CVE-2026-111089 Vulnerability Analysis & Exploit Details

CVE-2026-111089 Vulnerability Summary

CVE-2026-111089: Apache Wicket reads texts from the application's resource bundles — a localized label, a css class name — and writes some of them into the JavaScript and the markup it generates for a component. Those texts are placed inside single-quoted JavaScript string literals and inside quoted attribute values without being escaped for that context, so a text containing a quote ends the literal or the attribute, and what follows is parsed as script or as markup in the application's origin when the page loads. A resource bundle entry is authored for the application and does not say where the framework will write it. The same key is read by the framework into element text, where Wicket escapes it, and into the contexts below, where it did not. A text containing an apostrophe, which is ordinary in several languages, is enough to break the page; a text under the influence of another party is enough to run script. In org.apache.wicket:wicket-core, org.apache.wicket.markup.html.form.upload.MultiFileUploadField writes the org.apache.wicket.mfu.delete message into a JavaScript string literal, and org.apache.wicket.markup.html.form.Form writes the hidden-fields css class into the class attribute of the container it renders for its hidden fields; on 8.0.0 through 8.19.0 and 9.0.0 through 9.24.0 Form#appendDefaultButtonField writes the same css class into a second container. In org.apache.wicket:wicket-extensions, UploadProgressBar writes its UploadProgressBar.starting text into a JavaScript string literal, FilterForm writes the hidden-fields css class into the class attribute of its hidden input markup, and on 9.0.0 through 9.24.0 and 10.0.0 through 10.11.0 TrapFocusBehavior writes its current css class into a JavaScript string literal. The Content-Security-Policy that Apache Wicket 9.x and 10.x send by default does not prevent the JavaScript cases: the generated script is written into a script element carrying the per-response nonce, so the injected code is part of a script the policy admits. It does prevent an inline event handler injected through the attribute cases. This issue affects Apache Wicket: from 8.0.0 through 8.19.0, from 9.0.0 through 9.24.0, from 10.0.0 through 10.11.0. Users of Apache Wicket 7.x or older, which are no longer supported, should upgrade to a supported version. Users are recommended to upgrade to version 8.20.0, 9.25.0 or 10.12.0, which fix the issue.

CVE-2026-111089 References

External References

• https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/xyp4sm5mm7s618fktstb22577qxbmqw8

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-2026-120283 – A vulnerability was identified in Linksys E8450 1.2.00.360516. Affected is the function strcpy of the file /www/cgi-bin/portal.cgi. Such manipulati...
• CVE-2026-120282 – A vulnerability was determined in WAVLINK WN536AX6-A V260507. This impacts the function host_black of the file /protocol.csp. This manipulation of ...
• CVE-2026-120281 – A vulnerability was found in WAVLINK WN536AX6-A V260507. This affects the function strcpy of the file /protocol.csp of the component OpenVPN Handle...
• CVE-2026-120280 – A vulnerability has been found in WAVLINK WN536AX6-A V260507. The impacted element is the function wireguard_cli_group handler of the file /protoco...
• CVE-2026-120279 – A flaw has been found in WAVLINK WN536AX6-A V260507. The affected element is an unknown function of the file /protocol.csp of the component openvpn...