CVE-2021-41790
Official description Straight from the sourceThe vendor's or NVD's own wording, published unedited. Authoritative, but often terse — it says what broke, rarely what to do.
NVD · uneditedAn issue was discovered in Hyland org.alfresco:alfresco-content-services through 7.0.1.2. Script Action execution allows executing scripts uploaded outside of the Data Dictionary. This could allow a logged-in attacker to execute arbitrary code inside a sandboxed environment.
Technical summary Written by usOur analysis, written from the advisory, the CVSS vector and the affected-version data. It adds context the advisory leaves out, and never invents facts that are not in the source.
dbcve analysis · high confidenceIn Alfresco Content Services through 7.0.1.2, the Script Action feature fails to properly validate that scripts are located within the Data Dictionary before execution. This allows authenticated attackers to upload malicious scripts to arbitrary locations outside the protected Data Dictionary and execute them via the Script Action, effectively bypassing the intended sandboxing controls.
Verify against the referenced sources before acting — the references below are authoritative for this CVE, this summary is not.
Affected products & versions What the vendor confirmedThe version ranges the vendor confirmed as vulnerable. If your version sits inside a range here, treat yourself as exposed until you have upgraded.
NVD · CPE data>= 5.0.0.0, <= 5.2.7.11>= 6.0.0.0, <= 6.0.1.9>= 6.1.0.0, <= 6.1.1.10>= 6.2.0.0, <= 6.2.2.18>= 7.0.1.0, <= 7.0.1.2= 7.0= 7.0.0.1= 7.0.0.2CVSS breakdown How the score is builtThe industry scoring standard. It rates how the flaw is reached, what it takes to exploit, and what an attacker gains — the score is derived from those, not the other way round.
From the vector- Attack vector
- Network
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- Low
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
Am I affected? How to checkSteps we derive from the advisory and the affected-version data, so you can decide whether this CVE reaches your setup. They are a guide, not a scan — your own configuration is the authority.
dbcve checksWork through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.
-
Identify installed Alfresco Content Services versionAccess the Alfresco admin console or check the WAR file version information, typically found in the About section of Share or via the /alfresco/service/api/admin/about endpointAffected if The installed version falls within any of these ranges: 5.0.0.0 to 5.2.7.11, 6.0.0.0 to 6.0.1.9, 6.1.0.0 to 6.1.1.10, 6.2.0.0 to 6.2.2.18, 7.0.1.0 to 7.0.1.2, or is exactly 7.0, 7.0.0.1, or 7.0.0.2
-
Verify Script Action feature is accessibleCheck if the Script Action feature is enabled in the Alfresco administration console under Workflows and Tasks or Script Actions configurationAffected if The Script Action feature is enabled and available to authenticated users in the environment
-
Confirm path validation is missing for script executionAttempt to execute a test script located in a folder outside the Data Dictionary (for example, in a regular site document library) using the Script Action feature to see if execution is allowedAffected if Scripts located outside the Data Dictionary can be executed via the Script Action feature without being rejected or blocked
The environment is affected if the installed Alfresco version is within the affected ranges AND the Script Action feature is accessible AND scripts outside the Data Dictionary can be executed without path validation blocking them.
Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.
Remediation Closing itWhat it takes to close this. Where a vendor fix exists we point at it; where none exists we say so plainly, and can build one. Effort estimates are scoped from the advisory, not from your codebase.
From vendor dataRestrict Script Action execution to only allow scripts located within the Data Dictionary by implementing proper path validation checks before script execution, rejecting any scripts located outside the protected directory.
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation6.0 h
- Testing4.0 h
- Review / QA2.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $4,224.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2021-41790 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.
References Go to the primary sourcePrimary sources — vendor advisories, patches and trackers. Where our summary and a reference disagree, the reference wins.
Primary sourcesPractitioner notes
ContributedPeer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2021-41790 in production — separate from our analysis above.
The advisory tells you what broke. It rarely tells you what actually worked. If you’ve dealt with this one, that detail is what the next engineer is searching for.
- The version that genuinely resolved it — not the one the vendor claimed
- A config change or rule that shut the vector down
- A gotcha in the upgrade path that cost you an afternoon
No notes yet
Be the first to add a field note for this CVE — a mitigation you’ve verified, a version caveat, or a link to a working fix. Sign in above to contribute.
A place for practitioners to share what actually worked: a mitigation you’ve tested, a configuration change, a version- or environment-specific caveat, or a link to a verified patch. The most useful notes rise to the top as peers upvote them, so the signal stays high.
- Verified mitigations, workarounds, and config changes
- Version or environment caveats, and links to real fixes
- No weaponised exploit code, or anything meant to cause harm
- No spam, self-promotion, credentials, or personal data