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-2026-46449 macOS Akamai GPA<7.4本地命令注入漏洞 — Guardicore Platform Agent 6.7 Medium 2026-10-14
CVE-2026-103848 Adobe Experience Manager | Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in an OS Command ('OS Command Injection') (CWE-78) — Adobe Experience Manager 6.5 LTS 9.9 Critical 2026-10-13
CVE-2026-86022 VNote: Argument injection to arbitrary command execution via crafted note filename in external-program handling — vnote 7.0 High 2026-10-13
CVE-2026-55601 MultiTail: Shell injection in execute-on-match command handling — multitail 7.3 High 2026-10-13
CVE-2026-100207 Azure CycleCloud Remote Code Execution Vulnerability — Azure CycleCloud 8.9.1 7.3 High 2026-10-13
CVE-2026-110236 KDE Dolphin 24.08.0 through 26.08.2 OS Command Injection via Crafted Folder Name — Dolphin 7.0 High 2026-10-13
CVE-2026-110233 rovr through 0.10.3 OS Command Injection via Unquoted Path to cmd.exe — rovr 7.8 High 2026-10-13
CVE-2026-106171 FortiManager 命令注入漏洞(7.6.x/8.0.0) — FortiManager 5.3 Medium 2026-10-13
CVE-2026-104085 odt2spip < 4.4.0 OS Command Injection via Document Filename — odt2spip 8.8 High 2026-10-13
CVE-2026-55376 heym Python Tool Sandbox Escape — heym 8.8 High 2026-10-13
CVE-2026-109110 Wavlink WL-WN592AX6 wmapd system os command injection — WL-WN592AX6 10.0 Critical 2026-10-13
CVE-2026-109108 Wavlink WL-WN530BE1-A uploadVpn.cgi popen os command injection — WL-WN530BE1-A 9.9 Critical 2026-10-13
CVE-2026-75826 Teltonika Command Injection in Backup function — RUT 8.5 High 2026-10-13
CVE-2026-89116 OS Command Injection in Yeoman-UI / Application Wizard Extension for VS Code — SAP yeoman-ui 5.9 Medium 2026-10-13
CVE-2026-82096 DataStage on Cloud Pak for Data Command Injection — DataStage on Cloud Pak for Data 8.8 High 2026-10-12
CVE-2026-18529 IBM Maximo Application Suite - Location Service for Esri Component Code Execution — Maximo Application Suite - Location Service for Esri Component 8.7 High 2026-10-12
CVE-2025-71429 GPT-SoVITS through 20250606v2pro OS Command Injection via UVR5 vr.py — GPT-SoVITS 9.8 Critical 2026-10-12
CVE-2020-37279 easy-pdf-merge 0.1.0 through 0.2.6 OS Command Injection via merge function — easy-pdf-merge 8.1 High 2026-10-12
CVE-2026-109318 Grav Git Sync 1.0.2 through 3.4.12 Command Injection via Commit Author — grav-plugin-git-sync 8.8 High 2026-10-12
CVE-2026-108896 Linksys E1700 setLinksysIpv6 os command injection — E1700 9.9 Critical 2026-10-12
CVE-2026-108895 Linksys E1700 setDMZ os command injection — E1700 9.9 Critical 2026-10-12
CVE-2026-108894 Linksys E1700 Static Route addStaticRoute os command injection — E1700 9.9 Critical 2026-10-12
CVE-2026-18390 Command Injection in Ministry of Justice's UYAP Document Editor — UYAP Document Editor 7.8 High 2026-10-12
CVE-2026-108953 mac-shell-mcp before 2.0.0 OS Command Injection via execute_command Arguments — mac-shell-mcp 7.8 High 2026-10-12
CVE-2026-105407 OS Command Injection vulnerability affecting Tuleap Enterprise Edition from 17.0 through 17.5 — Tuleap Enterprise Edition 8.8 High 2026-10-12
CVE-2026-108817 agno-agi agno CodingTools coding.py agno.CodingTools.run_shell os command injection — agno 5.5 Medium 2026-10-12
CVE-2026-108804 TRENDnet TEW-751DR/TEW-752DRU/TEW733GR Web Management Backend pigwidgeon.cgi fwrite os command injection — TEW-751DR 10.0 Critical 2026-10-12
CVE-2026-108744 pbi-cli 3.10.1 through 3.12.0 OS Command Injection via Desktop Sync — pbi-cli 7.0 High 2026-10-11
CVE-2026-108576 TOZED X300 IPPingDiagnostics process_ping os command injection — X300 10.0 Critical 2026-10-11
CVE-2026-108540 OpenSpug File Transfer transfer os command injection — Spug 9.9 Critical 2026-10-11

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.