Weakness (CWE)
CWE-91: XML Injection
The product does not properly neutralize special elements that are used in XML, allowing attackers to modify the syntax, content, or commands of the XML before it is processed by an end system.
More detail
Within XML, special elements could include reserved words or characters such as "<", ">", """, and "&", which could then be used to add new data or modify XML syntax.
How to prevent it (1 mitigation)
-
Implementation
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.
Source: MITRE CWE-91
1 result · Clear filters · Feed
-
Medium 6.3CVE-2025-66034 Public exploit
fontTools is Vulnerable to Arbitrary File Write and XML injection in fontTools.varLib
fontTools is a library for manipulating fonts, written in Python. In versions from 4.33.0 to before 4.60.2, the fonttools varLib (or python3 -m fontTools.varLib) script has an arbitrary file write vulnerability that leads to remote code execution when a malic…