Open WebUI vulnerable to Stored XSS via iFrame embeds in response messages
Summary
Manually modifying chat history allows setting the
embeds property on a response message, the content of which is loaded into an iFrame with a sandbox that has
allow-scripts and
allow-same-origin set, ignoring the "iframe Sandbox Allow Same Origin" configuration. This enables stored XSS on the affected chat. This also triggers when the chat is in the shared format. The result is a shareable link containing the payload that can be distributed to any other users on the instance.
Details
The flaw stems from how iFrames are constructed here:
https://github.com/open-webui/open-webui/blob/6f1486ffd0cb288d0e21f41845361924e0d742b3/src/lib/components/chat/Messages/ResponseMessage.svelte#L689-L703
messages.embeds is a user controlled property and so can be arbitrarily set by the user to a payload of their choosing. Since allowScripts and allowSameOrigin are harcoded as true here the sandboxing offers essentially no protection.
PoC
Create an arbitrary chat:
Edit the model response:
Before saving, configure the browser to use an HTTP proxy tool (Burp/Caido/ZAP) and intercept the save request. Find the object within the history and then messages objects (not the messages array) that corresponds to the edited text.
On this object, add an embeds key and list value as shown below, forward the request and refresh the page.
This results in XSS via the controlled content getting rendered in the iFrame. Note the bold text is just to aid demonstration. console.log is used to prove JS execution because the lack of allow-modals on the iFrame sandbox prevents alerts.
The same payload triggers when the chat is shared.
Impact
Any user can create a weaponised chat that can be shared and subsequently used to target other users.
Low privilege users are at risk of having their session taken over by a payload that reads their token from local storage and exfiltrates it to an attacker controlled server.
Admins are at risk of exposing the server to RCE via same chain described in GHSA-w7xj-8fx7-wfch.
What the EG score is made of (scorer v4.0: the three questions the 0–10 score mixes, published apart · methodology)
The EG score (7.3): severity, escalated by confirmed exploitation. This CVE's 7.3 is its impact severity (EG Severity), not escalated.
- EG Severity
- 7.3 HIGHCVSS-B, impact only: no KEV listing, EPSS or EG-KEV tier raises it.the CNA's CVSS · CVSS v3.0 or v3.1
- EG Likelihood
- 0.2% within 30 daysSource: FIRST EPSS. FIRST's exploitation probability, not an EchelonGraph model.
- Confirmed exploitation
- None on record (CISA KEV, EG-KEV Tier 1)Reported apart from the likelihood: an observed fact, not a probability.
- EG Priority
- SSVC Track at medium mission impactTrack at low or medium mission impact; Track* at high (mission-essential systems).CISA BOD 26-04: 14 days if the affected system is publicly exposed; Fix on system upgrade if it is not.Each input and its source: the SSVC and BOD 26-04 blocks below.
SSVC (CISA's decision table, applied by EchelonGraph)Track at low or medium mission impact; Track* at high (mission-essential systems).
A fix is available. Apply it within your standard update timelines.
Exploitation none (CISA Vulnrichment) · Automatable no (CISA Vulnrichment) · Technical impact total (CISA Vulnrichment). All three are CISA's SSVC values (Vulnrichment). EchelonGraph applied CISA's decision table to them; CISA publishes SSVC inputs and the table, not a decision for each CVE. Mission impact is CISA's Mission & Well-being decision point, and only you can judge it. CISA's table makes it high when Mission Prevalence is Essential — the vulnerable component "directly provides capabilities that constitute at least one MEF for at least one entity" (MEF: mission essential function) — or when Public Well-Being Impact is Irreversible: "multiple fatalities are likely", the cyber-physical system "is likely lost or destroyed", "extreme or serious externalities" are imposed on other parties, or social systems such as elections or the financial grid "are destabilized and potentially collapse". CISA's decision table
BOD 26-04 (CISA's remediation timeline, Table 1)14 days if the affected system is publicly exposed; Fix on system upgrade if it is not.
In CISA KEV no (CISA's KEV catalog) · Automatable no (CISA Vulnrichment) · Technical impact total (CISA Vulnrichment). Whether your system is publicly exposed is yours to answer. BOD 26-04 binds US Federal Civilian Executive Branch agencies; for anyone else it is CISA's published timeline, a reference rather than an obligation. The directive · how EchelonGraph applies it