CVE-2026-45710VulnerabilityPublished 14 Jul 2026Updated 6 Nov 2026

WidgetVariante · FacturaScripts: Stored XSS

Affects facturascripts/facturascriptsSource GCVE Database

Compare

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 3.5 Low : upgrade to 2026.2 when convenient.

Data as of 6 Nov 2026, 21:05 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

3.5Low

How severe the flaw is on the 0–10 CVSS scale.

Patch: Available – fixed in 2026.2

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:H/UI:R/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:N

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: High
User Interaction: Required
Scope: Unchanged
Confidentiality: Low
Integrity: Low
Availability: None

Bold values are the worst case: easiest to exploit or largest impact.

Attack Vector: Network: The vulnerable component is bound to the network stack and the set of possible attackers extends beyond the other options listed, up to and including the entire Internet. Such a vulnerability is often termed 'remotely exploitable' and can be thought of as an attack being exploitable at the protocol level one or more network hops away (e.g., across one or more routers).
Attack Complexity: Low: Specialized access conditions or extenuating circumstances do not exist. An attacker can expect repeatable success against the vulnerable component.
Privileges Required: High: The attacker is authorized with (i.e., requires) privileges that provide significant (e.g., administrative) control over the vulnerable component that could affect component-wide settings and files.
User Interaction: Required: Successful exploitation of this vulnerability requires a user to take some action before the vulnerability can be exploited.
Scope: Unchanged: An exploited vulnerability can only affect resources managed by the same security authority. In this case, the vulnerable component and the impacted component are either the same, or both are managed by the same security authority.
Confidentiality: Low: There is some loss of confidentiality. Access to some restricted information is obtained, but the attacker does not have control over what information is obtained, or the amount or kind of loss is limited. The information disclosure does not cause a direct, serious loss to the impacted component.
Integrity: Low: Modification of data is possible, but the attacker does not have control over the consequence of a modification, or the amount of modification is limited. The data modification does not have a direct, serious impact on the impacted component.
Availability: None: There is no impact to availability within the impacted component.

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v3.1 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 14 Jul 2026
Detectable: no evidence on record.
No public nuclei template indexed
Weaponized: no evidence on record.
No public exploit code indexed in Metasploit or Exploit-DB
Exploited in the wildExploited: no evidence on record.
Not in CISA KEV and no source reports exploitation
Observed by OffSeq MirageSeen by Mirage: no evidence on record.
No attack traffic recorded by OffSeq Mirage sensors

A missing step is not evidence of safety. Sources: cve.org (opens in a new tab), the Metasploit, Exploit-DB and nuclei-templates index as of 6 Nov 2026.

Disclosed: The CVE record is public on cve.org. Its publication is t = 0.
Detectable: A public nuclei template can find exposed instances, for defenders and attackers alike.
Weaponized: A Metasploit exploit module or Exploit-DB entry exists (Metasploit scanner modules do not count), or CISA SSVC or the CVSS exploit maturity reports a public proof of concept.
Exploited in the wild: CISA KEV lists it, CISA SSVC rates exploitation active, or a source reports attacks.
Observed by OffSeq Mirage: OffSeq Mirage honeypot sensors recorded attack traffic for this CVE, or found exposed hosts without attack traffic.

Moments are spaced evenly, not to scale; a dashed line marks a gap of six months or more. Deltas count from t = 0. Sources that give only a date (CISA KEV, Exploit-DB, or a time of exactly 00:00Z) read “same day” rather than hours. Metasploit modules carry the flaw’s disclosure date, not their release date, and nuclei templates carry no date, so both appear above but not on the timeline.

What to do

Upgrade facturascripts/facturascripts to 2026.2.

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
Packagistfacturascripts/facturascripts	Affected <2026.2	Fixed in 2026.2

Check your own hosts for these packages with threat-finder (opens in a new tab), our free open-source scanner.

AI-suggested

Upgrade FacturaScripts to version 2026.2 or later, where this vulnerability is fixed by changing the implementation to use data-* attributes and JavaScript dataset properties instead of embedding user input directly in JavaScript string literals within HTML attributes. Until upgrading, avoid storing untrusted input in the affected fields or restrict access to trusted users only.

Description

FacturaScripts versions prior to 2026.2 contain a stored cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability in the WidgetVariante and WidgetSubcuenta modal lists. The vulnerability arises because user-controlled fields are inserted directly into JavaScript string literals inside HTML onclick attributes with only HTML entity escaping, which browsers decode before JavaScript parsing, allowing injection of arbitrary JavaScript code. This flaw was not addressed in these two widget classes during a recent fix wave that corrected similar issues in related classes. The vulnerability allows an attacker with write access to store payloads that execute when users open the affected modals.

Impact

An attacker able to store specially crafted values in the referencia or codsubcuenta fields can execute arbitrary JavaScript code in the browsers of users who open the affected modals. This stored XSS can lead to session hijacking, unauthorized actions, or other client-side attacks. The CVSS score is 3.5 (low severity) reflecting limited impact due to required privileges and user interaction.

Summary

In FacturaScripts, the WidgetVariante::renderVariantList and WidgetSubcuenta::renderSubaccountList methods build HTML table rows with onclick attributes that embed user-controlled values directly into single-quoted JavaScript string literals. Although the input is sanitized by replacing characters like apostrophes with HTML entities (e.g., '), browsers decode these entities before executing the JavaScript, effectively restoring the original characters and enabling injection of JavaScript code. For example, a payload like `1',alert(1),'2` in the referencia or codsubcuenta fields results in JavaScript code that executes alert(1) when the modal is opened. Recent fixes replaced this pattern in other widget classes by moving data into data-* attributes and accessing them via JavaScript dataset properties, preventing code injection. However, WidgetVariante and WidgetSubcuenta were missed and remain vulnerable. The issue is fixed in FacturaScripts version 2026.2.

CWE-116Improper Encoding or Escaping of Output (opens in a new tab)
Class weaknessLikelihood of exploit: HighOWASP Top 10 A05:2025: Injection (opens in a new tab)
The product prepares a structured message for communication with another component, but encoding or escaping of the data is either missing or done incorrectly. As a result, the intended structure of the message is not preserved.
Architecture and Design · Libraries or Frameworks
Use a vetted library or framework that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid.
Architecture and Design · Parameterization
If available, use structured mechanisms that automatically enforce the separation between data and code. These mechanisms may be able to provide the relevant quoting, encoding, and validation automatically, instead of relying on the developer to provide this capability at every point where output is generated.
Architecture and Design · Implementation
Understand the context in which your data will be used and the encoding that will be expected. This is especially important when transmitting data between different components, or when generating outputs that can contain multiple encodings at the same time, such as web pages or multi-part mail messages.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Content Security Policy (opens in a new tab)
Injection Prevention (opens in a new tab)
SQL Injection Prevention (opens in a new tab)
Injection Prevention in Java (opens in a new tab)
Query Parameterization (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V14.4.6 (opens in a new tab)
V14.4.4 (opens in a new tab)
V14.4.2 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Cross Zone Scripting (opens in a new tab)
User-Controlled Filename (opens in a new tab)
Web Server Logs Tampering (opens in a new tab)
AJAX Footprinting (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).
CWE-79Improper Neutralization of Input During Web Page Generation (Cross-site Scripting) (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessLikelihood of exploit: HighCWE Top 25 (2025): #1OWASP Top 10 A05:2025: Injection (opens in a new tab)
The product does not neutralize or incorrectly neutralizes user-controllable input before it is placed in output that is used as a web page that is served to other users.
Architecture and Design · Libraries or Frameworks
Use a vetted library or framework that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid.
Implementation · Architecture and Design
Understand the context in which your data will be used and the encoding that will be expected. This is especially important when transmitting data between different components, or when generating outputs that can contain multiple encodings at the same time, such as web pages or multi-part mail messages.
Architecture and Design · Implementation · Attack Surface Reduction
Understand all the potential areas where untrusted inputs can enter your software: parameters or arguments, cookies, anything read from the network, environment variables, reverse DNS lookups, query results, request headers, URL components, e-mail, files, filenames, databases, and any external systems that provide…
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Cross Site Scripting Prevention (opens in a new tab)
DOM based XSS Prevention (opens in a new tab)
Injection Prevention (opens in a new tab)
Abuse Case (opens in a new tab)
Deserialization (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V5.3.3 (opens in a new tab)
V1.5.1 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
XSS Using MIME Type Mismatch (opens in a new tab)
DOM-Based XSS (opens in a new tab)
Reflected XSS (opens in a new tab)
Stored XSS (opens in a new tab)
Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 6 Nov 2026, 21:05 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-116, CWE-79

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats