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

Goal: 1000 CNY · Raised: 1000 CNY

100.0%

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 2740

2740 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-RepudiationExecute 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 DesignIf at all possible, use library calls rather than external processes to recreate the desired functionality.
Architecture and Design, OperationRun 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 DesignFor 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 DesignFor 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 DesignUse 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 IDTitleCVSSSeverityPublished
CVE-2025-15519 Command Injection in Modem Management CLI on TP-Link Archer NX200, NX210, NX500 and NX600 — Archer NX600 v3.0 6.7 -2026-03-23
CVE-2025-15518 Command Injection in Wireless Control CLI on TP-Link Archer NX200, NX210, NX500 and NX600 — Archer NX600 v3.0 6.7 -2026-03-23
CVE-2026-4591 kalcaddle kodbox fileThumb Endpoint app.php checkBin os command injection — kodbox 4.7 Medium2026-03-23
CVE-2026-33482 AVideo has an OS Command Injection via $() Shell Substitution Bypass in sanitizeFFmpegCommand() — AVideo 8.1 High2026-03-23
CVE-2026-33478 AVideo Multi-Chain Attack: Unauthenticated Remote Code Execution via Clone Key Disclosure, Database Dump, and Command Injection — AVideo 10.0 Critical2026-03-23
CVE-2026-32968 Unauthenticated RCE in com_mb24sysapi — MB connect line mbCONNECT24 9.8 Critical2026-03-23
CVE-2026-4585 Tiandy Easy7 Integrated Management Platform Configuration ImportSystemConfiguration.jsp os command injection — Easy7 Integrated Management Platform 9.8 Critical2026-03-23
CVE-2026-4558 Linksys MR9600 SmartConnect.lua smartConnectConfigure os command injection — MR9600 8.8 High2026-03-22
CVE-2026-33319 AVideo Vulnerable to OS Command Injection via Unescaped URL in LinkedIn Video Upload Shell Command — AVideo 5.9 Medium2026-03-22
CVE-2026-32056 OpenClaw < 2026.2.22 - Remote Code Execution via Shell Startup Environment Variable Injection in system.run — OpenClaw 7.5 High2026-03-21
CVE-2026-4499 D-Link DIR-820LW SSDP ssdpcgi_main os command injection — DIR-820LW 7.3 High2026-03-20
CVE-2026-4497 Totolink WA300 cstecgi.cgi recvUpgradeNewFw os command injection — WA300 7.3 High2026-03-20
CVE-2026-4496 sigmade Git-MCP-Server gitUtils.ts child_process.exec os command injection — Git-MCP-Server 5.3 Medium2026-03-20
CVE-2026-22897 QuNetSwitch — QuNetSwitch 9.8 -2026-03-20
CVE-2026-22901 QuNetSwitch — QuNetSwitch 9.8 -2026-03-20
CVE-2026-22902 QuNetSwitch — QuNetSwitch 7.8 -2026-03-20
CVE-2026-4465 D-Link DIR-513 formSysCmd os command injection — DIR-513 6.3 Medium2026-03-20
CVE-2026-32034 OpenClaw < 2026.2.21 - Insecure Control UI Authentication over Plaintext HTTP — OpenClaw 8.1 High2026-03-19
CVE-2026-32010 OpenClaw < 2026.2.22 - Allowlist Bypass via sort --compress-program Parameter — OpenClaw 6.3 Medium2026-03-19
CVE-2026-32003 OpenClaw < 2026.2.22 - Remote Code Execution via SHELLOPTS/PS4 Environment Injection in system.run — OpenClaw 6.6 Medium2026-03-19
CVE-2026-32191 Microsoft Bing Images Remote Code Execution Vulnerability — Microsoft Bing Images 9.8 Critical2026-03-19
CVE-2026-32238 OpenEMR has Remote Code Execution in backup functionality — openemr 9.1 Critical2026-03-19
CVE-2026-32000 OpenClaw < 2026.2.19 - Command Injection via Windows Shell Fallback in Lobster Tool Execution — OpenClaw 7.1 High2026-03-19
CVE-2026-31999 OpenClaw 2026.2.26 < 2026.3.1 - Current Working Directory Injection via Windows Wrapper Resolution Fallback — OpenClaw 6.3 Medium2026-03-19
CVE-2026-31996 OpenClaw < 2026.2.19 - safeBins stdin-only bypass via sort output and recursive grep flags — OpenClaw 4.4 Medium2026-03-19
CVE-2026-31995 OpenClaw 2026.1.21 < 2026.2.19 - Command Injection via Windows Shell Fallback in Lobster Extension — OpenClaw 5.3 Medium2026-03-19
CVE-2026-31994 OpenClaw < 2026.2.19 - Local Command Injection via Unsafe cmd Argument Handling in Windows Scheduled Task Script Generation — OpenClaw 7.1 High2026-03-19
CVE-2026-29607 OpenClaw < 2026.2.22 - Authorization Bypass via allow-always Wrapper Persistence — OpenClaw 6.8 Medium2026-03-19
CVE-2026-28460 OpenClaw < 2026.2.22 - Allowlist Bypass via Shell Line-Continuation Command Substitution in system.run — OpenClaw 7.1 High2026-03-19
CVE-2026-27566 OpenClaw < 2026.2.22 - Allowlist Bypass via Wrapper Binary Unwrapping in system.run — OpenClaw 7.1 High2026-03-19

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 2740 CVEs. The CWE taxonomy describes the weakness; review individual CVEs for product-specific impact.