GHSA-j67x-q29f-qcvv — motioneye
MEDIUMGHSA-j67x-q29f-qcvv is a medium-severity (CVSS 5.3) CWE-862 vulnerability in motioneye. A fix is available for motioneye — see the affected versions and patch details below.
motionEye's missing authentication on ActionHandler allows unauthenticated camera action execution
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.
- CISA assesses this as automatable — exploitation doesn’t require manual, per-target effort, which raises the odds of mass scanning and opportunistic attacks.
Exploitation and automatability from CISA’s SSVC triage for GHSA-j67x-q29f-qcvv.
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-j67x-q29f-qcvv 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 376,715 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
motioneyeReal-time download stats are indexed for npm and PyPI packages. This vulnerability affects PyPI packages — download data is not available via public APIs for these ecosystems.
Description
Summary
The ActionHandler.post() method in motionEye has no authentication decorator, allowing any unauthenticated attacker to trigger camera actions including snapshots, recording start/stop, and configured action scripts (PTZ controls, alarm triggers, etc.).
Vulnerability Details
File: motioneye/handlers/action.py — ActionHandler.post() line 36
CWE: CWE-862 — Missing Authorization
CVSS: CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N = 5.3 Medium
Vulnerable Code
class ActionHandler(BaseHandler):
async def post(self, camera_id, action): # ← NO @BaseHandler.auth() decorator
camera_id = int(camera_id)
if camera_id not in config.get_camera_ids():
raise HTTPError(404, 'no such camera')
...
if action == 'snapshot':
await self.snapshot(camera_id) # executed without auth
return
elif action == 'record_start':
return self.record_start(camera_id)
elif action == 'record_stop':
return self.record_stop(camera_id)
action_commands = config.get_action_commands(local_config)
command = action_commands.get(action)
...
self.run_command_bg(command) # executes predefined shell scripts
Compare with other handlers that correctly require authentication:
@BaseHandler.auth(admin=True) # ← properly protected
async def delete(self, camera_id, filename):
...
Steps to Reproduce
- Deploy motionEye with at least one camera configured
- Send unauthenticated POST:
POST /action/1/snapshot HTTP/1.1
Host: motioneye-host:8765
Content-Length: 0
- Observe
{}(HTTP 200) response — snapshot triggered without any credentials
For action scripts (lock, unlock, alarm_on, alarm_off, light_on, etc.):
POST /action/1/alarm_on HTTP/1.1
Host: motioneye-host:8765
Impact
- Unauthenticated attacker can trigger camera snapshots on demand
- Unauthenticated attacker can start/stop video recording
- If action scripts are configured by admin: attacker can trigger PTZ movement, alarm control, lighting changes — physical security bypass
- Via remote cameras: SSRF by triggering action on a remote motionEye server
Verification
Dynamically confirmed on v0.43.1 in Docker lab — POST /action/2/snapshot with no credentials returns HTTP 200 {}. Server log shows the action was processed (failed only because motion daemon was not running for the test camera, not due to an auth rejection).
Recommended Fix
class ActionHandler(BaseHandler):
@BaseHandler.auth() # add authentication requirement
async def post(self, camera_id, action):
...
Affected Packages
| Ecosystem | Package | Vulnerable range | Fix |
|---|---|---|---|
| 🐍PyPI | motioneye | all versions | 0.44.0pip install --upgrade 'motioneye==0.44.0' |
Detection & mitigation playbook
Open-source dependencyDetect
Scan your dependency tree (package-lock.json, pnpm-lock.yaml, requirements.txt, go.sum, etc.) for motioneye, including transitive dependencies — a direct dependency you never call can still pull in a vulnerable version.
Fix
Update motioneye to 0.44.0 or later, then make sure no transitive (indirect) dependency still pins the vulnerable range — O3 confirms GHSA-j67x-q29f-qcvv 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-j67x-q29f-qcvv can be triaged on real exposure rather than presence alone.
Tailored to GHSA-j67x-q29f-qcvv. 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-j67x-q29f-qcvv in your dependencies?
O3 Security finds GHSA-j67x-q29f-qcvv across PyPI dependencies, including transitive ones, and its impact-aware SCA ranks findings by whether your code actually calls the vulnerable path.