Goal Reached Thanks to every supporter — we hit 100%!

Goal: 1000 CNY · Raised: 1359 CNY

100%

CWE-78 (OS命令中使用的特殊元素转义处理不恰当(OS命令注入)) — Vulnerability Class 4005

4005 vulnerabilities classified as CWE-78 (OS命令中使用的特殊元素转义处理不恰当(OS命令注入)). AI Chinese analysis included.

CWE-78 represents a critical input validation weakness where software constructs operating system commands using untrusted external data without proper sanitization. Attackers typically exploit this by injecting malicious shell metacharacters, such as semicolons or pipes, into user-supplied fields like form inputs or URL parameters. This manipulation allows the attacker to alter the intended command structure, enabling arbitrary code execution, data exfiltration, or complete system compromise. To mitigate this risk, developers must strictly avoid passing user input directly to OS command interpreters. Instead, they should utilize safe, language-specific APIs that do not invoke the shell, or implement rigorous input validation and parameterization techniques. By treating all external data as inherently untrusted and applying strict allow-list filtering, organizations can effectively neutralize special elements and prevent command injection vulnerabilities.

MITRE CWE Description
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. This weakness can lead to a vulnerability in environments in which the attacker does not have direct access to the operating system, such as in web applications. Alternately, if the weakness occurs in a privileged program, it could allow the attacker to specify commands that normally would not be accessible, or to call alternate commands with privileges that the attacker does not have. The problem is exacerbated if the compromised process does not follow the principle of least privilege, because the attacker-controlled commands may run with special system privileges that increases the amount of damage. There are at least two subtypes of OS command injection: The application intends to execute a single, fixed program that is under its own control. It intends to use externally-supplied inputs as arguments to that program. For example, the program might use system("nslookup [HOSTNAME]") to run nslookup and allow the user to supply a HOSTNAME, which is used as an argument. Attackers cannot prevent nslookup from executing. However, if the program does not remove command separators from the HOSTNAME argument, attackers could place the separators into the arguments, which allows them to execute their own program afte…
Common Consequences (1)
Confidentiality, Integrity, Availability, Non-Repudiation Execute Unauthorized Code or Commands, DoS: Crash, Exit, or Restart, Read Files or Directories, Modify Files or Directories, Read Application Data, Modify Application Data, Hide Activities
Attackers could execute unauthorized operating system commands, which could then be used to disable the product, or read and modify data for which the attacker does not have permissions to access directly. Since the targeted application is directly executing the commands instead of the attacker, any…
Mitigations (5)
Architecture and Design If at all possible, use library calls rather than external processes to recreate the desired functionality.
Architecture and Design, Operation 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 ex…
Effectiveness: Limited
Architecture and Design 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.
Architecture and Design 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.
Architecture and Design 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.
Examples (2)
This example code intends to take the name of a user and list the contents of that user's home directory. It is subject to the first variant of OS command injection.
$userName = $_POST["user"]; $command = 'ls -l /home/' . $userName; system($command);
Bad · PHP
;rm -rf /
Attack
The following simple program accepts a filename as a command line argument and displays the contents of the file back to the user. The program is installed setuid root because it is intended for use as a learning tool to allow system administrators in-training to inspect privileged system files without giving them the ability to modify them or damage the system.
int main(int argc, char** argv) { char cmd[CMD_MAX] = "/usr/bin/cat "; strcat(cmd, argv[1]); system(cmd); }
Bad · C
CVE ID Title CVSS Severity Published
CVE-2026-111853 Tektronix 3 Series MDO 1.21.1 前命令注入漏洞 — 3 Series MDO 8.8 High 2026-10-17
CVE-2026-108743 Apache Kylin: spark job OS command injection — Apache Kylin - - 2026-10-16
CVE-2026-30971 ZoneMinder: Authenticated RCE via command injection in monitor Device Path — zoneminder 8.8 High 2026-10-16
CVE-2026-102608 ZoneMinder: Authenticated OS Command Injection via unsanitized Monitor Name in event export (download_functions.php) — zoneminder 9.0 Critical 2026-10-16
CVE-2026-102607 ZoneMinder: Authenticated OS Command Injection (RCE) via Export Feature — zoneminder 8.8 High 2026-10-16
CVE-2026-92263 SparkyFitness: Authenticated OS command injection (host RCE) via backup-restore filename in POST /api/admin/backup/restore — SparkyFitness 7.2 High 2026-10-16
CVE-2026-111451 Wheels CLI 4.0.0-4.1.1 远程代码执行与文件覆盖漏洞 — Wheels CLI 7.8 High 2026-10-16
CVE-2026-111229 Netgate pfSense CE 2.7.0 through 2.9.0 Command Injection via Captive Portal HA Sync — pfSense CE 7.2 High 2026-10-15
CVE-2026-111226 Netgate pfSense CE 2.4.5 through 2.9.0 OS Command Injection via system_advanced_admin.php — pfSense CE 7.2 High 2026-10-15
CVE-2026-111225 Netgate pfSense CE 2.5.0 through 2.9.0 OS Command Injection via openvpn.learn-address.sh — pfSense CE 5.0 Medium 2026-10-15
CVE-2026-111224 Netgate pfSense CE through 2.9.0 OS Command Injection via openvpn.connect_async.sh — pfSense CE 7.5 High 2026-10-15
CVE-2026-111218 Netgate pfSense CE 2.7.0 through 2.9.0 OS Command Injection via Traffic Shaper Limiters — pfSense CE 7.2 High 2026-10-15
CVE-2026-111216 Netgate pfSense CE through 2.9.0 OS Command Injection via Gateway Monitor IP — pfSense CE 7.2 High 2026-10-15
CVE-2026-111217 Netgate pfSense CE through 2.9.0 OS Command Injection via CARP VHID — pfSense CE 7.2 High 2026-10-15
CVE-2026-111215 Netgate pfSense CE through 2.9.0 OS Command Injection via Wireless Parent Interface — pfSense CE 7.2 High 2026-10-15
CVE-2026-111214 Netgate pfSense CE 2.7.0 through 2.9.0 OS Command Injection via interfaces_qinq_edit.php — pfSense CE 7.2 High 2026-10-15
CVE-2026-45449 Unitronics - CWE-78: Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in an OS Command ('OS Command Injection') — Unitronics UniStream Pro/UniLogic 8.3 High 2026-10-15
CVE-2026-110957 Wavlink WL-WN530BE2-A Login Processing api.cgi sub_12580 os command injection — WL-WN530BE2-A 10.0 Critical 2026-10-15
CVE-2026-47786 Pre-Authentication Command Injection — HybridDesk Station 9.3 Critical 2026-10-15
CVE-2026-34007 **RCE** Unsanitized `X-Forwarded-For` header passed to `shell_exec()` via broken IP validation fallback in `getClientIP()` — Notes Station 3 6.9 Medium 2026-10-15
CVE-2026-110908 pfSense FRR 2.0.2_1命令注入漏洞 — pfSense-pkg-frr 8.8 High 2026-10-15
CVE-2026-0313 Cortex XSOAR: OS Command Injection Vulnerability — Cortex XSOAR OS Query 6.1 Medium 2026-10-14
CVE-2026-0320 PAN-OS: Authenticated Admin Command Injection Vulnerability — Cloud NGFW 5.7 Medium 2026-10-14
CVE-2026-100232 SonicWall NSM OS命令注入漏洞 — Network Security Manager (NSM) - - 2026-10-14
CVE-2026-55679 WeGIA: Pre-auth Installer Injection Chain Enables Command Execution and Arbitrary PHP Code Injection — WeGIA 6.5 Medium 2026-10-14
CVE-2026-54525 Markdown Preview Enhanced: One Click RCE via Markdown Link Command Injection on Windows — vscode-markdown-preview-enhanced 8.8 High 2026-10-14
CVE-2026-110536 D-Link DIR-868L HNAP CGI cgibin system os command injection — DIR-868L 10.0 Critical 2026-10-14
CVE-2026-55786 Flyto2 Core: Unauthenticated Command Execution via HTTP MCP `execute_module` — flyto-core 8.4 High 2026-10-14
CVE-2026-102059 Junos OS and Junos OS Evolved: EX Series, SRX Series, QFX Series: A rogue DHCP server causes root-level command execution when the phone-home client processes specific information — Junos OS 8.8 High 2026-10-14
CVE-2026-102031 Junos OS Evolved: A low-privileged TACACS+ user causes root command execution when authorization refresh is enabled — Junos OS Evolved 9.8 Critical 2026-10-14

Vulnerabilities classified as CWE-78 (OS命令中使用的特殊元素转义处理不恰当(OS命令注入)) represent 4005 CVEs. The CWE taxonomy describes the weakness; review individual CVEs for product-specific impact.