CVE Vulnerabilities

CVE-2026-12616

Improper Output Neutralization for Logs

Published: Jun 29, 2026 | Modified: Jun 29, 2026
CVSS 3.x
N/A
Source:
NVD
CVSS 2.x
RedHat/V2
RedHat/V3
Ubuntu
root.io logo minimus.io logo echo.ai logo

The /v1/upload/sbom endpoint extracts the iss claim from the attacker-supplied JWT with signature verification disabled, then interpolates that string into three log statements before any validation gate. Because the configured log format (%(asctime)s - %(name)s - %(levelname)s - %(message)s) renders newlines literally, an unauthenticated attacker can forge log records that are byte-for-byte indistinguishable from PIAs genuine Successfully authenticated project message. PIA is an authentication broker whose logs are explicitly relied upon for incident response (DESIGN.md ยง5.4 lists Token verifications and Errors as events to log), so the ability to plant fake auth-success entries directly undermines the audit trail the service exists to produce.

Weakness

The product constructs a log message from external input, but it does not neutralize or incorrectly neutralizes special elements when the message is written to a log file.

Potential Mitigations

  • 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.

References