Skip to content

GHSA-c2q3-p4jr-c55f CVE-2026-42842

Grav Vulnerable to XSS via Taxonomy Field Values in Admin Panel

Medium Packagist
Severity
5.4 / 10
Medium · CVSS 3.1
Exploit chance (EPSS)
0.18%
Chance of exploitation in the next 30 days. Higher than 7.93% 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
2.0.0-beta.2
Upgrade getgrav/grav to this version or later

Description

Summary

A Stored Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) vulnerability exists in the Grav CMS Form plugin's select field template. Taxonomy tag and category values are rendered with the Twig |raw filter in the admin panel, bypassing the global autoescape protection. An editor-level user can inject arbitrary JavaScript that executes in any administrator's browser session when they view or edit any page in the admin panel.

Additionally, Grav's built-in XSS detection (Security::detectXss()) can be bypassed by using payloads that close the <option>/<select> context and use unquoted event handlers - the on_events regex fails to match event handlers without quotes or trailing spaces before >.

Important

  • The vulnerability is in the Form plugin (select.html.twig), which is installed by default with Grav
  • The XSS is cross-page: a malicious taxonomy value on one page executes when an admin edits any page, because taxonomy options are rendered from a shared global pool
  • An editor can exploit this without any other vulnerability - taxonomy fields are not in the server-side restricted fields list
  • The HttpOnly flag on session cookies prevents direct session theft, but the XSS can steal the admin nonce and perform privileged actions via JavaScript

Permissions Needed

  • Editor: can create or edit pages and set taxonomy tag/category values

Details

The Form plugin's select field template renders option values using the |raw Twig filter, which outputs content without HTML escaping:

File: user/plugins/form/templates/forms/fields/select/select.html.twig

{# Line 55 #}
 avalue|raw 

{# Line 65 #}
 suboption|t|raw 

{# Line 72 #}
 item_value|t|raw 

The taxonomy field in the page editor uses this select template. When a page has taxonomy values (tags, categories), these values are populated as <option> elements in the select dropdown. The value attribute is properly escaped by the browser's attribute encoding, but the display text between <option> tags is rendered raw:

<option value="&lt;script&gt;alert(1)&lt;/script&gt;"><script>alert(1)</script></option>

Since taxonomy options are collected globally across all pages (to provide autocomplete/selection), a malicious taxonomy value on any page will appear in the taxonomy dropdown of every page editor - making this a cross-page stored XSS.

The server-side field restriction in the flex-objects plugin only blocks ['form', 'forms', 'process', 'twig'] for non-super users. Taxonomy fields are not restricted, so editors can freely set arbitrary taxonomy values.

XSS Detection Bypass

Grav's Security::detectXss() checks for dangerous_tags (e.g., <script>, <iframe>), on_events (event handlers), and invalid_protocols (e.g., javascript:). However, the on_events regex:

'on_events' => '#(<[^>]+[a-z\x00-\x20"\'\/)(?:on[a-z]+)\s*=[\s|\'"'].*[\s|\'"']>#iUu'

requires either quotes around the handler value or a trailing space before >. An unquoted handler like onerror=alert(1)> (no space before >) bypasses this check entirely.

Combined with </option></select> to break out of the select context (neither tag is in dangerous_tags), the full payload evades all three detection layers and triggers no XSS warning in the admin panel.

PoC

Step 1: Login as Editor

Navigate to http://TARGET/admin/ and authenticate with editor credentials.

Step 2: Create a Page with Malicious Taxonomy
  • Go to Pages → Add → Add Page
  • Title: XSS via editor
  • Go to Options Tap
  • On Taxonomies, Add tag:
</option></select><img src=x onerror=alert('XSS-via-editor')>

This payload:

  • Closes </option></select> to break out of the select dropdown context
  • Injects an <img> tag with an unquoted onerror handler (bypasses on_events regex)
  • Is not in the dangerous_tags list (no <script>, <iframe>, etc.)
  • Triggers no XSS warning in the admin panel

<img width="1221" height="857" alt="image" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/6223cbb2-f04b-46bd-89ce-828c89ad77ab" />

Step 3: Trigger the XSS

When any administrator navigates to the page editor of any page (not just the malicious one), the JavaScript executes immediately.

<img width="1224" height="856" alt="image" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/f008b0f2-dedb-4b22-a74a-cdc0d7325cb4" />

The XSS fires because taxonomy tag options are collected globally across all pages and rendered with |raw in the select dropdown template. The payload breaks out of the <option> context, and the browser renders the <img> tag as a regular DOM element.

Impact

  • Session hijacking: While HttpOnly prevents direct cookie theft, the XSS can steal the admin nonce token and perform any admin action via AJAX requests
  • Privilege escalation: An editor can perform admin-only actions (create users, modify system configuration, install plugins) through the hijacked admin session
  • Cross-page impact: A single malicious taxonomy value affects the entire admin panel - every page editor view is compromised

Maintainer note — fix applied (2026-04-24)

Fixed across two repos:

  1. grav-plugin-form 9.0.1 (commit 6bffb4c) — the primary fix. All four |raw filters in templates/forms/fields/select/select.html.twig (placeholder, avalue, suboption, item_value) have been removed. Option labels — including taxonomy values that propagate cross-page through the admin's shared selection pool — now go through Twig's default escaper, so a lower-privileged editor can no longer inject script that runs in an admin's browser when they open any page editor.

  2. Grav core on the 2.0 branch (commit 5a12f9be8, ships in 2.0.0-beta.2) — closes the detection-bypass half of the report. The on_events regex in Security::detectXss() is tightened so unquoted handlers like onerror=alert(1)> are flagged (see separate GHSA-9695-8fr9-hw5q), and option/select have been added to default security.xss_dangerous_tags so </option></select>… tripwires the detector (see separate GHSA-w8cg-7jcj-4vv2).

Sites running admin2 on Grav 2.0.0-beta.2 get the 9.0.1 form plugin automatically via its existing dependency graph.

Files:

Affected versions

Packagist

PackageVulnerableFixed in
getgrav/grav
< 2.0.0-beta.2
2.0.0-beta.2

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.

getgrav/grav Packagist → 2.0.0-beta.2

composer
composer require getgrav/grav:^2.0.0-beta.2

Severity breakdown

CVSS 3.1 5.4

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

Attack vector
Network
Attack complexity
Low
Privileges required
Low
User interaction
Required
Scope
Changed
Confidentiality
Low
Integrity
Low
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-xjw5-q542-3vmr
Grav: config_denied_paths default list omits `system`, exposing real secrets (e.g. system.cache.redis.password) via the Twig sandbox when config_access is enabled
High Also affects getgrav/grav
GHSA-3jhr-mxmx-38cx
Grav: UserInterface offsetget/offsetexists allow-listed in Twig sandbox let editor-authored content leak hashed_password and 2FA secrets via offsetGet()
Medium Also affects getgrav/grav
GHSA-9ccq-2jfg-qw33
Grav: Origin validation bypass in Uri::referrer() and Pages::referrerRoute() via unanchored prefix match
Critical Also affects getgrav/grav
GHSA-38p6-h87p-r4cg
Grav: Non constant time nonce comparison in Utils::verifyNonce() used for CSRF protection
Medium Also affects getgrav/grav
GHSA-p597-crqc-m349
Grav: The system, site, and theme Twig variables bypass the content sandbox entirely and are never covered by config_denied_paths
Medium Also affects getgrav/grav
GHSA-47ch-6w46-6xm7
Grav: media_directory() Twig function allows filesystem path traversal and file content disclosure from sandboxed page content
Medium Also affects getgrav/grav
GHSA-jq29-c7v8-rg55
Grav: Path Traversal in MediaUploadTrait::deleteFile() Allows Arbitrary File Deletion
High Also affects getgrav/grav
GHSA-8hgv-xc77-jmcr
Grav: Page editors can inject arbitrary script into rendered pages via the Twig sandbox's assets.addJs/addCss allowlist, escalating to super-admin
Medium Also affects getgrav/grav
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