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-346"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2021-03-09T18:15:00Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "Inappropriate implementation in performance APIs in Google Chrome prior to 89.0.4389.72 allowed a remote attacker to leak cross-origin data via a crafted HTML page.",
"id": "GHSA-62wq-cw97-crgg",
"modified": "2022-05-24T17:43:58Z",
"published": "2022-05-24T17:43:58Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2021-21184"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://chromereleases.googleblog.com/2021/03/stable-channel-update-for-desktop.html"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://crbug.com/1131929"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-announce@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/BBT54RKAE5XLMWSHLVUKJ7T2XHHYMXLH"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-announce@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/FE5SIKEVYTMDCC5OSXGOM2KRPYLHYMQX"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-announce@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/LCIDZ77XUDMB2EBPPWCQXPEIJERDNSNT"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://security.gentoo.org/glsa/202104-08"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.debian.org/security/2021/dsa-4886"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": []
}
GHSA-6324-2P78-9J67
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2023-01-10 21:30 – Updated: 2023-01-13 15:30Inappropriate implementation in in Permission prompts in Google Chrome on Windows prior to 109.0.5414.74 allowed a remote attacker to force acceptance of a permission prompt via a crafted HTML page. (Chromium security severity: Medium)
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2023-0132"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-346"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2023-01-10T20:15:00Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "Inappropriate implementation in in Permission prompts in Google Chrome on Windows prior to 109.0.5414.74 allowed a remote attacker to force acceptance of a permission prompt via a crafted HTML page. (Chromium security severity: Medium)",
"id": "GHSA-6324-2p78-9j67",
"modified": "2023-01-13T15:30:27Z",
"published": "2023-01-10T21:30:27Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2023-0132"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://chromereleases.googleblog.com/2023/01/stable-channel-update-for-desktop.html"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://crbug.com/1371215"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://security.gentoo.org/glsa/202305-10"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://security.gentoo.org/glsa/202311-11"
}
],
"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-634J-PC55-XW92
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-07-27 00:00 – Updated: 2022-07-29 00:00Inappropriate implementation in Input in Google Chrome prior to 101.0.4951.41 allowed a remote attacker to spoof the contents of cross-origin websites via a crafted HTML page.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2022-1497"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-346"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2022-07-26T22:15:00Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "Inappropriate implementation in Input in Google Chrome prior to 101.0.4951.41 allowed a remote attacker to spoof the contents of cross-origin websites via a crafted HTML page.",
"id": "GHSA-634j-pc55-xw92",
"modified": "2022-07-29T00:00:24Z",
"published": "2022-07-27T00:00:33Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2022-1497"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://chromereleases.googleblog.com/2022/04/stable-channel-update-for-desktop_26.html"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://crbug.com/1264543"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://security.gentoo.org/glsa/202208-25"
}
],
"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"
}
]
}
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-160: Exploit Script-Based APIs
Some APIs support scripting instructions as arguments. Methods that take scripted instructions (or references to scripted instructions) can be very flexible and powerful. However, if an attacker can specify the script that serves as input to these methods they can gain access to a great deal of functionality. For example, HTML pages support <script> tags that allow scripting languages to be embedded in the page and then interpreted by the receiving web browser. If the content provider is malicious, these scripts can compromise the client application. Some applications may even execute the scripts under their own identity (rather than the identity of the user providing the script) which can allow attackers to perform activities that would otherwise be denied to them.
CAPEC-21: Exploitation of Trusted Identifiers
An adversary guesses, obtains, or "rides" a trusted identifier (e.g. session ID, resource ID, cookie, etc.) to perform authorized actions under the guise of an authenticated user or service.
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-510: SaaS User Request Forgery
An adversary, through a previously installed malicious application, performs malicious actions against a third-party Software as a Service (SaaS) application (also known as a cloud based application) by leveraging the persistent and implicit trust placed on a trusted user's session. This attack is executed after a trusted user is authenticated into a cloud service, "piggy-backing" on the authenticated session, and exploiting the fact that the cloud service believes it is only interacting with the trusted user. If successful, the actions embedded in the malicious application will be processed and accepted by the targeted SaaS application and executed at the trusted user's privilege level.
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-60: Reusing Session IDs (aka Session Replay)
This attack targets the reuse of valid session ID to spoof the target system in order to gain privileges. The attacker tries to reuse a stolen session ID used previously during a transaction to perform spoofing and session hijacking. Another name for this type of attack is Session Replay.
CAPEC-75: Manipulating Writeable Configuration Files
Generally these are manually edited files that are not in the preview of the system administrators, any ability on the attackers' behalf to modify these files, for example in a CVS repository, gives unauthorized access directly to the application, the same as authorized users.
CAPEC-76: Manipulating Web Input to File System Calls
An attacker manipulates inputs to the target software which the target software passes to file system calls in the OS. The goal is to gain access to, and perhaps modify, areas of the file system that the target software did not intend to be accessible.
CAPEC-89: Pharming
A pharming attack occurs when the victim is fooled into entering sensitive data into supposedly trusted locations, such as an online bank site or a trading platform. An attacker can impersonate these supposedly trusted sites and have the victim be directed to their site rather than the originally intended one. Pharming does not require script injection or clicking on malicious links for the attack to succeed.