cve.bz

CAPEC-32

XSS Through HTTP Query Strings

High severityHigh likelihoodDetailed pattern

An adversary embeds malicious script code in the parameters of an HTTP query string and convinces a victim to submit the HTTP request that contains the query string to a vulnerable web application. The web application then procedes to use the values parameters without properly validation them first and generates the HTML code that will be executed by the victim's browser.

On this page

Ask an AI about this attack pattern

ChatGPTClaudeGoogle AI Mode

Show the promptExplain the attack pattern CAPEC-32: XSS Through HTTP Query Strings: how it unfolds, what it needs and how to prevent and detect it in my systems. Use https://capec.mitre.org/data/definitions/32.html and https://cve.bz/cve/capec/32?via=ask-ai-copy, which lists recent CVEs with the weaknesses it exploits. Cite the sources.

Opens a third-party assistant; its answer is its own, not cve.bz's. The prompt holds only this attack pattern's id and public links.

How the attack unfolds

  1. Explore

    The attacker looks for a way in.

    1. [Survey the application for public links] Using a browser or an automated tool, an adversary follows all public links on a web site. They record all the links they find.

      3 techniques
      • Use a spidering tool to follow and record all links. Make special note of any links that include parameters in the URL.
      • Use a proxy tool to record all links visited during a manual traversal of the web application. Make special note of any links that include parameters in the URL. Manual traversal of this type is frequently necessary to identify forms that are GET method forms rather than POST forms.
      • Use a browser to manually explore the website and analyze how it is constructed. Many browser's plugins are available to facilitate the analysis or automate the URL discovery.

  2. Experiment

    They probe what they found.

    1. [Probe public links for XSS vulnerability] The adversary uses the public links gathered in the "Explore" phase as a target list and requests variations on the URLs they spidered before. They send parameters that include variations of payloads. They record all the responses from the server that include unmodified versions of their script.

      2 techniques
      • Use a list of XSS probe strings to inject in parameters of known URLs. If possible, the probe strings contain a unique identifier.
      • Use a proxy tool to record results of manual input of XSS probes in known URLs.

    2. [Craft malicious XSS URL] Once the adversary has determined which parameters are vulnerable to XSS, they will craft a malicious URL containing the XSS exploit. The adversary can have many goals, from stealing session IDs, cookies, credentials, and page content from the victim.

      2 techniques
      • Change a URL parameter to include a malicious script tag.
      • Send information gathered from the malicious script to a remote endpoint.

  3. Exploit

    They carry out the attack.

    1. [Get victim to click URL] In order for the attack to be successful, the victim needs to access the malicious URL.

      2 techniques
      • Send a phishing email to the victim containing the malicious URL. This can be hidden in a hyperlink as to not show the full URL, which might draw suspicion.
      • Put the malicious URL on a public forum, where many victims might accidentally click the link.

Prerequisites

  • Target client software must allow scripting such as JavaScript. Server software must allow display of remote generated HTML without sufficient input or output validation.

Skills required

  • Low skill

    To place malicious payload on server via HTTP

  • High skill

    Exploiting any information gathered by HTTP Query on script host

Resources required

  • Ability to send HTTP post to scripting host and collect output

Consequences

What a successful attack can lead to
ImpactAffectsNote
Read DataConfidentiality
Execute Unauthorized CommandsConfidentiality, Integrity, AvailabilityRun Arbitrary Code

Mitigations

  • Design: Use browser technologies that do not allow client side scripting.

  • Design: Utilize strict type, character, and encoding enforcement

  • Design: Server side developers should not proxy content via XHR or other means, if a http proxy for remote content is setup on the server side, the client's browser has no way of discerning where the data is originating from.

  • Implementation: Ensure all content that is delivered to client is sanitized against an acceptable content specification.

  • Implementation: Perform input validation for all remote content, including remote and user-generated content

  • Implementation: Perform output validation for all remote content.

  • Implementation: Disable scripting languages such as JavaScript in browser

  • Implementation: Session tokens for specific host

  • Implementation: Patching software. There are many attack vectors for XSS on the client side and the server side. Many vulnerabilities are fixed in service packs for browser, web servers, and plug in technologies, staying current on patch release that deal with XSS countermeasures mitigates this.

  • Implementation: Privileges are constrained, if a script is loaded, ensure system runs in chroot jail or other limited authority mode

Weaknesses it exploits

  • CWE-80 Improper Neutralization of Script-Related HTML Tags in a Web Page

Recent CVEs with these weaknesses

  1. 6.5CVE-2026-119503

    Improper Neutralization of Script-Related HTML Tags in a Web Page (Basic XSS) vulnerability in Welcart Welcart e-Commerce usc-e-shop allows Code Injection.This issue affects Welcart e-Commerce: from n/a through 2.12.6.

  2. 5.3CVE-2026-123860

    Improper Neutralization of Script-Related HTML Tags in a Web Page (Basic XSS) vulnerability in Crocoblock JetFormBuilder jetformbuilder allows Code Injection.This issue affects JetFormBuilder: from n/a through 3.6.8.

  3. 5.3CVE-2026-123483

    Improper Neutralization of Script-Related HTML Tags in a Web Page (Basic XSS) vulnerability in Crocoblock JetFormBuilder jetformbuilder allows Code Injection.This issue affects JetFormBuilder: from n/a through 3.6.8.

  4. 5.3CVE-2026-123183

    Improper Neutralization of Script-Related HTML Tags in a Web Page (Basic XSS) vulnerability in PluginUs.Net Active Products Tables for WooCommerce profit-products-tables-for-woocommerce allows Code Injection.This issue affects Active Produ…

  5. 5.3CVE-2026-121777

    Improper Neutralization of Script-Related HTML Tags in a Web Page (Basic XSS) vulnerability in Cool Plugins Cool Formkit Lite extensions-for-elementor-form allows Code Injection.This issue affects Cool Formkit Lite: from n/a through 2.7.10.

  6. 5.3CVE-2026-119496

    Improper Neutralization of Script-Related HTML Tags in a Web Page (Basic XSS) vulnerability in David Lingren Media LIbrary Assistant media-library-assistant allows Code Injection.This issue affects Media LIbrary Assistant: from n/a through…

  7. 4.3CVE-2026-119492

    Improper Neutralization of Script-Related HTML Tags in a Web Page (Basic XSS) vulnerability in Metaphor Creations, LLC Ditty ditty-news-ticker allows Code Injection.This issue affects Ditty: from n/a through 3.1.71.

  8. 5.3CVE-2026-119490

    Improper Neutralization of Script-Related HTML Tags in a Web Page (Basic XSS) vulnerability in Made with Fuel Ltd. Better Notifications for WP bnfw allows Code Injection.This issue affects Better Notifications for WP: from n/a through 1.10…

The newest records naming one of them. Each weakness's page lists them all.

Part of

Examples

http://user:host@example.com:8080/oradb<script>alert('Hi')</script>

http://user:host@example.com:8080/oradb<script>alert('Hi')</script>

Web applications that accept name value pairs in a HTTP Query string are inherently at risk to any value (or …

Web applications that accept name value pairs in a HTTP Query string are inherently at risk to any value (or name for that matter) that an adversary would like to enter in the query string. This can be done manually via web browser or trivially scripted to post the query string to multiple sites. In the latter case, in the instance of many sites using similar infrastructure with predictable http queries being accepted and operated on (such as blogging software, Google applications, and so on), a single malicious payload can be scripted to target a wide variety of sites.

Web 2.0 type sites like Technorati and del.icio.us rely on user generated content like tags to build http links that are displayed to other users. del.icio.us allows users to identify sites, tag them with metadata and provide URL, descriptions and more data. This data is then echoed back to any other web browser that is interested in the link. If the data is not validated by the del.icio.us site properly then an arbitrary code can be added into the standard http string sent to del.icio.us by the adversary, for example formatted as normal content with a URL and description and tagged as Java, and available to be clicked on (and executed by) any user browsing for Java content that clicks on this trojaned content.

MITRE's words, unchanged: CAPEC-32 at MITRE. CAPEC is Copyright © 2007–2026, The MITRE Corporation, used under the CAPEC terms of use: “The MITRE Corporation (MITRE) hereby grants you a non-exclusive, royalty-free license to use Common Attack Pattern Enumeration and Classification (CAPEC™) for research, development, and commercial purposes. Any copy you make for such purposes is authorized provided that you reproduce MITRE’s copyright designation and this license in any such copy.” CAPEC and the CAPEC logo are trademarks of The MITRE Corporation. Credits. All attack patterns.