Stored XSS in the static HTML report export, because json.dumps does not escape the markup character
- Exploited
- No known exploitation
- Fix
- Fixed in 6.29.3
- Who is exposed
- Not reported
Do first: Upgrade to a fixed version: 6.29.3.
- Last modified
- A 0-100 score for how much a CVE matters across the industry: exploitation, exposure, how widely the software is used, severity and whether a fix exists.What do these mean? →
- 3/100 · provisional
- Whether working attack code is public (Exploit-DB, Metasploit, Nuclei or GitHub). Public code makes attacks easier.What do these mean? →
- None on Exploit-DB, Metasploit or GitHub
Summary
CodeChecker and plist-to-html's static HTML report export fails to escape the less-than character in the report message, checker name, and source file path, so an attacker can inject script that runs in the browser of anyone who opens the generated report. The attack is reached remotely, but only with high-level privileges, and it requires a viewer to open the report.
Written by anthropic/claude-haiku-5.5 from the sources below. Verify against them.
Read the original description
The HTML report that plist-to-html, CodeChecker parse --export html and CodeChecker cmd diff --output html generate puts the report message, the checker name and the source file path into a script block through json.dumps. json.dumps does not escape the less-than character, so a closing script tag in any of those three fields ends the script element and what follows is parsed as HTML.
The input author is whoever controls the analysed tree or a third-party result file that report-converter ingests, or who holds PRODUCT_STORE in the cmd diff flow. The viewer is somebody else: docs/jenkins_gerrit_integration.md documents writing the report into Jenkins userContent and posting its URL into a Gerrit review. One caveat worth stating up front is that Jenkins serves userContent under a restrictive CSP that would block an inline handler, so that destination is probably safe as configured. The generated report sets no CSP of its own, so the impact lands wherever it is published without one.
cve.now Index
- Exploitation?/40Unknown. No CISA SSVC exploitation rating yet
- Exposure3/25Reachable over the network · Unknown: No advisory context yet
- Reach?/20Unknown. No tracked technology or package matched
- Severity0/10CVSS 0.0
- No patch0/5No signal
What would change the score
- Would score about 58 if added to CISA KEV
- Would score about 53 if CISA's SSVC rates exploitation active
- Would score about 22 if advisories confirm default setups are exposed
What to do
Upgrade to a fixed version: 6.29.3.
Timeline
- CVE published
- First seen by cve.now
Affected versions
- Ericsson CodeChecker
fixed in 6.29.3
Evidence 1
- Advisory
Corrections
None so far.
Something wrong on this page? Report an error. Every fix is listed here.
Questions about CVE-2026-84164
Is CVE-2026-84164 being exploited?
It is not in CISA's Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog, and CISA's SSVC assessment does not mark exploitation as active. That does not mean it has not been attacked: vendors and researchers can report attacks before CISA lists them. No public exploit code is tracked.Source: cve.now feed data
Which versions are affected by CVE-2026-84164?
CodeChecker: before 6.29.3.Source: cve.now feed data
How do I fix CVE-2026-84164?
Upgrade to a fixed version: 6.29.3.Source: cve.now feed data