Weakness (CWE)
CWE-94: Improper Control of Generation of Code
The product constructs all or part of a code segment using externally-influenced input from an upstream component, but it does not neutralize or incorrectly neutralizes special elements that could modify the syntax or behavior of the intended code segment.
How to prevent it (7 mitigations)
-
Architecture and Design
Refactor your program so that you do not have to dynamically generate code.
-
Architecture and Design
Run your code in a "jail" or similar sandbox environment that enforces strict boundaries between the process and the operating system. This may effectively restrict which code can be executed by your product.
Examples include the Unix chroot jail and AppArmor. In general, managed code may provide some protection.
This may not be a feasible solution, and it only limits the impact to the operating system; the rest of your application may still be subject to compromise.
Be careful to avoid CWE-243 and other weaknesses related to jails.
-
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.
To reduce the likelihood of code injection, use stringent allowlists that limit which constructs are allowed. If you are dynamically constructing code that invokes a function, then verifying that the input is alphanumeric might be insufficient. An attacker might still be able to reference a dangerous function that you did not intend to allow, such as system(), exec(), or exit().
-
Testing
Use dynamic tools and techniques that interact with the product using large test suites with many diverse inputs, such as fuzz testing (fuzzing), robustness testing, and fault injection. The product's operation may slow down, but it should not become unstable, crash, or generate incorrect results.
-
Operation
Run the code in an environment that performs automatic taint propagation and prevents any command execution that uses tainted variables, such as Perl's "-T" switch. This will force the program to perform validation steps that remove the taint, although you must be careful to correctly validate your inputs so that you do not accidentally mark dangerous inputs as untainted (see CWE-183 and CWE-184).
-
Operation
Run the code in an environment that performs automatic taint propagation and prevents any command execution that uses tainted variables, such as Perl's "-T" switch. This will force the program to perform validation steps that remove the taint, although you must be careful to correctly validate your inputs so that you do not accidentally mark dangerous inputs as untainted (see CWE-183 and CWE-184).
-
Implementation
For Python programs, it is frequently encouraged to use the ast.literal_eval() function instead of eval, since it is intentionally designed to avoid executing code. However, an adversary could still cause excessive memory or stack consumption via deeply nested structures [REF-1372], so the python documentation discourages use of ast.literal_eval() on untrusted data [REF-1373].
Source: MITRE CWE-94
1,737 results · Clear filters · Feed
-
High 7.4
N-LINE 2.0.6 and prior versions contain a code injection vulnerability. If this vulnerability is exploited, arbitrary c…
-
High 7.2
Kliqqi-CMS has a background arbitrary code execution vulnerability that attackers can exploit to implant backdoors or g…
-
High 8.8
An issue in Total.js CMS v.1.0 allows a remote attacker to execute arbitrary code via the func.js file.
-
High 7.2
MangoOS before 5.2.0 was discovered to contain an authenticated remote code execution (RCE) vulnerability via the Activ…
-
High 7.6
OpenRefine's PreviewExpressionCommand, which is eval, lacks protection against cross-site request forgery (CSRF)
OpenRefine is a free, open source tool for working with messy data. Prior to version 3.8.3, lack of cross-site request forgery protection on the `preview-expression` command means that visiting a malicious website could cause an attacker-controlled expression…
-
High 7.5
OS Command Injection in Snyk gradle plugin
The package Snyk CLI before 1.1294.0 is vulnerable to Code Injection when scanning an untrusted Gradle project. The vulnerability can be triggered if Snyk test is run inside the untrusted project due to the improper handling of the current working directory n…
-
High 7.8
Networkmanager-libreswan: local privilege escalation via leftupdown
A flaw was found in the libreswan client plugin for NetworkManager (NetkworkManager-libreswan), where it fails to properly sanitize the VPN configuration from the local unprivileged user. In this configuration, composed by a key-value format, the plugin fails…
-
High 8.8
A vulnerability in the Web Interface component of Mitel MiCollab through 9.8 SP1 (9.8.1.5) and MiVoice Business Solutio…
-
High 8.8
Remote Code Execution in infiniflow/ragflow
The `add_llm` function in `llm_app.py` in infiniflow/ragflow version 0.11.0 contains a remote code execution (RCE) vulnerability. The function uses user-supplied input `req['llm_factory']` and `req['llm_name']` to dynamically instantiate classes from various …
-
High 8.3
Time Clock <= 1.2.2 & Time Clock Pro <= 1.1.4 - Unauthenticated (Limited) Remote Code Execution
The Time Clock plugin and Time Clock Pro plugin for WordPress are vulnerable to Remote Code Execution in versions up to, and including, 1.2.2 (for Time Clock) and 1.1.4 (for Time Clock Pro) via the 'etimeclockwp_load_function_callback' function. This allows u…
-
High 8.0
Dell OpenManage Enterprise, version(s) OME 4.1 and prior, contain(s) an Improper Control of Generation of Code ('Code I…
-
High 7.3
WP Popup Builder – Popup Forms and Marketing Lead Generation <= 1.3.5 - Unauthenticated Arbitrary Shortcode Execution via wp_ajax_nopriv_shortcode_Api_Add
The The WP Popup Builder – Popup Forms and Marketing Lead Generation plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to arbitrary shortcode execution via the wp_ajax_nopriv_shortcode_Api_Add AJAX action in all versions up to, and including, 1.3.5. This is due to the softw…
-
High 8.4
MB connect line/Helmholz: Remote code execution due to improper input validation
An unauthenticated local attacker can gain admin privileges by deploying a config file due to improper input validation.
-
High 7.3
AADMY – Add Auto Date Month Year Into Posts <= 2.0.1 - Unauthenticated Arbitrary Shortcode Execution
The The AADMY – Add Auto Date Month Year Into Posts plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to arbitrary shortcode execution in all versions up to, and including, 2.0.1. This is due to the software allowing users to execute an action that does not properly validat…
-
High 7.6
A HTML Injection vulnerability was found in /search-result.php of PHPGurukul User Registration & Login and User Managem…
-
High 8.8
A vulnerability was discovered in FBM_292W-21.03.10V, which has been classified as critical. This issue affects the sub…
-
High 7.3
Shortcodes AnyWhere <= 1.0.1 - Unauthenticated Arbitrary Shortcode Execution
The Shortcodes AnyWhere plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to arbitrary shortcode execution in all versions up to, and including, 1.0.1. This is due to the software allowing users to execute an action that does not properly validate a value before running do_…
-
High 7.2
Remote code execution via Log Poisoning in Cacti
Cacti is an open source performance and fault management framework. An admin user can create a device with a malicious hostname containing php code and repeat the installation process (completing only step 5 of the installation process is enough, no need to c…
-
High 8.0
Scriptcase v9.10.023 and before is vulnerable to Remote Code Execution (RCE) via the nm_zip function.
-
High 8.8
Remote Code Execution in mudler/localai
mudler/localai version 2.17.1 is vulnerable to remote code execution. The vulnerability arises because the localai backend receives inputs not only from the configuration file but also from other inputs, allowing an attacker to upload a binary file and execut…
-
High 7.3
Special Text Boxes <= 6.2.4 - Unauthenticated Arbitrary Shortcode Execution
The The Special Text Boxes plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to arbitrary shortcode execution in all versions up to, and including, 6.2.4. This is due to the plugin adding the filter add_filter('comment_text', 'do_shortcode'); which will run all shortcodes i…
-
High 8.8
Remote command execution in promptr
A remote command execution (RCE) vulnerability in promptr v6.0.7 allows attackers to execute arbitrary commands via a crafted URL.
-
High 7.3
MDTF – Meta Data and Taxonomies Filter <= 1.3.3.3 - Unauthenticated Arbitrary Shortcode Execution
The The MDTF – Meta Data and Taxonomies Filter plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to arbitrary shortcode execution in all versions up to, and including, 1.3.3.3. This is due to the software allowing users to execute an action that does not properly validate a…
-
High 7.6
A cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability in HelpDeskZ v2.0.2 allows attackers to execute arbitrary web scripts or HTM…
-
High 7.2
An issue in Doccano Open source annotation tools for machine learning practitioners v.1.8.4 and Doccano Auto Labeling P…
-
High 8.8
WoodWing Elvis DAM v6.98.1 was discovered to contain an authenticated remote command execution (RCE) vulnerability via …
-
High 7.3CVE-2024-44623 Public exploit
An issue in TuomoKu SPx-GC v.1.3.0 and before allows a remote attacker to execute arbitrary code via the child_process.…
-
High 7.3
Simple Spoiler 1.2 - 1.3 - Unauthenticated Arbitrary Shortcode Execution
The The Simple Spoiler plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to arbitrary shortcode execution in versions 1.2 to 1.3. This is due to the plugin adding the filter add_filter('comment_text', 'do_shortcode'); which will run all shortcodes in comments. This makes it…
-
High 7.3
FOX – Currency Switcher Professional for WooCommerce <= 1.4.2.1 - Unauthenticated Arbitrary Shortcode Execution
The The FOX – Currency Switcher Professional for WooCommerce plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to arbitrary shortcode execution in all versions up to, and including, 1.4.2.1. This is due to the software allowing users to execute an action that does not prope…
-
High 8.9
A remote code execution (RCE) vulnerability via crafted extension publisher-url/additional-urls could be abused by a malicious extension in Docker Desktop before 4.34.2.
A remote code execution (RCE) vulnerability via crafted extension publisher-url/additional-urls could be abused by a malicious extension in Docker Desktop before 4.34.2.
-
High 8.8
MindsDB Eval Injection vulnerability
An arbitrary code execution vulnerability exists in versions 23.10.5.0 up to 24.7.4.1 of the MindsDB platform, when the Microsoft SharePoint integration is installed on the server. For databases created with the SharePoint engine, an ‘INSERT’ query can be use…
-
High 8.8
MindsDB Eval Injection vulnerability
An arbitrary code execution vulnerability exists in versions 23.10.5.0 up to 24.7.4.1 of the MindsDB platform, when the Microsoft SharePoint integration is installed on the server. For databases created with the SharePoint engine, an ‘INSERT’ query can be use…
-
High 8.8
MindsDB Eval Injection vulnerability
An arbitrary code execution vulnerability exists in versions 23.10.5.0 up to 24.7.4.1 of the MindsDB platform, when the Microsoft SharePoint integration is installed on the server. For databases created with the SharePoint engine, an ‘INSERT’ query can be use…
-
High 8.8
MindsDB Eval Injection vulnerability
An arbitrary code execution vulnerability exists in versions 23.12.4.0 up to 24.7.4.1 of the MindsDB platform, when the ChromaDB integration is installed on the server. If a specially crafted ‘INSERT’ query containing Python code is run against a database cre…
-
High 8.8
MindsDB Eval Injection vulnerability
An arbitrary code execution vulnerability exists in versions 23.11.4.2 up to 24.7.4.1 of the MindsDB platform, when one of several integrations is installed on the server. If a specially crafted ‘UPDATE’ query containing Python code is run against a database …
-
High 8.8CVE-2024-45846 Public exploit
MindsDB Eval Injection vulnerability
An arbitrary code execution vulnerability exists in versions 23.10.3.0 up to 24.7.4.1 of the MindsDB platform, when the Weaviate integration is installed on the server. If a specially crafted ‘SELECT WHERE’ clause containing Python code is run against a datab…
-
High 8.8
Azure CycleCloud Remote Code Execution Vulnerability
Azure CycleCloud Remote Code Execution Vulnerability
-
High 8.1
Phoenix Contact: Configuration changes of the firewall services can lead to DoS in MGUARD devices
A low privileged remote attacker can perform configuration changes of the firewall services, including packet filter, packet forwarding, network access control or NAT through the FW_INCOMING.FROM_IP FW_INCOMING.IN_IP FW_OUTGOING.FROM_IP FW_OUTGOING.IN_IP FW_R…
-
High 8.1
Phoenix Contact: Firewall reconfiguration through the FW_environment variables in MGUARD devices
A low privileged remote attacker can perform configuration changes of the firewall services, including packet filter, packet forwarding, network access control or NAT through the FW_INCOMING.FROM_IP FW_INCOMING.IN_IP FW_OUTGOING.FROM_IP FW_OUTGOING.IN_IP envi…
-
High 8.1
Phoenix Contact: Firewall reconfiguration through the FW_PORTFORWARDING.SRC_IP in MGUARD devices
A low privileged remote attacker can perform configuration changes of the firewall services, including packet filter, packet forwarding, network access control or NAT through the FW_PORTFORWARDING.SRC_IP environment variable which can lead to a DoS.