CVE-2021-3693: Cross-site Scripting (XSS) - DOM in ledgersmb/ledgersmb
Noroxi assessment
Priority: Monitor (action score 39/100)
- The sources we track (CISA KEV, Exploit-DB, Metasploit, Nuclei, GitHub) show no public exploit code or exploitation in the wild.
- Probability of exploitation in the next 30 days: 3.1% (FIRST EPSS); higher than 88% of all records.
- Anyone who can reach it over the internet can trigger it. No account or password is required. A user must open a link or visit a page. No special conditions are required; it is repeatable.
- Fixed version: ledgersmb (Debian:10) 1.6.9+ds-1+deb10u2; ledgersmb (Debian:11) 1.6.9+ds-2+deb11u2; ledgersmb (Debian:12) 1.6.9+ds-2.1.
Low priority for now. Upgrade to ledgersmb (Debian:10) 1.6.9+ds-1+deb10u2; ledgersmb (Debian:11) 1.6.9+ds-2+deb11u2; ledgersmb (Debian:12) 1.6.9+ds-2.1 or later.
Generated automatically from the record's data: CVSS (NVD and CNA), CISA KEV and SSVC, FIRST EPSS, exploit sources, fixed versions. How we calculate it
Primary sources: NVD · CVE.org · FIRST EPSS
LedgerSMB does not check the origin of HTML fragments merged into the browser's DOM. By sending a specially crafted URL to an authenticated user, this flaw can be abused for remote code execution and information disclosure.
- Published
- Aug 23, 2021
- Updated
- Jun 17, 2026
- EPSS
- 3.1% · 88th percentile
- CWE
- CWE-79
Report tools
Action score
39
Monitor
Low priority for now.
- CVSS
- 38 / 40 · 9.6 / 10
- CISA KEV
- 0 / 30 · Not listed
- EPSS
- 1 / 30 · 3.1%
CNA vs NVD score
- NVD
- 9.6
- CNA · @huntrdev
- 8.8
- 0.8 point gap
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
The score given by the assigning authority versus NVD’s independent score. A gap means the severity is contested.
Get told when this record changes
- Not in KEV: no record of exploitation in the wild
- No public exploit code on record
- A fix has been released
If any of these changes, we'll tell you in the daily email digest.
Running WordPress? Scan your site free with WP Lens
Noroxi analysis
What does it mean in your environment?
The assessment above is generated automatically from the record's data; it doesn't know your environment. Our team verifies on your systems whether this vulnerability is actually exploitable and which mitigation is enough.
We use this product, ask for helpAffected systems
Is your version affected?
Pick the product and type the version you run. It's compared with this record's version ranges in your browser; the version isn't sent anywhere.
| Vendor | Product | CPE |
|---|---|---|
| ledgersmb | ledgersmb | cpe:2.3:a:ledgersmb:ledgersmb |
| debian | debian linux | cpe:2.3:o:debian:debian_linux |
Limit the impact of XSS
This is a cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability. A well-configured Content-Security-Policy doesn't fix it, but greatly reduces its impact. Check your site's CSP and other security headers for free.
Check security headersAffected versions
NVD version ranges (for catalog products). Add the product to your stack with a version and matching uses these.
- debian debian linux10.0
- debian debian linux11.0
- ledgersmb ledgersmb1.5.0 and later · up to 1.5.30 inclusive
- ledgersmb ledgersmb1.6.0 and later · up to 1.6.33 inclusive
- ledgersmb ledgersmb1.7.0 and later · up to 1.7.32 inclusive
- ledgersmb ledgersmb1.8.0 and later · up to 1.8.17 inclusive
Versions reported by the vendor
Affected version ranges reported by the assigning authority (@huntrdev). Independent of NVD's CPE analysis and usually ahead of it.
ledgersmb ledgersmb/ledgersmb
- 1.7.33not affected
- unspecified and later · before 1.8.18affected
Package-level exposure
OSV and GitHub Advisory data: ecosystem, package and range. SBOM matching uses this table.
| Ecosystem | Package | Affected range | Fix |
|---|---|---|---|
| Debian:10 | ledgersmb | before 1.6.9+ds-1+deb10u2 | 1.6.9+ds-1+deb10u2 |
| Debian:11 | ledgersmb | before 1.6.9+ds-2+deb11u2 | 1.6.9+ds-2+deb11u2 |
| Debian:12 | ledgersmb | before 1.6.9+ds-2.1 | 1.6.9+ds-2.1 |
Same product
ledgersmb: all recordsOther highest-scoring records for the same primary product.
- CVE-2007-1329Directory traversal vulnerability in SQL-Ledger, and LedgerSMB before 1.1.5, allows remote attackers to read and overwrite arbitrary files, 42Plan
- CVE-2007-5372Multiple SQL injection vulnerabilities in (a) LedgerSMB 1.0.0 through 1.2.7 and (b) DWS Systems SQL-Ledger 2.x allow remote attackers to exe41Plan
- CVE-2007-3907Unspecified vulnerability in login.pl in LedgerSMB 1.2.0 through 1.2.6 allows remote attackers to bypass authentication and perform certain 41Plan
Published before and after this one in the same product
- ← EarlierCVE-2008-4078Sep 15, 2008 · SQL injection vulnerability in the AR/AP transaction report in (1) LedgerSMB (LSMB) before 1.2.15 and (2) SQL-Ledger 2.8.17 and earlier allo26Monitor
- ← EarlierCVE-2018-9246Jun 7, 2018 · The PGObject::Util::DBAdmin module before 0.120.0 for Perl, as used in LedgerSMB through 1.5.x, insufficiently sanitizes or escapes variable40Plan
- Later →CVE-2021-3694Aug 23, 2021 · Cross-site Scripting (XSS) - Reflected in ledgersmb/ledgersmb39Monitor
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 |
|---|---|---|
| debian:ledgersmb | 1.6.9+ds-2.1 · Debian:12 | Package registry (OSV) |
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.
No history yet (it accumulates with the daily EPSS job).
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.
- No account or password is required.
- A user must open a link or visit a page.
- No special conditions are required; it is repeatable.
If successful
- Confidentiality
- high · data can be read
- Integrity
- high · data or configuration can be modified
- Availability
- high · the service can be disrupted
Impact can extend beyond the vulnerable component (scope changes).
- Attack vector
- Network
- Attack complexity
- Low
- Privileges required
- None
- User interaction
- Required
- Scope
- Changed
- Confidentiality impact
- High
- Integrity impact
- High
- Availability impact
- High
Weakness class (CWE)
CWE-79 · Improper Neutralization of Input During Web Page Generation ('Cross-site Scripting')CVSS vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H
nvd-primary
Root cause
User content is inserted into the page as HTML. The browser interprets the content as code rather than data.
The bug in code
The whole CWE-79 classA representative example of this vulnerability class. Not the vendor's source code; it shows the faulty pattern and its fix.
Vulnerable
commentEl.innerHTML = comment.body;Fixed
commentEl.textContent = comment.body;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)
ATT&CK techniques
—
Change log
- Fix✗ → ✓
For records you follow, these changes also arrive as notifications. →
References
Show all references (2 more)Show less
Vendor advisories and official records. Exploit/PoC links are deliberately left out.