Skip to content

GHSA-54vw-f4xf-f92j CVE-2025-54139

HAX CMS application pages vulnerable to clickjacking

Medium Packagistnpm
Severity
4.3 / 10
Medium · CVSS 3.1
Exploit chance (EPSS)
0.36%
Chance of exploitation in the next 30 days. Higher than 29.35% of scored vulnerabilities.
Known exploited
No
Not in CISA's catalog
Weakness
CWE-1021 Improper Restriction of Rendered UI Layers or Frames
Fix
Available
2 packages have a fixed version

Description

Summary

All pages within the HAX CMS application do not contain headers to stop other websites from loading the site within an iframe. This applies to both the CMS and generated sites.

PoC

To replicate this vulnerability, load the target page in an iframe and observe the rendered content.

image

Impact

An unauthenticated attacker can load the standalone login page or other sensitive functionality within an iframe, performing a UI redressing attack (Clickjacking). This can be used to perform social engineering attacks to attempt to coerce users into performing unintended actions within the HAX CMS application.

Affected versions

Packagist

PackageVulnerableFixed in
elmsln/haxcms
< 11.0.8
11.0.8

npm

PackageVulnerableFixed in
@haxtheweb/haxcms-nodejs
< 11.0.13
11.0.13

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.

elmsln/haxcms Packagist → 11.0.8

composer
composer require elmsln/haxcms:^11.0.8

@haxtheweb/haxcms-nodejs npm → 11.0.13

npm
npm install @haxtheweb/haxcms-nodejs@11.0.13
yarn
yarn add @haxtheweb/haxcms-nodejs@11.0.13
pnpm
pnpm add @haxtheweb/haxcms-nodejs@11.0.13

Severity breakdown

CVSS 3.1 4.3

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

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

Weakness

CWE-1021: Improper Restriction of Rendered UI Layers or Frames

The web application does not restrict or incorrectly restricts frame objects or UI layers that belong to another application or domain.

How to prevent it
  • Implementation: The use of X-Frame-Options allows developers of web content to restrict the usage of their application within the form of overlays, frames, or iFrames. The developer can indicate from which domains can frame the content. The concept of X-Frame-Options is well documented, but implementation of this protection mechanism is in development to cover gaps. There is a need for allowing frames from multiple domains.
  • Implementation: A developer can use a "frame-breaker" script in each page that should not be framed. This is very helpful for legacy browsers that do not support X-Frame-Options security feature previously mentioned. It is also important to note that this tactic has been circumvented or bypassed. Improper usage of frames can persist in the web application through nested frames. The "frame-breaking" script does not intuitively account for multiple nested frames that can be presented to the user.
  • Implementation: This defense-in-depth technique can be used to prevent the improper usage of frames in web applications. It prioritizes the valid sources of data to be loaded into the application through the usage of declarative policies. Based on which implementation of Content Security Policy is in use, the developer should use the "frame-ancestors" directive or the "frame-src" directive to mitigate this weakness. Both directives allow for the placement of restrictions when it comes to allowing embedded content.
  • Implementation: In addition to frames or iframes as previously mentioned, the web application is expected to place restrictions on whether it is allowed to be rendered within objects, embed, or applet elements.

References

Timeline

  1. Published
  2. Last updated by the source
  3. Latest EPSS score
AdvisorySeverityWhy it's related
GHSA-g2g8-95qg-v35h
HaxCMS has a stored Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) bypass in its saveNode endpoint
High Also affects @haxtheweb/haxcms-nodejs
GHSA-9r33-xhw8-4qqp
HAX CMS: Denial of Service using Malicious Import Request
Medium Also affects @haxtheweb/haxcms-nodejs
GHSA-x3x5-7h4h-gwxg
HAXcms: Mass Token Exfiltration and Cross-Tenant Hijack
High Also affects @haxtheweb/haxcms-nodejs
GHSA-jh3h-rpxg-fr36
Stored XSS via <iframe> in HAX CMS allows access to sensitive client-side data and account takeover
High Also affects @haxtheweb/haxcms-nodejs
GHSA-6c8g-9hfh-pq5h
HAXcms: Private Key Disclosure via Broken HMAC Implementation
Critical Also affects @haxtheweb/haxcms-nodejs
GHSA-2m6p-hm3w-6jm3
HAX CMS: Stored XSS via '<video-player>' component allows arbitrary JavaScript execution and token theft
Medium Also affects @haxtheweb/haxcms-nodejs
GHSA-q862-gcgq-5m6g
HAXcms createSite SSRF Enables Arbitrary File Read
High Also affects @haxtheweb/haxcms-nodejs
GHSA-3fm2-xfq7-7778
HAXcms Has Stored XSS Vulnerability that May Lead to Account Takeover
Medium Also affects @haxtheweb/haxcms-nodejs
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