{"answers":{"affected":"7 open source packages ship an affected version, including django and Django. It affects 1 product.","exploited":"There is no known exploitation of CVE-2008-3909 in the wild and no public exploit code.","fix":"Upgrade django to a fixed version for your release line: 1.1, 0.91.3, 0.95.4 or 0.96.3.","what":"CVE-2008-3909 is a medium-severity vulnerability in Djangoproject Django, published on 4 Sep 2008. An attacker can exploit it over the internet without logging in, and only if a user opens a file or follows a link."},"fix_prompt":"Check this codebase for CVE-2008-3909 and fix it if it is affected.\n\nWhat it is: CVE-2008-3909 is a medium-severity vulnerability in Djangoproject Django, published on 4 Sep 2008. An attacker can exploit it over the internet without logging in, and only if a user opens a file or follows a link.\nExploitation: There is no known exploitation of CVE-2008-3909 in the wild and no public exploit code.\n\nAffected packages and fixed versions:\n- django (PyPI): affected all versions; fixed in 1.1\n- django (PyPI): affected from 0.91.0; fixed in 0.91.3\n- django (PyPI): affected from 0.95.0; fixed in 0.95.4\n- django (PyPI): affected from 0.96.0; fixed in 0.96.3\n- Django (PyPI): affected from 0.91.0; fixed in 0.91.3\n- Django (PyPI): affected from 0.95.0; fixed in 0.95.4\n- Django (PyPI): affected from 0.96.0; fixed in 0.96.3\n\nTask:\n1. Search the dependency manifests and lockfiles (for example package.json, package-lock.json, requirements.txt, poetry.lock, uv.lock, pom.xml, build.gradle, go.mod, Cargo.lock, Gemfile.lock) and any Dockerfiles for the affected packages, including transitive dependencies.\n2. If an affected version is in use, upgrade it to the fixed version for its release line with the project's package manager, so the lockfile is regenerated. Prefer the smallest upgrade that fixes it.\n3. If there is no fix, or the upgrade would break the build, do not guess: explain the risk and the safest workaround instead.\n4. Run the tests and summarise what changed and why.\n5. If nothing in the project is affected, say so and change nothing.\n\nReference: https://insights.sbomify.com/CVE-2008-3909/ (Markdown: https://insights.sbomify.com/CVE-2008-3909/index.md)","id":"CVE-2008-3909","markdown":"https://insights.sbomify.com/CVE-2008-3909/index.md","name":"CVE-2008-3909","record":{"aliases":["DEBIAN-CVE-2008-3909","GHSA-r5cj-wv24-92p5","PYSEC-2008-2"],"analysis":{"component_type":"web_application","fix_type":"upgrade","impacts":["data_modify","data_read"],"network_reachable":"yes","non_default_config":false,"product_category":"Django web framework","requires_auth":"none","summary":"Remote attackers can perform cross-site request forgery to delete or modify data in the Django administration application by exploiting unauthenticated request storage.","user_interaction":"required","vuln_class":"csrf"},"analysis_generated_by":"qwen3.8-flash-next","assigner":"mitre","cpe":[{"product":"django","vendor":"djangoproject"}],"cvss":{"score":5.8,"severity":"medium","source":"nvd","vector":"AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:N/I:P/A:P","version":"2.0"},"cwes":[{"id":"CWE-352","name":"Cross-Site Request Forgery"}],"description":"The administration application in Django 0.91, 0.95, and 0.96 stores unauthenticated HTTP POST requests and processes them after successful authentication occurs, which allows remote attackers to conduct cross-site request forgery (CSRF) attacks and delete or modify data via unspecified requests.","ecosystems":["PyPI"],"exploits":{"exploitdb":0,"first_seen":null,"github_poc":0,"max_poc_stars":null,"metasploit":0,"nuclei":0,"refs":[],"tier":"none_known"},"has_fix":true,"headline":"Django cross-site request forgery (CSRF) vulnerability","id":"CVE-2008-3909","indexable":true,"kev":null,"kind":"cve","links":{"ecosystem":"PyPI","product":"djangoproject:django","products":["djangoproject:django"],"type":"csrf","year":"2008"},"n_packages":7,"n_references":10,"next":{"headline":"Integer overflow in n/a","id":"CVE-2008-3910"},"packages":[{"ecosystem":"PyPI","fixed":["0.91.3"],"introduced":["0.91.0"],"last_affected":[],"package":"Django","purl":null,"source":"GHSA-r5cj-wv24-92p5"},{"ecosystem":"PyPI","fixed":["0.95.4"],"introduced":["0.95.0"],"last_affected":[],"package":"Django","purl":null,"source":"GHSA-r5cj-wv24-92p5"},{"ecosystem":"PyPI","fixed":["0.96.3"],"introduced":["0.96.0"],"last_affected":[],"package":"Django","purl":null,"source":"GHSA-r5cj-wv24-92p5"},{"ecosystem":"PyPI","fixed":["1.1"],"introduced":["0"],"last_affected":[],"package":"django","purl":"pkg:pypi/django","source":"PYSEC-2008-2"},{"ecosystem":"PyPI","fixed":["0.91.3"],"introduced":["0.91.0"],"last_affected":[],"package":"django","purl":"pkg:pypi/django","source":"GHSA-r5cj-wv24-92p5"},{"ecosystem":"PyPI","fixed":["0.95.4"],"introduced":["0.95.0"],"last_affected":[],"package":"django","purl":"pkg:pypi/django","source":"GHSA-r5cj-wv24-92p5"},{"ecosystem":"PyPI","fixed":["0.96.3"],"introduced":["0.96.0"],"last_affected":[],"package":"django","purl":"pkg:pypi/django","source":"GHSA-r5cj-wv24-92p5"}],"prev":{"headline":"Memory corruption in n/a","id":"CVE-2008-3908"},"products":["n/a"],"published":"2008-09-04","related":[{"cvss_score":9.8,"headline":"Privilege abuse in GenericInlineModelAdmin","id":"CVE-2026-4277","kev_date_added":null,"published":"2026-04-07"},{"cvss_score":9.8,"headline":"Django SQL injection in HasKey(lhs, rhs) on Oracle","id":"CVE-2024-53908","kev_date_added":null,"published":"2024-12-06"},{"cvss_score":9.8,"headline":"Django SQL injection vulnerability","id":"CVE-2024-42005","kev_date_added":null,"published":"2024-08-07"},{"cvss_score":9.8,"headline":"Django bypasses validation when using one form field to upload multiple files","id":"CVE-2023-31047","kev_date_added":null,"published":"2023-05-07"},{"cvss_score":9.8,"headline":"Django `Trunc()` and `Extract()` database functions vulnerable to SQL Injection","id":"CVE-2022-34265","kev_date_added":null,"published":"2022-07-04"},{"cvss_score":9.8,"headline":"SQL Injection in Django","id":"CVE-2021-35042","kev_date_added":null,"published":"2021-07-02"},{"cvss_score":9.8,"headline":"SQL injection in Django","id":"CVE-2020-7471","kev_date_added":null,"published":"2020-02-03"}],"sources":[{"class":"attribution","licence":"CVE Terms of Use (MITRE)","name":"CVE List","prefix":"CVE"},{"class":"attribution","licence":"CC BY 4.0","name":"GitHub Advisory Database","prefix":"GHSA"},{"class":"attribution","licence":"CC BY 4.0","name":"PyPA Advisory Database","prefix":"PYSEC"},{"class":"attribution","licence":"US public information, NVD API terms","name":"NVD"},{"class":"attribution","licence":"CWE Terms of Use","name":"CWE (MITRE)"},{"class":"attribution","licence":"FIRST CVSS licence","name":"CVSS (FIRST)"}],"ssvc":{"automatable":null,"exploitation":null,"technical_impact":null},"state":"PUBLISHED","updated":"2024-08-07","vendors":["n/a"]},"summary":"Remote attackers can perform cross-site request forgery to delete or modify data in the Django administration application by exploiting unauthenticated request storage.","url":"https://insights.sbomify.com/CVE-2008-3909/"}