Skip to content

GHSA-43c9-gw4x-pcx6 CVE-2025-24019

Authenticated arbitrary file deletion in YesWiki

High Packagist
Severity
7.1 / 10
High · CVSS 3.1
Exploit chance (EPSS)
0.61%
Chance of exploitation in the next 30 days. Higher than 49.44% of scored vulnerabilities.
Known exploited
No
Not in CISA's catalog
Weakness
CWE-22 Improper Limitation of a Pathname to a Restricted Directory ('Path Traversal')
Fix
4.5.0
Upgrade yeswiki/yeswiki to this version or later

Description

Authenticated arbitrary file deletion in YesWiki <= 4.4.5

Summary

It is possible for any authenticated user, through the use of the filemanager to delete any file owned by the user running the FastCGI Process Manager (FPM) on the host without any limitation on the filesystem's scope.

This Proof of Concept has been performed using the followings:

  • YesWiki v4.4.5 (doryphore-dev branch, latest)
  • Docker environnment (docker/docker-compose.yml)
  • Docker v27.5.0
  • Default installation
Details

The vulnerability makes use of the filemanager that allows a user to manage files that are attached to a resource when they have owner permission on it. This part of the code is managed in tools/attach/libs/attach.lib.php

public function doFileManager($isAction = false)
{
    $do = (isset($_GET['do']) && $_GET['do']) ? $_GET['do'] : '';
    switch ($do) {
        case 'restore':
            $this->fmRestore();
            $this->fmShow(true, $isAction);
            break;
        case 'erase':
            $this->fmErase();
            $this->fmShow(true, $isAction);
            break;
        case 'del':
            $this->fmDelete();
            $this->fmShow(false, $isAction);
            break;
        case 'trash':
            $this->fmShow(true, $isAction);
            break;
        case 'emptytrash':
            $this->fmEmptyTrash(); //pas de break car apres un emptytrash => retour au gestionnaire
            // no break
        default:
            $this->fmShow(false, $isAction);
    }
}

The fmErase() function doesn't sanitize or verify the path that has been provided by the user in any way. Thus allowing a malicious user to specify any arbitrary file on the filesystem and having it deleted through the use of unlink() (as long as the user that runs the process has permission to delete it).

public function fmErase()
{
    $path = $this->GetUploadPath();
    $filename = $path . '/' . ($_GET['file'] ? $_GET['file'] : '');
    if (file_exists($filename)) {
        unlink($filename);
    }
}

In addition to this deletion accross all the filesystem through fmErase(), it is also possible to delete any file attached to an existing wiki page, for instance, if user A creates a page and attaches images/documents to it, they always get uploaded to the files/ directory. If user B (malicious), knows the path of the files he can also arbitrarly delete them. (fmDelete() is also impacted by this case)

PoC
1. Environnement setup

The following actions have been performed as a privileged user

First, let's create one user (in addition to the WikiAdmin user):

poc1

Restrict the edition of 'PagePrincipale' wiki page to administrators only:

poc2

2. Upload of a file on a resource not owned by our user

The following actions have been performed as a privileged user

Second, let's upload a media to this PagePrincipale wiki page:

poc3 poc4

Then view it in the page's filemanager:

poc5

We can confirm that our file has been uploaded to the files/ directory by directly looking at the yeswiki container:

poc5 1

3. Arbitrary deletion (in files/)

The following actions have been performed using an unprivileged user

Now, get the full path/name of the media in the files directory by opening it in a new tab:

poc6

Afterwards, we need an instance of filemanager to be accessible to our user so we need to create a page that we own, here is used the agenda and the creation of a new event:

poc7

Call the erase method on the PagePrincipale's uploaded media:

poc

The media is now deleted from PagePrincipale (the button is shown when the attached media doesn't exist, it's an intended behaviour):

poc9

It has also disappeared from the files/ directory:

poc10

This behaviour can be applied to any file under the files/ directory.

4. Arbitrary deletion (in /tmp/)

The following actions have been performed using a privileged access

Finally, using the same user as the process running the app, we create a file under the /tmp directory:

poc11

The following actions have been performed using an unprivileged user

We can once again call the erase method using a relative path:

poc3

The file isn't here anymore:

poc13

Impact

This vulnerability allows any authenticated user to arbitrarly remove content from the Wiki resulting in partial loss of data and defacement/deteroriation of the website. In the context of a container installation of YesWiki without any modification, the 'yeswiki' files (for example .php) are not owned by the same user (root) as the one running the FPM process (www-data). However in a standard installation, www-data may also be the owner of the PHP files, allowing a malicious user to completely cut the access to the wiki by deleting all important PHP files (like index.php or core files of YesWiki).

Suggestion of possible corrective measures
  • Restrict the possible paths of fmErase() to the upload_path directory.

  • Restrict the use of fmErase() to trashed files only.

public function fmErase()
{
    $path = $this->GetUploadPath();
    $filename = $this->GetUploadPath() . '/' . basename(realpath(($_GET['file'] ? $_GET['file'] : ''))); //Sanitize file path
    if (file_exists($filename) && preg_match('/trash\d{14}$/', $filename)) { //Make sure that the filename ends with trash and a date
        unlink($filename);
    }
}
  • Make sure that any request to fmErase() or fmDelete() originates from the owner of the resource to which the attachment is linked (asks a bit more than a few lines of code).

Affected versions

Packagist

PackageVulnerableFixed in
yeswiki/yeswiki
< 4.5.0
4.5.0

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.

yeswiki/yeswiki Packagist → 4.5.0

composer
composer require yeswiki/yeswiki:^4.5.0

Severity breakdown

CVSS 3.1 7.1

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

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

Weakness

CWE-22: Improper Limitation of a Pathname to a Restricted Directory ('Path Traversal')

The product uses external input to construct a pathname that is intended to identify a file or directory that is located underneath a restricted parent directory, but the product does not properly neutralize special elements within the pathname that can cause the pathname to resolve to a location that is outside of the restricted directory.

How to prevent it
  • 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 validating filenames, use stringent allowlists that limit the character set to be used. If feasible, only allow a single "." character in the filename to avoid weaknesses such as CWE-23, and exclude directory separators such as "/" to avoid CWE-36. Use a list of allowable file extensions, which will help to avoid CWE-434. Do not rely exclusively on a filtering mechanism that removes potentially dangerous characters. This is equivalent to a denylist, which may be incomplete (CWE-184). For example, filtering "/" is insufficient protection if the filesystem also supports the use of "\" as a directory separator. Another possible error could occur when the filtering is applied in a way that still produces dangerous data (CWE-182). For example, if "../" sequences are removed from the ".../...//" string in a sequential fashion, two instances of "../" would b
  • 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.
  • Implementation: Inputs should be decoded and canonicalized to the application's current internal representation before being validated (CWE-180). Make sure that the application does not decode the same input twice (CWE-174). Such errors could be used to bypass allowlist validation schemes by introducing dangerous inputs after they have been checked. Use a built-in path canonicalization function (such as realpath() in C) that produces the canonical version of the pathname, which effectively removes ".." sequences and symbolic links (CWE-23, CWE-59). This includes: realpath() in C getCanonicalPath() in Java GetFullPath() in ASP.NET realpath() or abs_path() in Perl realpath() in PHP
  • 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].
  • 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].
  • Architecture and Design, Operation: Run your code using the lowest privileges that are required to accomplish the necessary tasks [REF-76]. If possible, create isolated accounts with limited privileges that are only used for a single task. That way, a successful attack will not immediately give the attacker access to the rest of the software or its environment. For example, database applications rarely need to run as the database administrator, especially in day-to-day operations.
  • 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. For example, ID 1 could map to "inbox.txt" and ID 2 could map to "profile.txt". Features such as the ESAPI AccessReferenceMap [REF-185] provide this capability.
  • Architecture and Design, Operation: Run the code in a "jail" or similar sandbox environment that enforces strict boundaries between the process and the operating system. This may effectively restrict which files can be accessed in a particular directory or which commands can be executed by the software. OS-level examples include the Unix chroot jail, AppArmor, and SELinux. In general, managed code may provide some protection. For example, java.io.FilePermission in the Java SecurityManager allows the software to specify restrictions on file operations. This may not be a feasible solution, and it only limits the impact to the operating system; the rest of the application may still be subject to compromise. Be careful to avoid CWE-243 and other weaknesses related to jails.
  • Architecture and Design, Operation: Store library, include, and utility files outside of the web document root, if possible. Otherwise, store them in a separate directory and use the web server's access control capabilities to prevent attackers from directly requesting them. One common practice is to define a fixed constant in each calling program, then check for the existence of the constant in the library/include file; if the constant does not exist, then the file was directly requested, and it can exit immediately. This significantly reduces the chance of an attacker being able to bypass any protection mechanisms that are in the base program but not in the include files. It will also reduce the attack surface.
  • Implementation: Ensure that error messages only contain minimal details that are useful to the intended audience and no one else. The messages need to strike the balance between being too cryptic (which can confuse users) or being too detailed (which may reveal more than intended). The messages should not reveal the methods that were used to determine the error. Attackers can use detailed information to refine or optimize their original attack, thereby increasing their chances of success. If errors must be captured in some detail, record them in log messages, but consider what could occur if the log messages can be viewed by attackers. Highly sensitive information such as passwords should never be saved to log files. Avoid inconsistent messaging that might accidentally tip off an attacker about internal state, such as whether a user account exists or not. In the context of path traversal, error messages which disclose path information can help attackers craft the appropriate attack strings to move through the file system hierarchy.
  • 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-9369-69wj-7m2f
YesWiki Vulnerable to Authenticated PHP Object Injection in BazarImportAction via unserialize
Critical Also affects yeswiki/yeswiki
GHSA-4pf7-cc4r-g63h
YesWiki has Authenticated SQL Injection via ReactionManager
High Also affects yeswiki/yeswiki
GHSA-r5xw-gcgw-hwp5
YesWiki Vulnerable to Reflected XSS via Unescaped `id` Parameter in Bazar Widget HTML Attributes
Medium Also affects yeswiki/yeswiki
GHSA-35f3-pg38-486f
YesWiki Vulnerable to Reflected XSS via Unescaped Archived-Revision `time` Parameter in `handlers/page/show.php`
Medium Also affects yeswiki/yeswiki
GHSA-xc7j-3g8q-9vh4
YesWiki has stored XSS in Bazar form-field templates via unescaped field.label / field.hint (|raw('html'))
Medium Also affects yeswiki/yeswiki
GHSA-8f2v-2qhj-gfwg
YesWiki: Second-Order SQL Injection in Page Delete API via Unescaped Page Tag (`ApiController::deletePage`)
High Also affects yeswiki/yeswiki
GHSA-qg78-vmvc-fhjw
YesWiki: SQL Injection possible through public Bazar entry-listing APIs via numeric `query`/`queries` filters
High Also affects yeswiki/yeswiki
GHSA-vw42-752g-5mrp
YesWiki has Unauthenticated Server-Side Request Forgery via ActivityPub `Signature.keyId`
High Also affects yeswiki/yeswiki
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