| CVSS Meta Temp Score | Current Exploit Price (≈) | CTI Interest Score |
|---|---|---|
| 3.9 | $0-$5k | 0.00 |
Summary
A vulnerability, which was classified as problematic, has been found in Pixelpost 1.4.3/1.5 Beta1. This impacts an unknown function. The manipulation leads to cross site scripting. This vulnerability is listed as CVE-2006-1106. The attack may be initiated remotely. There is no available exploit. The actual existence of this vulnerability is currently in question. It is advisable to upgrade the affected component.
Details
A vulnerability was found in Pixelpost 1.4.3/1.5 Beta1 and classified as problematic. This issue affects an unknown functionality. The manipulation with an unknown input leads to a cross site scripting vulnerability. Using CWE to declare the problem leads to CWE-80. The product receives input from an upstream component, but it does not neutralize or incorrectly neutralizes special characters such as "<", ">", and "&" that could be interpreted as web-scripting elements when they are sent to a downstream component that processes web pages. Impacted is integrity. The summary by CVE is:
Cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability in Pixelpost 1.5 beta 1 and earlier allows remote attackers to inject arbitrary web script or HTML via the (1) message, (2) name, (3) url, and (4) email parameters when commenting on a post. NOTE: the vendor has disputed some issues from the original disclosure, but due to the vagueness of the dispute, it is not clear whether the vendor is disputing this particular issue.
The bug was discovered 03/05/2006. The weakness was presented 03/09/2006 by Paisterist with AIST (Website). The advisory is shared at xforce.iss.net. The identification of this vulnerability is CVE-2006-1106 since 03/09/2006. The attack may be initiated remotely. No form of authentication is needed for a successful exploitation. It demands that the victim is doing some kind of user interaction. Neither technical details nor an exploit are publicly available. MITRE ATT&CK project uses the attack technique T1059.007 for this issue.
It is declared as proof-of-concept. The vulnerability was handled as a non-public zero-day exploit for at least 4 days. During that time the estimated underground price was around $0-$5k. The real existence of this vulnerability is still doubted at the moment. The vulnerability scanner Nessus provides a plugin with the ID 21049 (Pixelpost < 1.5 RC1 showimage Parameter SQL Injection), which helps to determine the existence of the flaw in a target environment. It is assigned to the family CGI abuses and running in the context r.
Upgrading eliminates this vulnerability.
The vulnerability is also documented in the databases at X-Force (25047), Tenable (21049), SecurityFocus (BID 16964†) and Vulnerability Center (SBV-10671†). See VDB-29092 and VDB-29091 for similar entries. If you want to get the best quality for vulnerability data then you always have to consider VulDB.
Product
Name
Version
CPE 2.3
CPE 2.2
CVSSv4
VulDB Vector: 🔍VulDB Reliability: 🔍
CVSSv3
VulDB Meta Base Score: 4.3VulDB Meta Temp Score: 3.9
VulDB Base Score: 4.3
VulDB Temp Score: 3.9
VulDB Vector: 🔍
VulDB Reliability: 🔍
CVSSv2
| AV | AC | Au | C | I | A |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 |
| 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 |
| 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 |
| Vector | Complexity | Authentication | Confidentiality | Integrity | Availability |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock |
| Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock |
| Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock |
VulDB Base Score: 🔍
VulDB Temp Score: 🔍
VulDB Reliability: 🔍
NVD Base Score: 🔍
Exploiting
Class: Cross site scriptingCWE: CWE-80 / CWE-74 / CWE-707
CAPEC: 🔍
ATT&CK: 🔍
Physical: No
Local: No
Remote: Yes
Availability: 🔍
Status: Proof-of-Concept
EPSS Score: 🔍
EPSS Percentile: 🔍
Price Prediction: 🔍
Current Price Estimation: 🔍
| 0-Day | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Today | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock |
Nessus ID: 21049
Nessus Name: Pixelpost < 1.5 RC1 showimage Parameter SQL Injection
Nessus File: 🔍
Nessus Risk: 🔍
Nessus Family: 🔍
Nessus Context: 🔍
Threat Intelligence
Interest: 🔍Active Actors: 🔍
Active APT Groups: 🔍
Countermeasures
Recommended: UpgradeStatus: 🔍
0-Day Time: 🔍
Timeline
03/04/2006 🔍03/04/2006 🔍
03/05/2006 🔍
03/09/2006 🔍
03/09/2006 🔍
03/09/2006 🔍
03/13/2006 🔍
03/19/2006 🔍
03/12/2015 🔍
07/08/2021 🔍
Sources
Advisory: xforce.iss.netResearcher: Paisterist
Organization: AIST
Status: Not defined
Disputed: 🔍
CVE: CVE-2006-1106 (🔍)
GCVE (CVE): GCVE-0-2006-1106
GCVE (VulDB): GCVE-100-29093
X-Force: 25047
SecurityFocus: 16964 - Pixelpost Multiple Input Validation Vulnerabilities
Vulnerability Center: 10671 - PixelPost Cross-Site Scripting Vulnerability, Medium
Vupen: ADV-2006-0823
See also: 🔍
Entry
Created: 03/12/2015 12:19Updated: 07/08/2021 10:13
Changes: 03/12/2015 12:19 (65), 06/15/2019 16:35 (4), 07/08/2021 10:13 (3)
Complete: 🔍
Cache ID: 216::103
If you want to get the best quality for vulnerability data then you always have to consider VulDB.
No comments yet. Languages: en.
Please log in to comment.