Biscom Secure File Transfer is vulnerable to AngularJS expression injection in the Display Name field.
Biscom Secure File Transfer is vulnerable to AngularJS expression injection in the Display Name field. An authenticated user can populate this field with a valid AngularJS expression, wrapped in double curly-braces ({{ }}). This expression will be evaluated by any other authenticated user who views the attacker's display name. Affected versions are 5.0.0000 through 5.1.1026. The Issue is fixed in 5.1.1028.
- Published
- Jul 18, 2017
- Updated
- Jun 16, 2026
- EPSS
- 0.6% · 47th percentile
- CWE
- CWE-74
Sign in to follow · You’ll be notified if a followed record enters KEV, gets an exploit or is updated.
Report tools
Action score
17
Monitor
Low priority for now.
- CVSS
- 17 / 40 · 4.3 / 10
- CISA KEV
- 0 / 30 · Not listed
- EPSS
- 0 / 30 · 0.6%
Affected systems
| Vendor | Product | CPE |
|---|---|---|
| biscom | secure file transfer | cpe:2.3:a:biscom:secure_file_transfer |
Affected versions
NVD version ranges (for catalog products). Add the product to your stack with a version and matching uses these.
- biscom secure file transferall versions
Versions reported by the vendor
Affected version ranges reported by the assigning authority (rapid7). Independent of NVD's CPE analysis and usually ahead of it.
Biscom Secure File Transfer
- 5.0.0000 through 5.1.1026affected
Same product
biscom: all recordsOther highest-scoring records for the same primary product.
- CVE-2020-8796Biscom Secure File Transfer (SFT) before 5.1.1071 and 6.0.1xxx before 6.0.1005 allows Remote Code Execution on the server.40Plan
- CVE-2016-10710Biscom Secure File Transfer (SFT) 5.0.1000 through 5.0.1048 does not validate the dataFieldId value, and uses sequential numbers, which allo32Monitor
- CVE-2020-27646Biscom Secure File Transfer (SFT) before 5.1.1082 and 6.x before 6.0.1011 allows user credential theft.26Monitor
- CVE-2020-8503Biscom Secure File Transfer (SFT) 5.0.1050 through 5.1.1067 and 6.0.1000 through 6.0.1003 allows Insecure Direct Object Reference (IDOR) by 26Monitor
- CVE-2017-5247Biscom Secure File Transfer is vulnerable to cross-site scripting in the File Name field.21Monitor
- CVE-2017-5241Biscom Secure File Transfer versions 5.0.0.0 trough 5.1.1024 are vulnerable to post-authentication persistent cross-site scripting (XSS) in 21Monitor
Remediation
Which version to upgrade to
Fix versions compiled from the vendor, package registries and Microsoft. Verify the vendor's note before upgrading.
| Product / package | Fixed version | Source |
|---|---|---|
| Biscom Secure File Transfer | 5.1.1028 · description | Vendor (CNA) |
Exploit status
No known public exploit
No public exploit has been observed yet. That doesn't mean you're safe, only that the bar is a little higher.
Research context
For pentesters and researchers: attack profile, score disagreement, timeline, patch commits, credits, variant and chain candidates, bug bounty scope. All derived from existing data; no exploit code.
Timeline
From publication to today: proof of concept, Metasploit module, CISA KEV and fix record. Dates are as reported by the sources.
No dated events beyond publication.
FIRST EPSS daily score; only changes of 0.01 or more are recorded (step chart).
Patch and commit links
Commit, PR and diff links among the references. A starting point for patch-diffing and variant hunting; fixes, not exploits.
No commit or PR link among the references.
Credits
All researchersFinders, reporters and analysts named in the CNA record. Click a name for that researcher’s other records.
No credits in the CNA record.
Variant candidates
Same product, same weakness class, within 18 months. If the patch missed the root cause, the sibling bug is here.
No nightly-computed relations.
Chain candidates
An authentication bypass and a privilege-requiring bug in the same product, published close together: combined they may become an unauthenticated path.
—
Bug bounty scope
No known public program.
Source: bounty-targets-data (public HackerOne, Bugcrowd, Intigriti, YesWeHack listings).
Technical details
Attack conditions
- Anyone who can reach it over the internet can trigger it.
- A low-privileged account is enough.
- No user action is required.
- No special conditions are required; it is repeatable.
If successful
- Confidentiality
- none
- Integrity
- low · data or configuration can be modified
- Availability
- none
- Attack vector
- Network
- Attack complexity
- Low
- Privileges required
- Low
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality impact
- None
- Integrity impact
- Low
- Availability impact
- None
Weakness class (CWE)
CWE-74 · Improper Neutralization of Special Elements in Output Used by a Downstream Component ('Injection')CVSS vector
CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N
nvd-primary
Attack context
MITRE CAPEC attack patterns and ATT&CK techniques for this weakness class (CWE). A starting point for detection rules and threat hunting.
Attack patterns (CAPEC)
- Buffer Overflow via Environment VariablesCAPEC-10likelihood: High · High
- Server Side Include (SSI) InjectionCAPEC-101likelihood: High · High
- HTTP Request SplittingCAPEC-105likelihood: Medium · High
- Command Line Execution through SQL InjectionCAPEC-108likelihood: Low · Very High
- Double EncodingCAPEC-120likelihood: Low · Medium
- Subverting Environment Variable ValuesCAPEC-13likelihood: High · Very High
- Format String InjectionCAPEC-135likelihood: High · High
- Client-side Injection-induced Buffer OverflowCAPEC-14likelihood: Medium · High
Noroxi analysis
No Noroxi analysis for this record yet
We don't hand-write analysis for all 385,000+ vulnerabilities; that wouldn't be honest. For notable, high-impact vulnerabilities our team writes the mechanism, detection and remediation steps.
We use this product, ask for helpChange log
- Fix✗ → ✓
For records you follow, these changes also arrive as notifications. →
References
Vendor advisories and official records. Exploit/PoC links are deliberately left out.