GHSA-5ghq-42rg-769x — ci4-cms-erp/ci4ms
CRITICALGHSA-5ghq-42rg-769x is a critical-severity (CVSS 9.1) Cross-site Scripting (XSS) vulnerability in ci4-cms-erp/ci4ms. A fix is available for ci4-cms-erp/ci4ms — see the affected versions and patch details below.
CI4MS: Company Information Public-Facing Page Full Platform Compromise & Full Account Takeover for All Roles & Privilege-Escalation via System Settings Company Information Stored DOM XSS
Exploitation Status
Proof-of-concept exploit code exists
- CISA’s SSVC triage found public proof-of-concept exploit code for this CVE, though no confirmed active exploitation.
- A successful exploit gives an attacker total control of the affected component, not partial access.
Exploitation and automatability from CISA’s SSVC triage for GHSA-5ghq-42rg-769x.
EPSS Exploitation Probability
EPSS (Exploit Prediction Scoring System) is a daily probability model maintained by FIRST.org. It estimates the likelihood a CVE will be exploited in production environments within the next 30 days, derived from real-world threat intelligence signals.
How urgent is this, really
GHSA-5ghq-42rg-769x plotted by exploitation likelihood (EPSS) against impact (CVSS). The shaded corner — EPSS 50%+ and CVSS 7.0+ — is where this CVE doesn't sit, though severity or exploitability alone can still warrant action.
Where this sits among everything scored
Of 379,145 CVEs with a current EPSS score, this one falls in the < 10% band (highlighted). Real counts from FIRST.org, not a sample — log-scaled since the landscape is heavily right-skewed.
Real-World Exposure
ci4-cms-erp/ci4msReal-time download stats are indexed for npm and PyPI packages. This vulnerability affects Packagist packages — download data is not available via public APIs for these ecosystems.
Description
CI4MS is a CodeIgniter 4-based CMS skeleton that delivers a production-ready, modular architecture with RBAC authorization and theme support. Prior to 0.31.2.0, the application fails to properly sanitize user-controlled input within System Settings – Company Information. Several administrative configuration fields accept attacker-controlled input that is stored server-side and later rendered without proper output encoding. These values are persisted in the database and rendered unsafely on public-facing pages only, such as the main landing page. There is no execution in the administrative dashboard—the vulnerability only impacts the public frontend. This vulnerability is fixed in 0.31.2.0.
Affected Packages
| Ecosystem | Package | Vulnerable range | Fix |
|---|---|---|---|
| 🐘Packagist | ci4-cms-erp/ci4ms | all versions | 0.31.2.0composer require ci4-cms-erp/ci4ms:^0.31.2.0 |
Detection & mitigation playbook
Open-source dependencyDetect
Scan your dependency tree (package-lock.json, pnpm-lock.yaml, requirements.txt, go.sum, etc.) for ci4-cms-erp/ci4ms, including transitive dependencies — a direct dependency you never call can still pull in a vulnerable version.
Fix
Update ci4-cms-erp/ci4ms to 0.31.2.0 or later, then make sure no transitive (indirect) dependency still pins the vulnerable range — O3 confirms GHSA-5ghq-42rg-769x is resolved across your whole dependency graph.
Workarounds
If you can't upgrade right away: gate or disable the affected feature, validate untrusted input at the boundary, and avoid passing attacker-controlled data into the vulnerable path. O3's runtime protection blocks exploitation in production as an interim safeguard until the upgrade lands.
How O3 protects you
O3 Security's impact-aware SCA analyses which vulnerable code paths your application actually calls, so a match like GHSA-5ghq-42rg-769x can be triaged on real exposure rather than presence alone.
Tailored to GHSA-5ghq-42rg-769x. Runtime protection reduces exposure until a permanent patch is applied and verified — it complements patching, it doesn't replace it.
Frequently Asked Questions
Is GHSA-5ghq-42rg-769x in your dependencies?
O3 Security finds GHSA-5ghq-42rg-769x across Packagist dependencies, including transitive ones, and its impact-aware SCA ranks findings by whether your code actually calls the vulnerable path.