Stored XSS via unescaped campaign form fields
Published Jun 27, 2022 · Updated Aug 3, 2024
Stored XSS in Icegram Engage before 2.1.8 allows remote authenticated users to execute script in a victim browser through campaign fields. The campaign editor stores message_data form_header and form_footer values without sanitizing them and later renders them without escaping during campaign view or preview. Contributor-level access is sufficient to plant the payload; execution requires another user to view or preview the campaign, exposing data or actions available to that session.
Summary
What happened
Stored XSS in Icegram Engage before 2.1.8 allows remote authenticated users to execute script in a victim browser through campaign fields. The campaign editor stores message_data form_header and form_footer values without sanitizing them and later renders them without escaping during campaign view or preview. Contributor-level access is sufficient to plant the payload; execution requires another user to view or preview the campaign, exposing data or actions available to that session.
The record
- CVE
- CVE-2022-1776
- Published
- Jun 27, 2022
- Updated
- Aug 3, 2024
- Vendor
- Icegram
- Product
- Icegram Engage
- Classifications
- CWE-79, T1059.007
- Attack vector
- network
- Privileges
- authenticated
Timeline
How it unfolded
- Jun 27, 2022CVE publishedPublication date reported by the CVE source.
- Aug 3, 2024Record updatedLatest update available in the CVE record.
Exploitability
Present is not the same as exploitable
Compare your product and version with the public record. A matching version still requires validation against your environment.
Is a vulnerable build present?
Compare these published version ranges with your installed build and any vendor patches.
- Affected versionversion=2.1.8 <2.1.8
What conditions does exploitation require?
What is affected?
Published CVSS scores
CVSS describes severity. EPSS estimates exploitation probability.
Attacks
What attackers are doing with it
Daily unique IPs observed by Shadowserver honeypots for known exploited vulnerabilities (KEVs). Missing observations do not establish an absence of attacks.
Weakness, pattern, technique
Public exploit references
- WPScan campaign form-field proof of conceptproof of concept · validated
Labels summarize the accepted research assessment. They do not indicate a test against your environment.
Technologies
Your stack
See the directory against your own environment.
Your stack
Check the software in your environment
Book a demo to see how Hinoki identifies affected software and validates exploitability in your environment.
Book a demo