CVE-2024-32970 Vulnerability Analysis & Exploit Details

CVE-2024-32970 Vulnerability Summary

CVE-2024-32970: Phlex is a framework for building object-oriented views in Ruby. In affected versions there is a potential cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability that can be exploited via maliciously crafted user data. Since the last two vulnerabilities https://github.com/phlex-ruby/phlex/security/advisories/GHSA-242p-4v39-2v8g and https://github.com/phlex-ruby/phlex/security/advisories/GHSA-g7xq-xv8c-h98c, we have invested in extensive browser tests. It was these new tests that helped us uncover these issues. As of now the project exercises every possible attack vector the developers can think of — including enumerating every ASCII character, and we run these tests in Chrome, Firefox and Safari. Additionally, we test against a list of 6613 known XSS payloads (see: payloadbox/xss-payload-list). The reason these issues were not detected before is the escapes were working as designed. However, their design didn't take into account just how recklessly permissive browsers are when it comes to executing unsafe JavaScript via HTML attributes. If you render an `<a>` tag with an `href` attribute set to a user-provided link, that link could potentially execute JavaScript when clicked by another user. If you splat user-provided attributes when rendering any HTML or SVG tag, malicious event attributes could be included in the output, executing JavaScript when the events are triggered by another user. Patches are available on RubyGems for all minor versions released in the last year. Users are advised to upgrade. Users unable to upgrade should configure a Content Security Policy that does not allow `unsafe-inline` which would effectively prevent this vulnerability from being exploited. Users who upgrade are also advised to configure a Content Security Policy header that does not allow `unsafe-inline`.

Exploit Prediction Scoring System (EPSS)

The EPSS score estimates the probability that this vulnerability will be exploited in the near future.

EPSS Score: 0.044% (probability of exploit)

EPSS Percentile: 12.92% (lower percentile = lower relative risk)
This vulnerability is less risky than approximately 87.08% of others.

CVE-2024-32970 References

External References

• https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/HTTP/Headers/Content-Security-Policy
• https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/HTTP/Headers/Content-Security-Policy#unsafe-inline
• https://github.com/payloadbox/xss-payload-list
• https://github.com/phlex-ruby/phlex/commit/da8f94342a84cff9d78c98bcc3b3604ee2e577d2
• https://github.com/phlex-ruby/phlex/security/advisories/GHSA-9p57-h987-4vgx
• https://rubygems.org/gems/phlex
• https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/HTTP/Headers/Content-Security-Policy
• https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/HTTP/Headers/Content-Security-Policy#unsafe-inline
• https://github.com/payloadbox/xss-payload-list
• https://github.com/phlex-ruby/phlex/commit/da8f94342a84cff9d78c98bcc3b3604ee2e577d2
• https://github.com/phlex-ruby/phlex/security/advisories/GHSA-9p57-h987-4vgx
• https://rubygems.org/gems/phlex

CWE Common Weakness Enumeration

CAPEC Common Attack Pattern Enumeration and Classification

• XSS Using MIME Type Mismatch CAPEC-209 An adversary creates a file with scripting content but where the specified MIME type of the file is such that scripting is not expected. The adversary tricks the victim into accessing a URL that responds with the script file. Some browsers will detect that the specified MIME type of the file does not match the actual type of its content and will automatically switch to using an interpreter for the real content type. If the browser does not invoke script filters before doing this, the adversary's script may run on the target unsanitized, possibly revealing the victim's cookies or executing arbitrary script in their browser.
• DOM-Based XSS CAPEC-588 This type of attack is a form of Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) where a malicious script is inserted into the client-side HTML being parsed by a web browser. Content served by a vulnerable web application includes script code used to manipulate the Document Object Model (DOM). This script code either does not properly validate input, or does not perform proper output encoding, thus creating an opportunity for an adversary to inject a malicious script launch a XSS attack. A key distinction between other XSS attacks and DOM-based attacks is that in other XSS attacks, the malicious script runs when the vulnerable web page is initially loaded, while a DOM-based attack executes sometime after the page loads. Another distinction of DOM-based attacks is that in some cases, the malicious script is never sent to the vulnerable web server at all. An attack like this is guaranteed to bypass any server-side filtering attempts to protect users.
• Reflected XSS CAPEC-591 This type of attack is a form of Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) where a malicious script is "reflected" off a vulnerable web application and then executed by a victim's browser. The process starts with an adversary delivering a malicious script to a victim and convincing the victim to send the script to the vulnerable web application.
• Stored XSS CAPEC-592 An adversary utilizes a form of Cross-site Scripting (XSS) where a malicious script is persistently "stored" within the data storage of a vulnerable web application as valid input.
• Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) CAPEC-63 An adversary embeds malicious scripts in content that will be served to web browsers. The goal of the attack is for the target software, the client-side browser, to execute the script with the users' privilege level. An attack of this type exploits a programs' vulnerabilities that are brought on by allowing remote hosts to execute code and scripts. Web browsers, for example, have some simple security controls in place, but if a remote attacker is allowed to execute scripts (through injecting them in to user-generated content like bulletin boards) then these controls may be bypassed. Further, these attacks are very difficult for an end user to detect.
• AJAX Footprinting CAPEC-85 This attack utilizes the frequent client-server roundtrips in Ajax conversation to scan a system. While Ajax does not open up new vulnerabilities per se, it does optimize them from an attacker point of view. A common first step for an attacker is to footprint the target environment to understand what attacks will work. Since footprinting relies on enumeration, the conversational pattern of rapid, multiple requests and responses that are typical in Ajax applications enable an attacker to look for many vulnerabilities, well-known ports, network locations and so on. The knowledge gained through Ajax fingerprinting can be used to support other attacks, such as XSS.

Other 5 Recently Published CVEs Vulnerabilities

• CVE-2025-31203 – An integer overflow was addressed with improved input validation. This issue is fixed in macOS Sequoia 15.4, tvOS 18.4, iPadOS 17.7.6, macOS Sonoma...
• CVE-2025-31202 – A null pointer dereference was addressed with improved input validation. This issue is fixed in iOS 18.4 and iPadOS 18.4, macOS Sequoia 15.4, tvOS ...
• CVE-2025-31197 – The issue was addressed with improved checks. This issue is fixed in macOS Sequoia 15.4, tvOS 18.4, macOS Ventura 13.7.5, iPadOS 17.7.6, macOS Sono...
• CVE-2025-30445 – A type confusion issue was addressed with improved checks. This issue is fixed in macOS Sequoia 15.4, tvOS 18.4, macOS Ventura 13.7.5, iPadOS 17.7....
• CVE-2025-24271 – An access issue was addressed with improved access restrictions. This issue is fixed in macOS Sequoia 15.4, tvOS 18.4, macOS Ventura 13.7.5, iPadOS...