Cyber Resilience

CVE-2018-16873

Opensuse Leap 15.0 … 42.3

High EPSS
Published
14 December 2018
Modified
21 November 2024
Patch / advisory
CVSS Score v3.1 8.1
Click a component to see what it means
Raw vectorCVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
EPSS Score 0.66 99.2th percentile
Risk Priority 80 floored blend · peak EPSS

Summary

CVE-2018-16873 is a high-severity Improper Input Validation (CWE-20) vulnerability in Opensuse Leap. Its CVSS base score is 8.1 (High).

Operationally, ranked in the top 0.8% of CVEs by exploit likelihood; it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog.

OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)

EU & UK References

Vulnerability Data

In Go before 1.10.6 and 1.11.x before 1.11.3, the "go get" command is vulnerable to remote code execution when executed with the -u flag and the import path of a malicious Go package, or a package that imports it directly…

more

or indirectly. Specifically, it is only vulnerable in GOPATH mode, but not in module mode (the distinction is documented at https://golang.org/cmd/go/#hdr-Module_aware_go_get). Using custom domains, it's possible to arrange things so that a Git repository is cloned to a folder named ".git" by using a vanity import path that ends with "/.git". If the Git repository root contains a "HEAD" file, a "config" file, an "objects" directory, a "refs" directory, with some work to ensure the proper ordering of operations, "go get -u" can be tricked into considering the parent directory as a repository root, and running Git commands on it. That will use the "config" file in the original Git repository root for its configuration, and if that config file contains malicious commands, they will execute on the system running "go get -u".

CWE(s)

Related Threats

Likely ATT&CK TechniquesAI

Techniques this vulnerability likely enables, inferred from its description, weakness type, and attributed-actor tradecraft. Confidence is per-technique.

T1190 Exploit Public-Facing Application Initial Accessconfidence: HIGH
The vulnerability allows remote code execution via malicious input to the publicly accessible 'go get' command.
T1059.004 Unix Shell Executionconfidence: HIGH
Successful exploitation results in execution of attacker-controlled Git commands via the Unix shell.
T1204.001 Malicious Link Executionconfidence: MEDIUM
Exploitation requires the victim to run 'go get -u' against a malicious vanity import path (user execution of a malicious link).
inferred from description + CWE · MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise v19.0

CVEs Like This One

CVE-2016-3714Same product: Debian Debian Linux
CVE-2019-9851Same product: Debian Debian Linux
CVE-2023-45648Same product: Debian Debian Linux
CVE-2018-7600Same product: Debian Debian Linux
CVE-2024-3096Same product: Debian Debian Linux
CVE-2024-47175Same product: Debian Debian Linux
CVE-2023-35936Same product: Debian Debian Linux
CVE-2025-1080Same product: Debian Debian Linux
CVE-2018-7187Same product: Debian Debian Linux
CVE-2024-24549Same product: Debian Debian Linux

Affected Assets

golang
go
≤ 1.10.6 · 1.11.0 — 1.11.3
opensuse
backports sle
15.0
opensuse
leap
15.0, 15.1, 42.3
suse
linux enterprise server
12
debian
debian linux
9.0

Mitigating Controls

Control response

Prevent
Stop it (NIST 800-53)

Detect
Catch it (NIST detect / respond)

Harden
Shrink the surface (DISA STIG)
  • 6 hardening rules · 3 OS baselines
Validate
Prove the fix (OWASP ASVS)

Likely Mitigating Controls AI

Per-CVE control mapping for this CVE has not run yet; the list below is derived from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry.

addresses: CWE-20

Security testing and developer training directly verify and enforce proper input validation, reducing exploitability of injection and malformed-data weaknesses.

addresses: CWE-20

Security testing and evaluation at multiple SDLC stages directly detects missing or flawed input validation, with the required remediation process ensuring fixes are applied.

addresses: CWE-20

Directly implements checks on information inputs to reject invalid data before processing.

addresses: CWE-20

Spam protection mechanisms perform filtering and detection on inbound/outbound messages, directly compensating for missing or weak input validation of unsolicited content.

Mitigating Controls (NIST CSF 2.0) AI

Derived directly from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry via our AI-authored CWE→CSF cross-walk (authority under review) — links open the control.

PR.PS-06 mostly match
prevents

Secure SDLC practices directly require and enforce input validation during development.

Mitigating Controls (ISO/IEC 27001:2022 Annex A) AI

Derived directly from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry via our AI-authored CWE→ISO cross-walk (authority under review) — links open the control.

detects

Testing against a defined set of requirements and using code review plus vulnerability scanning forces validation of inputs and handling of unanticipated conditions, reducing the chance that malformed data will be accepted.

prevents

Secure-coding guidelines and mandatory security testing (including code scans) compel developers to validate and sanitize inputs at design and implementation time, lowering the incidence of malformed or malicious data reaching downstream components.

prevents

Mandating input controls that include integrity checks and input validation ensures that untrusted data is examined before use, blocking the root cause of many injection and malformed-data weaknesses.

prevents

Security-by-design principles explicitly call for data validation and sanitization at every layer, reducing the chance that malformed or malicious input will be processed without scrutiny.

prevents

Requiring language-specific secure coding standards, peer review, SAST and documented mitigation of common programming errors forces validation of all inputs before they are trusted.

none

Regular automated validation of system software and data content, combined with scanning of all inbound files, enforces input validation at the boundary before untrusted content is processed.

References