GHSA-r7fx-8g49-7hhr CVE-2026-42841
Grav CMS vulnerable to stored XSS via Markdown media attribute() action
- Severity
- 0.0 / 10
- Medium · CVSS 4.0
- Exploit chance (EPSS)
- 0.42%
- Chance of exploitation in the next 30 days. Higher than 36.39% 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
An authenticated user with page editing permissions can inject an executable JavaScript event-handler attribute into rendered image HTML through Grav's Markdown media action syntax.
The issue is caused by Markdown image query parameters being converted into callable media actions. The public attribute() media method can be reached this way, allowing an editor to set an arbitrary HTML attribute name and value on the generated image element.
For example, this Markdown:
)
is rendered as an image tag containing an executable onload handler:
<img onload="alert(document.domain)" alt="Quarterly market overview" src="/user/pages/03.campaigns/market-overview.gif?...">
This results in stored XSS when another user views the affected page. In a multi-user Grav installation, a lower-privileged page editor could use this to target administrators or reviewers who preview or view editor-controlled content.
Tested versions:
- Grav CMS: 1.7.49.5
- Admin Plugin: 1.10.49.1
Suggested classification:
- CWE-79: Improper Neutralization of Input During Web Page Generation
- Stored Cross-Site Scripting
- Suggested CVSS v4.0 score if page editing is considered high privilege: 6.9 Medium
- Suggested CVSS v4.0 vector:
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:H/UI:P/VC:H/VI:L/VA:N/SC:H/SI:L/SA:N - Suggested CVSS v3.1 score if page editing is considered high privilege: 6.9 Medium
- Suggested CVSS v3.1 vector:
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:H/UI:R/S:C/C:H/I:L/A:N
Details
The issue appears to come from this source-to-sink flow:
ParsedownGravTrait::inlineImage()processes Markdown images.Excerpts::processImageExcerpt()resolves the referenced media object.Excerpts::processMediaActions()parses the image URL query string into media actions.call_user_func_array()invokes the requested action method on the media object.MediaObjectTrait::attribute()stores the attacker-controlled attribute name and value.- The media object returns a Parsedown element containing the injected attribute.
- Parsedown renders the attribute name into the final HTML.
Relevant code paths:
system/src/Grav/Common/Markdown/ParsedownGravTrait.php
system/src/Grav/Common/Page/Markdown/Excerpts.php
system/src/Grav/Common/Media/Traits/MediaObjectTrait.php
system/src/Grav/Common/Page/Medium/StaticImageMedium.php
system/src/Grav/Common/Page/Medium/ImageMedium.php
vendor/erusev/parsedown/Parsedown.php
In system/src/Grav/Common/Markdown/ParsedownGravTrait.php, Markdown image excerpts are passed into Grav-specific media handling:
if (isset($excerpt['element']['attributes']['src'])) {
$excerpt = $this->excerpts->processImageExcerpt($excerpt);
}
In system/src/Grav/Common/Page/Markdown/Excerpts.php, query string parameters are converted into media action calls. The query parameter name becomes the method name:
$carry[] = ['method' => $parts[0], 'params' => $value];
The requested method is later invoked dynamically:
$medium = call_user_func_array([$medium, $action['method']], $args);
For the payload:
attribute=onload,alert(document.domain)
the method is attribute, and the arguments are onload and alert(document.domain).
In system/src/Grav/Common/Media/Traits/MediaObjectTrait.php, attribute() stores the caller-controlled attribute name directly:
public function attribute($attribute = null, $value = '')
{
if (!empty($attribute)) {
$this->attributes[$attribute] = $value;
}
return $this;
}
The image media classes then return the collected attributes as attributes for an img element.
In system/src/Grav/Common/Page/Medium/StaticImageMedium.php:
return ['name' => 'img', 'attributes' => $attributes];
The non-static image path in system/src/Grav/Common/Page/Medium/ImageMedium.php also returns image attributes in the same way.
Finally, in vendor/erusev/parsedown/Parsedown.php, the attribute value is escaped, but the attribute name is rendered as-is:
$markup .= ' '.$name.'="'.self::escape($value).'"';
As a result, the attacker-controlled attribute name onload is emitted into the final HTML and executes as a browser event handler.
The Admin Plugin's save-time XSS detection does not appear to block this because the stored content is Markdown media syntax, not raw HTML:
)
The dangerous HTML is generated later during Markdown/media rendering.
PoC
I reproduced this on a standard Grav CMS installation with the Admin Plugin enabled.
Configuration and prerequisites:
- Grav CMS 1.7.49.5
- Admin Plugin 1.10.49.1
- Markdown processing enabled for pages
- A user account with permission to create or edit pages
- A page media file available in the edited page folder, for example
market-overview.gif
Steps to reproduce:
-
Install Grav CMS with the Admin Plugin.
-
Log in to the Admin panel as a user who can create or edit pages.
-
Create a normal content page or edit an existing one.
-
Add or reference a page media file named
market-overview.gif. -
Insert the following Markdown into the page body:
) -
Save the page.
-
Open the rendered frontend page in a browser.
-
The JavaScript payload executes when the image loads.
-
Inspect the generated DOM. The rendered image element contains the injected
onloadattribute.
Expected result:
The Markdown media action should not be able to generate executable HTML attributes. The payload should be rejected, sanitized, or rendered without the dangerous event-handler attribute.
Actual result:
The payload is accepted and rendered as an executable image event handler:
<img onload="alert(document.domain)" alt="Quarterly market overview" src="/user/pages/03.campaigns/market-overview.gif?...">
Screenshots:
- the stored Markdown payload in the page editor <img width="1718" height="1013" alt="edycja" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/8f5e5275-e4ef-4d5e-a2cd-44683537b909" />
- the JavaScript alert executing on the frontend page <img width="1727" height="1002" alt="alert" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/6de81228-830c-49f2-ac41-b15658a8913d" />
- browser DevTools showing the injected
onloadattribute in the rendered DOM <img width="939" height="539" alt="inspect" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/7832c42d-6f3a-4ea2-b072-b837bd3913ed" />
Impact
This is a stored cross-site scripting vulnerability.
An authenticated user with page editing permissions can store a malicious Markdown image reference. When the affected page is rendered, the payload executes in the browser of any user who views that page.
In multi-user Grav installations, this may allow a lower-privileged editor to target administrators, reviewers, or other privileged users who preview or view editor-controlled content. Depending on the victim's privileges and deployed plugins, successful exploitation may allow JavaScript execution in the site origin, access to same-origin page data available to the victim, and same-origin actions performed as the victim.
CVSS 4.0 rationale:
AV:N: the issue is exploitable through the web application.AC:L: no special race condition or complex setup is required after page editing access is obtained.AT:P: exploitation requires the malicious Markdown/media reference to be stored in page content and later rendered to a victim.PR:H: the attacker needs page editing capability.UI:P: a victim must view the affected page. The demonstratedonloadpayload executes on passive page rendering, without requiring a click or form submission by the victim.VC:H/VI:L/VA:N: confidentiality impact can be high when the victim is an administrator or reviewer; integrity impact is limited; no direct availability impact was demonstrated.SC:H/SI:L/SA:N: the injected script executes in the browser/application context and may affect subsequent same-origin interactions available to the victim.
Maintainer note — fix applied (2026-04-24)
Fixed in Grav core on the 2.0 branch: commit 5a12f9be8 — will ship in 2.0.0-beta.2.
What changed: MediaObjectTrait::attribute() — the sink reached by Markdown like ) — now gates the attribute name through an allowlist regex (^[A-Za-z][A-Za-z0-9_:.\-]*$) plus an explicit denylist of script-context names:
- any
on*handler (case-insensitive) style(inline CSS expression risk)xmlns(XML namespace tricks)srcdoc(iframe sandbox bypass)formaction(form action override)
Invalid names are silently dropped — the attribute isn't stored, so it doesn't survive into the rendered <img>. src/href/data-*/aria-*/standard media attributes are unaffected.
Files:
system/src/Grav/Common/Media/Traits/MediaObjectTrait.php— newisSafeAttributeName()gate.tests/unit/Grav/Common/Security/MediaAttributeSecurityTest.php— 28 cases (14 dangerous-name rejections, 14 safe-name round-trips).
Discoverers
@K-Czaplicki @morzelowski
Affected versions
Packagist
| Package | Vulnerable | Fixed 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 4.0 0.0
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:H/UI:P/VC:H/VI:L/VA:N/SC:H/SI:L/SA:N
- Attack vector
- Network
- Attack complexity
- Low
- Attack requirements
- Present
- Privileges required
- High
- User interaction
- Passive
- Confidentiality (vulnerable system)
- High
- Integrity (vulnerable system)
- Low
- Availability (vulnerable system)
- None
- Confidentiality (subsequent systems)
- High
- Integrity (subsequent systems)
- Low
- Availability (subsequent systems)
- None
CVSS 3.1 4.8
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:H/UI:R/S:C/C:L/I:L/A:N
- Attack vector
- Network
- Attack complexity
- Low
- Privileges required
- High
- 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
Advisories
Packages
Other links
Timeline
- Published
- Last updated by the source
- Latest EPSS score
Related advisories
| Advisory | Severity | Why 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 |
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