CVE Intelligence
Skip to main content
LOW

CVE-2021-4255

CVE-2021-4255 — ctrlo lenio contractor.tt cross site scripting

A vulnerability was found in ctrlo lenio and classified as problematic. Affected by this issue is some unknown functionality of the file views/contractor.tt. The manipulation of the argument contractor.name leads to cross site scripting. The attack may be launched remotely. The name of the patch is e1646d5cd0a2fbab9eb505196dd2ca1c9e4cdd97. It is recommended to apply a patch to fix this issue. The identifier of this vulnerability is VDB-216212.

Published Updated Sources: cvelistV5, VulDB

Triage

Is it exploited, how likely is exploitation, what does it touch, and how severe do the scoring sources call it.

Exploitation

Unreported

no source claims exploitation

EPSS

0%

chance of exploitation in 30 days

Affects

ctrlo

lenio

CVSS base

3.5

LOW

CISA SSVC assessment

Three decision points CISA publishes for the CVEs it assesses · SSVC 2.0.3. A stakeholder decision, not a severity score.

CISA

Exploitation

None

none · proof-of-concept · active

Automatable

No

can an attacker script all four kill-chain steps

Technical impact

Partial

partial · total control of the vulnerable component

Affected scope

The catalog records vendors and products as separate lists, not pairs, so which product belongs to which vendor is not something this page can say.

Vendors (1)

Products (1)

lenio

Every base score collected

Sources score independently and disagree; each row says who scored it and under which version.

ScoreVersionSeverityExpl.ImpactSource
3.5CVSS 3.1LOWcvelistV5

Weakness & attack patterns

  • CWE-707

Detection

Read off the CVSS vector and the weakness class. Starting points, not rules we have tested.

  • Search application, proxy, and WAF logs for requests touching /contractor.tt.

References

2 on the record

Elsewhere on this site

  • ctrloevery CVE for this vendor
  • CWE-707other pages naming this weakness

Not in any source we poll

Listed rather than left blank: an empty field and an unmeasured one look identical on screen, and only one is a reason to look elsewhere.

  • No confirmed IOCs, IP addresses, domains, file hashes, or malware artifacts supplied.
  • No organization-specific asset inventory, compensating-control status, or patch deployment evidence supplied.
  • No exploit packet captures, log samples, or incident case IDs supplied.