When the sandbox is enabled selectively via SourcePolicyInterface (and not globally), a sandboxed template that is allowed to call template_from_string and include can render an arbitrary inner template with no security policy enforcement.
Environment::createTemplate() compiles the inner string under a synthesized name (__string_template__<hash>), so a name/path-based SourcePolicy returns false for it, and the inner template's checkSecurity() becomes a no-op. From a template the integrator believes is sandboxed, an attacker can use any tag/filter/function (including constant() to read secrets, or |map("system") to execute shell commands).
This is a configuration trap rather than a code bug: there is no legitimate use case for exposing template_from_string to untrusted template authors, and propagating the parent sandbox state through template_from_string would require invasive changes to SourcePolicyInterface semantics with their own risks.
Starting with Twig 3.26.0, the documentation and the PHPDoc of StringLoaderExtension::templateFromString() explicitly warn against allowing template_from_string in a sandboxed environment (i.e. listing it in a SecurityPolicy allowed-functions list). Integrators using a SourcePolicyInterface MUST NOT allow template_from_string in their allowed functions; the safest option is not to register StringLoaderExtension at all when a sandbox is in use.
Twig would like to thank Claude Mythos Preview (via Project Glasswing) for reporting the issue.
A security vulnerability is a weakness in software, hardware, or configuration that can be exploited to compromise confidentiality, integrity, or availability. Many vulnerabilities are tracked as CVEs (Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures), which provide a standardized identifier so teams can coordinate patching, mitigation, and risk assessment across tools and vendors.
CVSS (Common Vulnerability Scoring System) estimates technical severity, but it doesn't automatically equal business risk. Prioritize using context like internet exposure, affected asset criticality, known exploitation (proof-of-concept or in-the-wild), and whether compensating controls exist. A "Medium" CVSS on an exposed, production system can be more urgent than a "Critical" on an isolated, non-production host.
A vulnerability is the underlying weakness. An exploit is the method or code used to take advantage of it. A zero-day is a vulnerability that is unknown to the vendor or has no publicly available fix when attackers begin using it. In practice, risk increases sharply when exploitation becomes reliable or widespread.
Recurring findings usually come from incomplete Asset Discovery, inconsistent patch management, inherited images, and configuration drift. In modern environments, you also need to watch the software supply chain: dependencies, containers, build pipelines, and third-party services can reintroduce the same weakness even after you patch a single host. Unknown or unmanaged assets (often called Shadow IT) are a common reason the same issues resurface.
Use a simple, repeatable triage model: focus first on externally exposed assets, high-value systems (identity, VPN, email, production), vulnerabilities with known exploits, and issues that enable remote code execution or privilege escalation. Then enforce patch SLAs and track progress using consistent metrics so remediation is steady, not reactive.
SynScan combines attack surface monitoring and continuous security auditing to keep your inventory current, flag high-impact vulnerabilities early, and help you turn raw findings into a practical remediation plan.