CWE-77
Allowed-with-ReviewImproper Neutralization of Special Elements used in a Command ('Command Injection')
Abstraction: Class · Status: Draft
The product constructs all or part of a command using externally-influenced input from an upstream component, but it does not neutralize or incorrectly neutralizes special elements that could modify the intended command when it is sent to a downstream component.
5386 vulnerabilities reference this CWE, most recent first.
GHSA-R773-HH48-F8MC
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2025-05-05 18:32 – Updated: 2025-05-05 18:32NETGEAR RAX5 (AX1600 WiFi Router) V1.0.2.26 was discovered to contain a command injection vulnerability via the ifname parameter in the apcli_wps_gen_pincode function.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2024-57232"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-77"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2025-05-05T17:18:46Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "NETGEAR RAX5 (AX1600 WiFi Router) V1.0.2.26 was discovered to contain a command injection vulnerability via the ifname parameter in the apcli_wps_gen_pincode function.",
"id": "GHSA-r773-hh48-f8mc",
"modified": "2025-05-05T18:32:52Z",
"published": "2025-05-05T18:32:52Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-57232"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/yanggao017/vuln/blob/main/NETGEAR/RAX5/CI_6_apcli_wps_gen_pincode/README.md"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-R79C-PQJ3-577X
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-02-09 17:46 – Updated: 2026-02-09 22:39Summary
The Super-linter GitHub Action is vulnerable to command injection via crafted filenames. When this action is used in downstream GitHub Actions workflows, an attacker can submit a pull request that introduces a file whose name contains shell command substitution syntax, such as $(...). In affected Super-linter versions, runtime scripts may execute the embedded command during file discovery processing, enabling arbitrary command execution in the workflow runner context. This can be used to disclose the job’s GITHUB_TOKEN depending on how the workflow configures permissions.
Details
The issue appears originates in the logic that scans the repository for changed files to check.
- Use a workflow that runs Super-linter on
pull_requestevents. - Open a pull request that adds a new file with a crafted filename containing command substitution and an outbound request that includes
$GITHUB_TOKEN. - Run the workflow.
Impact
- Arbitrary command execution in the context of the workflow run that invokes Super-linter (triggered by attacker-controlled filenames in a PR).
- Credential exposure / misuse: the injected command can read environment variables available to the action, including
GITHUB_TOKEN.
The level of exposure depends on the source of the pull request.
To actively exploit the vulnerability, an attacker needs have the ability to run workflows without any approval from the repository admin.
Also, the GITHUB_TOKEN needs to have unconstrained access to repository resources. Even in that case, for pull request coming from forked repositories, no secrets are passed to the forked repository when running workflows triggered by pull_request events, and the GITHUB_TOKEN drops and write permission on the source repository source.
Finally, although not specific to this vulnerability, we recommend auditing workflow_call and pull_request_target workflows because they can lead to compromise, regardless of whether you're using Super-linter, or not, as explained by this GitHub Enterprise doc.
{
"affected": [
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "GitHub Actions",
"name": "super-linter/super-linter"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "6.0.0"
},
{
"fixed": "8.3.1"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
},
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "GitHub Actions",
"name": "super-linter/super-linter/slim"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "6.0.0"
},
{
"fixed": "8.3.1"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
}
],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2026-25761"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-77"
],
"github_reviewed": true,
"github_reviewed_at": "2026-02-09T17:46:31Z",
"nvd_published_at": "2026-02-09T21:15:49Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "### Summary\n\nThe Super-linter GitHub Action is vulnerable to **command injection via crafted filenames**. When this action is used in downstream GitHub Actions workflows, an attacker can submit a pull request that introduces a file whose **name** contains shell command substitution syntax, such as `$(...)`. In affected Super-linter versions, runtime scripts may execute the embedded command during file discovery processing, enabling arbitrary command execution in the workflow runner context. This can be used to disclose the job\u2019s `GITHUB_TOKEN` depending on how the workflow configures permissions.\n\n### Details\n\nThe issue appears originates in the logic that scans the repository for changed files to check.\n\n1. Use a workflow that runs Super-linter on `pull_request` events.\n2. Open a pull request that adds a new file with a crafted filename containing command substitution and an outbound request that includes `$GITHUB_TOKEN`.\n3. Run the workflow. \n\n### Impact\n\n- **Arbitrary command execution** in the context of the workflow run that invokes Super-linter (triggered by attacker-controlled filenames in a PR).\n- **Credential exposure / misuse:** the injected command can read environment variables available to the action, including `GITHUB_TOKEN`.\n\nThe level of exposure depends on the source of the pull request.\n\nTo actively exploit the vulnerability, an attacker needs have the ability to run workflows without any [approval from the repository admin](https://docs.github.com/en/actions/how-tos/manage-workflow-runs/approve-runs-from-forks).\n\nAlso, the `GITHUB_TOKEN` needs to have unconstrained access to repository resources. Even in that case, for pull request coming from forked repositories, no secrets are passed to the forked repository when running workflows triggered by `pull_request` events, and the `GITHUB_TOKEN` drops and write permission on the source repository [source](https://docs.github.com/en/actions/reference/workflows-and-actions/events-that-trigger-workflows#workflows-in-forked-repositories).\n\nFinally, although not specific to this vulnerability, we recommend auditing `workflow_call` and `pull_request_target` workflows because they can lead to compromise, regardless of whether you\u0027re using Super-linter, or not, as [explained by this GitHub Enterprise doc](https://docs.github.com/en/enterprise-cloud@latest/actions/reference/security/secure-use#mitigating-the-risks-of-untrusted-code-checkout).",
"id": "GHSA-r79c-pqj3-577x",
"modified": "2026-02-09T22:39:39Z",
"published": "2026-02-09T17:46:31Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/super-linter/super-linter/security/advisories/GHSA-r79c-pqj3-577x"
},
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-25761"
},
{
"type": "PACKAGE",
"url": "https://github.com/super-linter/super-linter"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/super-linter/super-linter/releases/tag/v8.3.1"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
],
"summary": "Super-linter is vulnerable to command injection via crafted filenames in Super-linter Action"
}
GHSA-R79F-V7W7-JV39
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2025-01-10 18:31 – Updated: 2025-01-14 18:31TOTOLINK A6000R V1.0.1-B20201211.2000 was discovered to contain a command injection vulnerability via the devname parameter in the reset_wifi function.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2024-57214"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-77"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2025-01-10T17:15:18Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "TOTOLINK A6000R V1.0.1-B20201211.2000 was discovered to contain a command injection vulnerability via the devname parameter in the reset_wifi function.",
"id": "GHSA-r79f-v7w7-jv39",
"modified": "2025-01-14T18:31:55Z",
"published": "2025-01-10T18:31:41Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-57214"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/yanggao017/vuln/tree/main/TOTOLINK/A6000R/CI_8_reset_wifi"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-R7GJ-GGXH-QX78
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-17 00:18 – Updated: 2022-05-17 00:18The FusionSphere OpenStack with software V100R006C00 and V100R006C10 has a command injection vulnerability due to the insufficient input validation on four TCP listening ports. An unauthenticated attacker can exploit the vulnerabilities to gain root privileges by sending some messages with malicious commands.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2017-8132"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-77"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2017-11-22T19:29:00Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "The FusionSphere OpenStack with software V100R006C00 and V100R006C10 has a command injection vulnerability due to the insufficient input validation on four TCP listening ports. An unauthenticated attacker can exploit the vulnerabilities to gain root privileges by sending some messages with malicious commands.",
"id": "GHSA-r7gj-ggxh-qx78",
"modified": "2022-05-17T00:18:09Z",
"published": "2022-05-17T00:18:09Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2017-8132"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://www.huawei.com/en/psirt/security-advisories/huawei-sa-20170531-01-openstack-en"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.0/AV:A/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-R7MX-84M9-9H4Q
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2025-08-22 03:30 – Updated: 2025-08-22 03:30Improper neutralization of alarm-to-mail configuration fields used in an OS shell Command ('Command Injection') in Danfoss AK-SM8xxA Series prior to version 4.3.1, leading to a potential post-authenticated remote code execution on an attacked system.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2025-41451"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-77"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2025-08-22T03:15:29Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "Improper neutralization of alarm-to-mail configuration fields used in an OS shell Command (\u0027Command Injection\u0027) in Danfoss AK-SM8xxA Series\u00a0prior to version 4.3.1, leading to a potential post-authenticated remote code execution on an attacked system.",
"id": "GHSA-r7mx-84m9-9h4q",
"modified": "2025-08-22T03:30:25Z",
"published": "2025-08-22T03:30:25Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2025-41451"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.danfoss.com/en/service-and-support/downloads/dcs/adap-kool-software/ak-sm-800a/#tab-overview"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:H/AT:P/PR:H/UI:A/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/SC:H/SI:H/SA:H/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-R7QQ-8R7X-5553
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-02-07 12:31 – Updated: 2026-02-07 12:31A weakness has been identified in D-Link DIR-823X 250416. This impacts an unknown function of the file /goform/set_language. Executing a manipulation of the argument langSelection can lead to os command injection. It is possible to launch the attack remotely. The exploit has been made available to the public and could be used for attacks.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2026-2084"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-77"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2026-02-07T12:15:55Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "A weakness has been identified in D-Link DIR-823X 250416. This impacts an unknown function of the file /goform/set_language. Executing a manipulation of the argument langSelection can lead to os command injection. It is possible to launch the attack remotely. The exploit has been made available to the public and could be used for attacks.",
"id": "GHSA-r7qq-8r7x-5553",
"modified": "2026-02-07T12:31:25Z",
"published": "2026-02-07T12:31:25Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-2084"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/master-abc/cve/issues/24"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://vuldb.com/?ctiid.344651"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://vuldb.com/?id.344651"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://vuldb.com/?submit.746379"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://vuldb.com/?submit.746380"
},
{
"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:H/I:H/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
},
{
"score": "CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:H/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:P/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-R7R5-2RQH-R972
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2023-07-01 00:30 – Updated: 2024-04-04 05:19com.perimeter81.osx.HelperTool in Perimeter81 10.0.0.19 on macOS allows Local Privilege Escalation (to root) via shell metacharacters in usingCAPath.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2023-33298"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-77"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2023-06-30T22:15:10Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "com.perimeter81.osx.HelperTool in Perimeter81 10.0.0.19 on macOS allows Local Privilege Escalation (to root) via shell metacharacters in usingCAPath.",
"id": "GHSA-r7r5-2rqh-r972",
"modified": "2024-04-04T05:19:16Z",
"published": "2023-07-01T00:30:45Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2023-33298"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://support.perimeter81.com/docs/macos-agent-release-notes"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.kb.cert.org/vuls/id/653767"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.ns-echo.com/posts/cve_2023_33298.html"
}
],
"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-R7VQ-QR3G-R3WG
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-24 17:19 – Updated: 2024-04-04 02:52A vulnerability in the web-based user interface (web UI) of Cisco IOS XE Software could allow an authenticated, remote attacker with read-only privileges to inject IOS commands to an affected device. The injected commands should require a higher privilege level in order to be executed. The vulnerability is due to insufficient input validation of specific HTTP requests. An attacker could exploit this vulnerability by sending crafted HTTP requests to a specific web UI endpoint on an affected device. A successful exploit could allow the attacker to inject IOS commands to the affected device, which could allow the attacker to alter the configuration of the device or cause a denial of service (DoS) condition.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2020-3224"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-77",
"CWE-78"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2020-06-03T18:15:00Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "A vulnerability in the web-based user interface (web UI) of Cisco IOS XE Software could allow an authenticated, remote attacker with read-only privileges to inject IOS commands to an affected device. The injected commands should require a higher privilege level in order to be executed. The vulnerability is due to insufficient input validation of specific HTTP requests. An attacker could exploit this vulnerability by sending crafted HTTP requests to a specific web UI endpoint on an affected device. A successful exploit could allow the attacker to inject IOS commands to the affected device, which could allow the attacker to alter the configuration of the device or cause a denial of service (DoS) condition.",
"id": "GHSA-r7vq-qr3g-r3wg",
"modified": "2024-04-04T02:52:40Z",
"published": "2022-05-24T17:19:08Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2020-3224"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://tools.cisco.com/security/center/content/CiscoSecurityAdvisory/cisco-sa-webui-cmdinj-zM283Zdw"
}
],
"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-R7X3-5RWC-88X4
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-17 04:04 – Updated: 2022-05-17 04:04IBM WebSphere Message Broker 8 before 8.0.0.6 and Integration Bus 9 before 9.0.0.4 do not check authorization for MQSISTARTMSGFLOW and MQSISTOPMSGFLOW commands, which allows local users to bypass intended access restrictions, and start or stop a service, by issuing a command.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2015-5011"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-77"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2015-10-26T02:59:00Z",
"severity": "LOW"
},
"details": "IBM WebSphere Message Broker 8 before 8.0.0.6 and Integration Bus 9 before 9.0.0.4 do not check authorization for MQSISTARTMSGFLOW and MQSISTOPMSGFLOW commands, which allows local users to bypass intended access restrictions, and start or stop a service, by issuing a command.",
"id": "GHSA-r7x3-5rwc-88x4",
"modified": "2022-05-17T04:04:03Z",
"published": "2022-05-17T04:04:03Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2015-5011"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://www-01.ibm.com/support/docview.wss?uid=swg1PI28139"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://www-01.ibm.com/support/docview.wss?uid=swg21967265"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": []
}
GHSA-R823-2Q58-C7VX
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2024-02-13 21:30 – Updated: 2024-03-05 21:30A command injection vulnerability was identified in GitHub Enterprise Server that allowed an attacker with an editor role in the Management Console to gain admin SSH access to the appliance via the syslog-ng configuration file. Exploitation of this vulnerability required access to the GitHub Enterprise Server instance and access to the Management Console with the editor role. This vulnerability affected all versions of GitHub Enterprise Server prior to 3.12 and was fixed in versions 3.11.5, 3.10.7, 3.9.10, and 3.8.15. This vulnerability was reported via the GitHub Bug Bounty program.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2024-1354"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-20",
"CWE-77"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2024-02-13T19:15:09Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "A command injection vulnerability was identified in GitHub Enterprise Server that allowed an attacker with an editor role in the Management Console to gain admin SSH access to the appliance via the `syslog-ng`\u00a0configuration file. Exploitation of this vulnerability required access to the GitHub Enterprise Server instance and access to the Management Console with the editor role. This vulnerability affected all versions of GitHub Enterprise Server prior to 3.12 and was fixed in versions 3.11.5, 3.10.7, 3.9.10, and 3.8.15. This vulnerability was reported via the GitHub Bug Bounty program.\n",
"id": "GHSA-r823-2q58-c7vx",
"modified": "2024-03-05T21:30:25Z",
"published": "2024-02-13T21:30:29Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-1354"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://docs.github.com/en/enterprise-server@3.10/admin/release-notes#3.10.7"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://docs.github.com/en/enterprise-server@3.11/admin/release-notes#3.11.5"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://docs.github.com/en/enterprise-server@3.8/admin/release-notes#3.8.15"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://docs.github.com/en/enterprise-server@3.9/admin/release-notes#3.9.10"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:H/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
Mitigation
If at all possible, use library calls rather than external processes to recreate the desired functionality.
Mitigation
If possible, ensure that all external commands called from the program are statically created.
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.
Mitigation
Run time: Run time policy enforcement may be used in an allowlist fashion to prevent use of any non-sanctioned commands.
Mitigation
Assign permissions that prevent the user from accessing/opening privileged files.
CAPEC-136: LDAP Injection
An attacker manipulates or crafts an LDAP query for the purpose of undermining the security of the target. Some applications use user input to create LDAP queries that are processed by an LDAP server. For example, a user might provide their username during authentication and the username might be inserted in an LDAP query during the authentication process. An attacker could use this input to inject additional commands into an LDAP query that could disclose sensitive information. For example, entering a * in the aforementioned query might return information about all users on the system. This attack is very similar to an SQL injection attack in that it manipulates a query to gather additional information or coerce a particular return value.
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-183: IMAP/SMTP Command Injection
An adversary exploits weaknesses in input validation on web-mail servers to execute commands on the IMAP/SMTP server. Web-mail servers often sit between the Internet and the IMAP or SMTP mail server. User requests are received by the web-mail servers which then query the back-end mail server for the requested information and return this response to the user. In an IMAP/SMTP command injection attack, mail-server commands are embedded in parts of the request sent to the web-mail server. If the web-mail server fails to adequately sanitize these requests, these commands are then sent to the back-end mail server when it is queried by the web-mail server, where the commands are then executed. This attack can be especially dangerous since administrators may assume that the back-end server is protected against direct Internet access and therefore may not secure it adequately against the execution of malicious commands.
CAPEC-248: Command Injection
An adversary looking to execute a command of their choosing, injects new items into an existing command thus modifying interpretation away from what was intended. Commands in this context are often standalone strings that are interpreted by a downstream component and cause specific responses. This type of attack is possible when untrusted values are used to build these command strings. Weaknesses in input validation or command construction can enable the attack and lead to successful exploitation.
CAPEC-40: Manipulating Writeable Terminal Devices
This attack exploits terminal devices that allow themselves to be written to by other users. The attacker sends command strings to the target terminal device hoping that the target user will hit enter and thereby execute the malicious command with their privileges. The attacker can send the results (such as copying /etc/passwd) to a known directory and collect once the attack has succeeded.
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-75: Manipulating Writeable Configuration Files
Generally these are manually edited files that are not in the preview of the system administrators, any ability on the attackers' behalf to modify these files, for example in a CVS repository, gives unauthorized access directly to the application, the same as authorized users.
CAPEC-76: Manipulating Web Input to File System Calls
An attacker manipulates inputs to the target software which the target software passes to file system calls in the OS. The goal is to gain access to, and perhaps modify, areas of the file system that the target software did not intend to be accessible.