CVE-2008-2035 in Cube
Summary
by MITRE
Cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability in the Bluemoon, Inc. (1) BackPack 0.91 and earlier, (2) BmSurvey 0.84 and earlier, (3) newbb_fileup 1.83 and earlier, (4) News_embed (news_fileup) 1.44 and earlier, and (5) PopnupBlog 3.19 and earlier modules for XOOPS 2.0.x, XOOPS Cube 2.1, and ImpressCMS allows remote attackers to inject arbitrary web script or HTML via unspecified vectors.
If you want to get best quality of vulnerability data, you may have to visit VulDB.
Analysis
by VulDB Data Team • 09/23/2018
This cross-site scripting vulnerability affects multiple modules within the XOOPS content management ecosystem including BackPack, BmSurvey, newbb_fileup, News_embed, and PopnupBlog versions up to 0.91, 0.84, 1.83, 1.44, and 3.19 respectively. The flaw exists in the way these modules handle user input without proper sanitization or validation, creating an avenue for malicious actors to execute arbitrary web scripts or HTML code within the context of a victim's browser session. This vulnerability specifically impacts XOOPS 2.0.x, XOOPS Cube 2.1, and ImpressCMS platforms, which are widely used content management systems in the web application landscape. The vulnerability is classified under CWE-79 as Improper Neutralization of Input During Web Page Generation, which represents one of the most common and dangerous web application security flaws. The attack vectors remain unspecified in the CVE description, but typically such vulnerabilities occur when user-provided data is directly incorporated into web page output without proper encoding or validation mechanisms. The operational impact of this vulnerability is significant as it allows remote attackers to perform session hijacking, deface web pages, steal sensitive information, or redirect users to malicious websites. Attackers can exploit this weakness to inject malicious scripts that persist in the application's database or temporary storage, making the attack vector particularly dangerous as it can affect multiple users over time. The vulnerability enables the execution of malicious code in the context of the victim's browser, potentially leading to complete compromise of user sessions and unauthorized access to sensitive data. This flaw directly maps to attack techniques described in the MITRE ATT&CK framework under the T1059.001 category for Command and Scripting Interpreter, specifically focusing on the use of JavaScript within web applications. The lack of input validation and output encoding in these modules creates a persistent security risk that can be exploited by attackers with minimal technical expertise, making these applications particularly vulnerable to widespread exploitation. Organizations using these vulnerable modules face potential data breaches, reputational damage, and compliance violations due to the exposure of user data and session information.
The technical nature of this vulnerability stems from improper handling of user-supplied data within the web application's rendering pipeline. When users interact with these modules, their input is not adequately sanitized before being displayed in web pages, allowing attackers to inject malicious payloads that execute in the context of other users' browsers. This represents a classic case of unsafe output encoding where special characters are not properly escaped or encoded before being rendered in HTML contexts. The vulnerability affects multiple modules within the same platform ecosystem, suggesting a systemic issue in how these applications handle user input across different components. The impact extends beyond simple script injection as it can be leveraged for more sophisticated attacks including credential theft, CSRF exploitation, and data exfiltration. The vulnerability's persistence across multiple versions of different modules indicates that the underlying architectural flaw has not been properly addressed in the codebase, requiring comprehensive patching efforts across all affected components. Security researchers have identified that this type of vulnerability typically arises when developers assume that user input is safe without implementing proper validation or encoding mechanisms, a common oversight in web application development practices. The vulnerability's exploitation potential is amplified by the widespread adoption of these modules within the XOOPS ecosystem, meaning that a successful attack could potentially compromise numerous websites simultaneously.
Mitigation strategies for this vulnerability require immediate patching of all affected modules to the latest available versions that contain proper input validation and output encoding mechanisms. Organizations should implement comprehensive input sanitization processes that validate and encode all user-supplied data before processing or storing it within the application. The implementation of Content Security Policy headers can provide additional defense-in-depth measures to prevent execution of unauthorized scripts even if the primary vulnerability is not fully patched. Regular security audits and code reviews should be conducted to identify similar vulnerabilities in other modules or custom applications built on these platforms. The use of web application firewalls can help detect and block malicious payloads attempting to exploit this vulnerability, though this should not be considered a substitute for proper code-level fixes. Security teams should also implement monitoring solutions to detect unusual patterns of script injection attempts and user behavior that might indicate exploitation attempts. The vulnerability highlights the critical importance of following secure coding practices as outlined in OWASP Top Ten and other industry standards, particularly regarding input validation and output encoding. Organizations should establish comprehensive vulnerability management processes that include regular scanning of web applications for XSS vulnerabilities and prompt remediation of identified issues. Training programs for developers should emphasize secure coding practices and the importance of proper input validation to prevent similar vulnerabilities from being introduced in future development cycles. The remediation process should also include thorough testing of patched modules to ensure that the fixes do not introduce new functionality issues or regressions in application behavior.