Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:HSummary
CVE-2026-35035 is a high-severity Cross-site Scripting (CWE-79) vulnerability in Ci4-Cms-Erp Ci4Ms. Its CVSS base score is 7.2 (High).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Browser Session Hijacking (T1185); ranked at the 38th percentile by exploit likelihood (below the median); it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog; a public proof-of-concept is referenced.
The strongest mitigations our analysis identified map to SA-11 (Developer Testing and Evaluation) and SI-10 (Information Input Validation) — see the control section below for these in your framework.
Deeper analysis AI-assisted summary
Synthesised by an AI model from the NVD description and linked references — a reading aid, not an authoritative source.
CVE-2026-35035 is a stored cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability (CWE-79) in CI4MS, a CodeIgniter 4-based CMS skeleton providing production-ready modular architecture with RBAC authorization and theme support. The issue affects versions prior to 0.31.2.0 and stems from improper sanitization of user-controlled input in the System Settings – Company Information section. Administrative configuration fields accept attacker-supplied data that is stored server-side in the database and later rendered without proper output encoding on public-facing pages, such as the main landing page.
Exploitation requires high privileges (PR:H), meaning an authenticated administrative user must have access to the System Settings interface. Once injected, the malicious payload is persisted in the database and executed in the context of public frontend pages viewed by unauthenticated visitors. This enables attackers to steal cookies, session tokens, or perform other client-side attacks against site visitors. The CVSS v3.1 base score of 7.2 (AV:N/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H) reflects high impacts on confidentiality, integrity, and availability for affected users, though no execution occurs in the administrative dashboard.
The vulnerability is addressed in CI4MS version 0.31.2.0, which introduces proper input sanitization and output encoding for the affected fields. Security practitioners should upgrade to this version or later, as detailed in the GitHub Security Advisory at https://github.com/ci4-cms-erp/ci4ms/security/advisories/GHSA-5ghq-42rg-769x.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2026-19374
Vulnerability Data
CI4MS is a CodeIgniter 4-based CMS skeleton that delivers a production-ready, modular architecture with RBAC authorization and theme support. Prior to 0.31.2.0, the application fails to properly sanitize user-controlled input within System Settings – Company Information. Several administrative configuration fields…
more
accept attacker-controlled input that is stored server-side and later rendered without proper output encoding. These values are persisted in the database and rendered unsafely on public-facing pages only, such as the main landing page. There is no execution in the administrative dashboard—the vulnerability only impacts the public frontend. This vulnerability is fixed in 0.31.2.0.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
—
V1.1.2V1.3.2
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Developer testing and evaluation can discover missing or incorrect input neutralization through targeted web-application tests.
Input validation directly enforces neutralization of untrusted data before it reaches web output generation.
Output filtering can catch or sanitize unneutralized script content before it is served to users.
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.
Secure SDLC practices directly target introduction of XSS via coding standards/testing (mostly), yet the single broad outcome leaves many specific neutralization vectors unaddressed (partial).
Patching and EOL replacement can remediate known XSS instances in libraries or frameworks (partial) but do nothing to enforce input neutralization in application code (none).
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.
Secure-coding testing and automated code-analysis tools are applied to detect improper neutralization of script-related content during web-page generation.
Knowledge exchange on emerging attack techniques and patches reduces the likelihood that cross-site scripting flaws remain unaddressed in deployed applications.
Operational indicators of compromise for web-application attacks can be incorporated into WAF or input-filtering rules, lowering the likelihood that unsanitized data reaches the browser.
Requiring language-specific secure-coding standards and automated scanning during the SDLC catches missing output encoding or improper neutralization of untrusted data before the software reaches production.
Secure-coding standards, SAST scans and removal of insecure code samples together eliminate the failure to neutralize script content that produces cross-site scripting flaws.
Webpage malware scanning and block-listing of known malicious sites reduce the likelihood that reflected or stored script payloads reach a user’s browser.