Summary
XCMS contains a SQL injection vulnerability in the password recovery mail endpoint because the email argument is handled unsafely. A remote, unauthenticated attacker may be able to manipulate database queries through this endpoint, potentially exposing or altering application data.
XCMS contains a SQL injection vulnerability in the password recovery mail endpoint because the email argument is handled unsafely. A remote, unauthenticated attacker may be able to manipulate database queries through this endpoint, potentially exposing or altering application data.
Affected context
The vulnerability occurs in the PublicController::sendFindPwdMail function within the XCMS password recovery component. It becomes risky when the endpoint accepts attacker-controlled email input and incorporates that input into a database query without sufficiently separating data from SQL instructions. Deployments exposing the recovery endpoint over a network may therefore have a remotely reachable attack surface.
The vulnerability occurs in the PublicController::sendFindPwdMail function within the XCMS password recovery component. It becomes risky when the endpoint accepts attacker-controlled email input and incorporates that input into a database query without sufficiently separating data from SQL instructions. Deployments exposing the recovery endpoint over a network may therefore have a remotely reachable attack surface.
Exploit preconditions
- Attack surface: The password recovery mail endpoint exposed through the web application
- Required access: Typically no authenticated account, provided the endpoint is publicly reachable
- Trigger point: Processing of the
emailargument byPublicController::sendFindPwdMail - Why exploitation is possible: Attacker-controlled input may reach a database query without adequate parameterization or contextual escaping
- Additional condition: The application must be connected to a database and the vulnerable code path must be enabled
- Attack surface: The password recovery mail endpoint exposed through the web application
- Required access: Typically no authenticated account, provided the endpoint is publicly reachable
- Trigger point: Processing of the
emailargument byPublicController::sendFindPwdMail - Why exploitation is possible: Attacker-controlled input may reach a database query without adequate parameterization or contextual escaping
- Additional condition: The application must be connected to a database and the vulnerable code path must be enabled
Why this happens
The underlying bug is an injection flaw in which externally supplied email data is treated as part of a SQL statement rather than strictly as a value. When query construction does not use parameterized statements or an equivalent safe abstraction, special input can change the intended query structure. This is classified primarily as CWE-89, SQL Injection, and is also related to CWE-74, Improper Neutralization of Special Elements in Output Used by a Downstream Component.
The underlying bug is an injection flaw in which externally supplied email data is treated as part of a SQL statement rather than strictly as a value. When query construction does not use parameterized statements or an equivalent safe abstraction, special input can change the intended query structure. This is classified primarily as CWE-89, SQL Injection, and is also related to CWE-74, Improper Neutralization of Special Elements in Output Used by a Downstream Component.
Potential impact
- An attacker may read sensitive records accessible to the database account.
- An attacker could alter or delete application data.
- Database credentials or other secrets may be exposed if stored in reachable tables.
- Password recovery workflows may be abused, potentially contributing to account compromise.
- The application or connected database service may experience disruption.
- An attacker may read sensitive records accessible to the database account.
- An attacker could alter or delete application data.
- Database credentials or other secrets may be exposed if stored in reachable tables.
- Password recovery workflows may be abused, potentially contributing to account compromise.
- The application or connected database service may experience disruption.
General mitigation guidance
Mitigation generally focuses on ensuring that user-controlled values cannot
alter database query structure.
Common defensive patterns include:
- Use parameterized queries, prepared statements, or trusted ORM APIs for all database operations.
- Treat email addresses as untrusted input and validate them against an appropriate application-level format.
- Avoid constructing SQL through string concatenation or interpolation.
- Give the application database account only the permissions required by the recovery workflow.
- Apply consistent error handling so database details are not disclosed to callers.
- Add security-focused tests for recovery endpoints and enforce secure query patterns through development policy.
Mitigation generally focuses on ensuring that user-controlled values cannot
alter database query structure.
Common defensive patterns include:
- Use parameterized queries, prepared statements, or trusted ORM APIs for all database operations.
- Treat email addresses as untrusted input and validate them against an appropriate application-level format.
- Avoid constructing SQL through string concatenation or interpolation.
- Give the application database account only the permissions required by the recovery workflow.
- Apply consistent error handling so database details are not disclosed to callers.
- Add security-focused tests for recovery endpoints and enforce secure query patterns through development policy.
How teams detect issues like this
Organizations can look for this weakness through:
- Static analysis rules that flag SQL string concatenation or interpolation involving request parameters.
- Code review checks for database calls in password recovery and other public endpoints.
- Dynamic testing that sends malformed and boundary-case input to identify unexpected query behavior without using destructive actions.
- Database and application logs showing unusual recovery requests, query errors, or access patterns.
- Policy enforcement requiring prepared statements or approved data-access abstractions.
Automated security review tools may help identify unsafe query construction, but findings should be validated against the actual data-access layer.
Organizations can look for this weakness through:
- Static analysis rules that flag SQL string concatenation or interpolation involving request parameters.
- Code review checks for database calls in password recovery and other public endpoints.
- Dynamic testing that sends malformed and boundary-case input to identify unexpected query behavior without using destructive actions.
- Database and application logs showing unusual recovery requests, query errors, or access patterns.
- Policy enforcement requiring prepared statements or approved data-access abstractions.
Automated security review tools may help identify unsafe query construction, but findings should be validated against the actual data-access layer.
Sources
| Source | Link |
|---|---|
| github. | github.com/ |
| vuldb. | vuldb.com/ |
| vuldb. | vuldb.com/ |
| vuldb. | vuldb.com/ |
| vuldb. | vuldb.com/ |
