Common Weakness Enumeration
Show details on NVD website
Show details on NVD website
Show details on NVD website
Show details on NVD website
Show details on NVD website
Show details on NVD website
Show details on NVD website
Show details on NVD website
Show details on NVD website
Show details on NVD website
Back to CWE stats page
CWE-89
Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in an SQL Command ('SQL Injection')
The product constructs all or part of an SQL command using externally-influenced input from an upstream component, but it does not neutralize or incorrectly neutralizes special elements that could modify the intended SQL command when it is sent to a downstream component. Without sufficient removal or quoting of SQL syntax in user-controllable inputs, the generated SQL query can cause those inputs to be interpreted as SQL instead of ordinary user data.
CVE-2026-28785 (GCVE-0-2026-28785)
Vulnerability from cvelistv5 – Published: 2026-03-06 04:27 – Updated: 2026-03-06 16:07
VLAI
Title
Ghostfolio: Time-Based Blind SQL Injection in Manual Asset Import
Summary
Ghostfolio is an open source wealth management software. Prior to version 2.244.0, by bypassing symbol validation, an attacker can execute arbitrary SQL commands via the getHistorical() method, potentially allowing them to read, modify, or delete sensitive financial data for all users in the database. This issue has been patched in version 2.244.0.
Severity
SSVC
Exploitation: none
Automatable: yes
Technical Impact: partial
CISA Coordinator (v2.0.3)
CWE
- CWE-89 - Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in an SQL Command ('SQL Injection')
Assigner
References
2 references
| URL | Tags |
|---|---|
| https://github.com/ghostfolio/ghostfolio/security… | x_refsource_CONFIRM |
| https://github.com/ghostfolio/ghostfolio/releases… | x_refsource_MISC |
Impacted products
1 product
| Vendor | Product | Version | |
|---|---|---|---|
| ghostfolio | ghostfolio |
Affected:
< 2.244.0
|
{
"containers": {
"adp": [
{
"metrics": [
{
"other": {
"content": {
"id": "CVE-2026-28785",
"options": [
{
"Exploitation": "none"
},
{
"Automatable": "yes"
},
{
"Technical Impact": "partial"
}
],
"role": "CISA Coordinator",
"timestamp": "2026-03-06T16:00:12.447485Z",
"version": "2.0.3"
},
"type": "ssvc"
}
}
],
"providerMetadata": {
"dateUpdated": "2026-03-06T16:07:18.757Z",
"orgId": "134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0",
"shortName": "CISA-ADP"
},
"title": "CISA ADP Vulnrichment"
}
],
"cna": {
"affected": [
{
"product": "ghostfolio",
"vendor": "ghostfolio",
"versions": [
{
"status": "affected",
"version": "\u003c 2.244.0"
}
]
}
],
"descriptions": [
{
"lang": "en",
"value": "Ghostfolio is an open source wealth management software. Prior to version 2.244.0, by bypassing symbol validation, an attacker can execute arbitrary SQL commands via the getHistorical() method, potentially allowing them to read, modify, or delete sensitive financial data for all users in the database. This issue has been patched in version 2.244.0."
}
],
"metrics": [
{
"cvssV4_0": {
"attackComplexity": "LOW",
"attackRequirements": "NONE",
"attackVector": "NETWORK",
"baseScore": 9.3,
"baseSeverity": "CRITICAL",
"privilegesRequired": "NONE",
"subAvailabilityImpact": "NONE",
"subConfidentialityImpact": "NONE",
"subIntegrityImpact": "NONE",
"userInteraction": "NONE",
"vectorString": "CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N",
"version": "4.0",
"vulnAvailabilityImpact": "NONE",
"vulnConfidentialityImpact": "HIGH",
"vulnIntegrityImpact": "HIGH"
}
}
],
"problemTypes": [
{
"descriptions": [
{
"cweId": "CWE-89",
"description": "CWE-89: Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in an SQL Command (\u0027SQL Injection\u0027)",
"lang": "en",
"type": "CWE"
}
]
}
],
"providerMetadata": {
"dateUpdated": "2026-03-06T04:27:07.645Z",
"orgId": "a0819718-46f1-4df5-94e2-005712e83aaa",
"shortName": "GitHub_M"
},
"references": [
{
"name": "https://github.com/ghostfolio/ghostfolio/security/advisories/GHSA-m5cc-7jw5-34xp",
"tags": [
"x_refsource_CONFIRM"
],
"url": "https://github.com/ghostfolio/ghostfolio/security/advisories/GHSA-m5cc-7jw5-34xp"
},
{
"name": "https://github.com/ghostfolio/ghostfolio/releases/tag/2.244.0",
"tags": [
"x_refsource_MISC"
],
"url": "https://github.com/ghostfolio/ghostfolio/releases/tag/2.244.0"
}
],
"source": {
"advisory": "GHSA-m5cc-7jw5-34xp",
"discovery": "UNKNOWN"
},
"title": "Ghostfolio: Time-Based Blind SQL Injection in Manual Asset Import"
}
},
"cveMetadata": {
"assignerOrgId": "a0819718-46f1-4df5-94e2-005712e83aaa",
"assignerShortName": "GitHub_M",
"cveId": "CVE-2026-28785",
"datePublished": "2026-03-06T04:27:07.645Z",
"dateReserved": "2026-03-03T14:25:19.244Z",
"dateUpdated": "2026-03-06T16:07:18.757Z",
"state": "PUBLISHED"
},
"dataType": "CVE_RECORD",
"dataVersion": "5.2"
}
CVE-2026-28805 (GCVE-0-2026-28805)
Vulnerability from cvelistv5 – Published: 2026-04-02 13:44 – Updated: 2026-04-02 18:31
VLAI
Title
OpenSTAManager: Time-Based Blind SQL Injection via `options[stato]` Parameter
Summary
OpenSTAManager is an open source management software for technical assistance and invoicing. Prior to version 2.10.2, multiple AJAX select handlers in OpenSTAManager are vulnerable to Time-Based Blind SQL Injection through the options[stato] GET parameter. The user-supplied value is read from $superselect['stato'] and concatenated directly into SQL WHERE clauses as a bare expression, without any sanitization, parameterization, or allowlist validation. An authenticated attacker can inject arbitrary SQL statements to extract sensitive data from the database, including usernames, password hashes, financial records, and any other information stored in the MySQL database. This issue has been patched in version 2.10.2.
Severity
8.8 (High)
SSVC
Exploitation: poc
Automatable: no
Technical Impact: total
CISA Coordinator (v2.0.3)
CWE
- CWE-89 - Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in an SQL Command ('SQL Injection')
Assigner
References
4 references
| URL | Tags |
|---|---|
| https://github.com/devcode-it/openstamanager/secu… | x_refsource_CONFIRM |
| https://github.com/devcode-it/openstamanager/comm… | x_refsource_MISC |
| https://github.com/devcode-it/openstamanager/comm… | x_refsource_MISC |
| https://github.com/devcode-it/openstamanager/rele… | x_refsource_MISC |
Impacted products
1 product
| Vendor | Product | Version | |
|---|---|---|---|
| devcode-it | openstamanager |
Affected:
< 2.10.2
|
{
"containers": {
"adp": [
{
"metrics": [
{
"other": {
"content": {
"id": "CVE-2026-28805",
"options": [
{
"Exploitation": "poc"
},
{
"Automatable": "no"
},
{
"Technical Impact": "total"
}
],
"role": "CISA Coordinator",
"timestamp": "2026-04-02T18:30:58.710195Z",
"version": "2.0.3"
},
"type": "ssvc"
}
}
],
"providerMetadata": {
"dateUpdated": "2026-04-02T18:31:08.958Z",
"orgId": "134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0",
"shortName": "CISA-ADP"
},
"title": "CISA ADP Vulnrichment"
}
],
"cna": {
"affected": [
{
"product": "openstamanager",
"vendor": "devcode-it",
"versions": [
{
"status": "affected",
"version": "\u003c 2.10.2"
}
]
}
],
"descriptions": [
{
"lang": "en",
"value": "OpenSTAManager is an open source management software for technical assistance and invoicing. Prior to version 2.10.2, multiple AJAX select handlers in OpenSTAManager are vulnerable to Time-Based Blind SQL Injection through the options[stato] GET parameter. The user-supplied value is read from $superselect[\u0027stato\u0027] and concatenated directly into SQL WHERE clauses as a bare expression, without any sanitization, parameterization, or allowlist validation. An authenticated attacker can inject arbitrary SQL statements to extract sensitive data from the database, including usernames, password hashes, financial records, and any other information stored in the MySQL database. This issue has been patched in version 2.10.2."
}
],
"metrics": [
{
"cvssV3_1": {
"attackComplexity": "LOW",
"attackVector": "NETWORK",
"availabilityImpact": "HIGH",
"baseScore": 8.8,
"baseSeverity": "HIGH",
"confidentialityImpact": "HIGH",
"integrityImpact": "HIGH",
"privilegesRequired": "LOW",
"scope": "UNCHANGED",
"userInteraction": "NONE",
"vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
"version": "3.1"
}
}
],
"problemTypes": [
{
"descriptions": [
{
"cweId": "CWE-89",
"description": "CWE-89: Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in an SQL Command (\u0027SQL Injection\u0027)",
"lang": "en",
"type": "CWE"
}
]
}
],
"providerMetadata": {
"dateUpdated": "2026-04-02T13:44:07.063Z",
"orgId": "a0819718-46f1-4df5-94e2-005712e83aaa",
"shortName": "GitHub_M"
},
"references": [
{
"name": "https://github.com/devcode-it/openstamanager/security/advisories/GHSA-3gw8-3mg3-jmpc",
"tags": [
"x_refsource_CONFIRM"
],
"url": "https://github.com/devcode-it/openstamanager/security/advisories/GHSA-3gw8-3mg3-jmpc"
},
{
"name": "https://github.com/devcode-it/openstamanager/commit/50b9089c506ba2ca249afb1dfead2af5d42c10e7",
"tags": [
"x_refsource_MISC"
],
"url": "https://github.com/devcode-it/openstamanager/commit/50b9089c506ba2ca249afb1dfead2af5d42c10e7"
},
{
"name": "https://github.com/devcode-it/openstamanager/commit/679c40fa5b3acad4263b537f367c0695ff9666dc",
"tags": [
"x_refsource_MISC"
],
"url": "https://github.com/devcode-it/openstamanager/commit/679c40fa5b3acad4263b537f367c0695ff9666dc"
},
{
"name": "https://github.com/devcode-it/openstamanager/releases/tag/v2.10.2",
"tags": [
"x_refsource_MISC"
],
"url": "https://github.com/devcode-it/openstamanager/releases/tag/v2.10.2"
}
],
"source": {
"advisory": "GHSA-3gw8-3mg3-jmpc",
"discovery": "UNKNOWN"
},
"title": "OpenSTAManager: Time-Based Blind SQL Injection via `options[stato]` Parameter"
}
},
"cveMetadata": {
"assignerOrgId": "a0819718-46f1-4df5-94e2-005712e83aaa",
"assignerShortName": "GitHub_M",
"cveId": "CVE-2026-28805",
"datePublished": "2026-04-02T13:44:07.063Z",
"dateReserved": "2026-03-03T14:25:19.246Z",
"dateUpdated": "2026-04-02T18:31:08.958Z",
"state": "PUBLISHED"
},
"dataType": "CVE_RECORD",
"dataVersion": "5.2"
}
CVE-2026-2893 (GCVE-0-2026-2893)
Vulnerability from cvelistv5 – Published: 2026-03-05 07:30 – Updated: 2026-04-08 17:04
VLAI
Title
Page and Post Clone <= 6.3 - Authenticated (Contributor+) SQL Injection via 'meta_key' Parameter
Summary
The Page and Post Clone plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to SQL Injection via the 'meta_key' parameter in the content_clone() function in all versions up to, and including, 6.3. This is due to insufficient escaping on the user-supplied meta_key value and insufficient preparation on the existing SQL query. This makes it possible for authenticated attackers, with Contributor-level access and above, to append additional SQL queries into already existing queries that can be used to extract sensitive information from the database. The injection is second-order: the malicious payload is stored as a post meta key and executed when the post is cloned.
Severity
6.5 (Medium)
SSVC
Exploitation: none
Automatable: no
Technical Impact: partial
CISA Coordinator (v2.0.3)
CWE
- CWE-89 - Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in an SQL Command ('SQL Injection')
Assigner
References
Impacted products
1 product
| Vendor | Product | Version | |
|---|---|---|---|
| carlosfazenda | Fast Page & Post Duplicator |
Affected:
0 , ≤ 6.3
(semver)
|
Credits
{
"containers": {
"adp": [
{
"metrics": [
{
"other": {
"content": {
"id": "CVE-2026-2893",
"options": [
{
"Exploitation": "none"
},
{
"Automatable": "no"
},
{
"Technical Impact": "partial"
}
],
"role": "CISA Coordinator",
"timestamp": "2026-03-05T15:01:15.371730Z",
"version": "2.0.3"
},
"type": "ssvc"
}
}
],
"providerMetadata": {
"dateUpdated": "2026-03-05T15:02:06.475Z",
"orgId": "134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0",
"shortName": "CISA-ADP"
},
"title": "CISA ADP Vulnrichment"
}
],
"cna": {
"affected": [
{
"defaultStatus": "unaffected",
"product": "Fast Page \u0026 Post Duplicator",
"vendor": "carlosfazenda",
"versions": [
{
"lessThanOrEqual": "6.3",
"status": "affected",
"version": "0",
"versionType": "semver"
}
]
}
],
"credits": [
{
"lang": "en",
"type": "finder",
"value": "Arthur GRIMAULT"
}
],
"descriptions": [
{
"lang": "en",
"value": "The Page and Post Clone plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to SQL Injection via the \u0027meta_key\u0027 parameter in the content_clone() function in all versions up to, and including, 6.3. This is due to insufficient escaping on the user-supplied meta_key value and insufficient preparation on the existing SQL query. This makes it possible for authenticated attackers, with Contributor-level access and above, to append additional SQL queries into already existing queries that can be used to extract sensitive information from the database. The injection is second-order: the malicious payload is stored as a post meta key and executed when the post is cloned."
}
],
"metrics": [
{
"cvssV3_1": {
"baseScore": 6.5,
"baseSeverity": "MEDIUM",
"vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N",
"version": "3.1"
}
}
],
"problemTypes": [
{
"descriptions": [
{
"cweId": "CWE-89",
"description": "CWE-89 Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in an SQL Command (\u0027SQL Injection\u0027)",
"lang": "en",
"type": "CWE"
}
]
}
],
"providerMetadata": {
"dateUpdated": "2026-04-08T17:04:36.416Z",
"orgId": "b15e7b5b-3da4-40ae-a43c-f7aa60e62599",
"shortName": "Wordfence"
},
"references": [
{
"url": "https://www.wordfence.com/threat-intel/vulnerabilities/id/85674d8a-96b3-4fae-8bff-900ca78073a4?source=cve"
},
{
"url": "https://plugins.trac.wordpress.org/browser/page-or-post-clone/tags/6.3/page-or-post-clone.php#L95"
},
{
"url": "https://plugins.trac.wordpress.org/browser/page-or-post-clone/trunk/page-or-post-clone.php#L95"
},
{
"url": "https://plugins.trac.wordpress.org/changeset?sfp_email=\u0026sfph_mail=\u0026reponame=\u0026new=3474651%40page-or-post-clone%2Ftrunk\u0026old=3202933%40page-or-post-clone%2Ftrunk\u0026sfp_email=\u0026sfph_mail="
}
],
"timeline": [
{
"lang": "en",
"time": "2026-03-04T19:00:38.000Z",
"value": "Disclosed"
}
],
"title": "Page and Post Clone \u003c= 6.3 - Authenticated (Contributor+) SQL Injection via \u0027meta_key\u0027 Parameter"
}
},
"cveMetadata": {
"assignerOrgId": "b15e7b5b-3da4-40ae-a43c-f7aa60e62599",
"assignerShortName": "Wordfence",
"cveId": "CVE-2026-2893",
"datePublished": "2026-03-05T07:30:55.134Z",
"dateReserved": "2026-02-20T18:48:50.173Z",
"dateUpdated": "2026-04-08T17:04:36.416Z",
"state": "PUBLISHED"
},
"dataType": "CVE_RECORD",
"dataVersion": "5.2"
}
CVE-2026-29047 (GCVE-0-2026-29047)
Vulnerability from cvelistv5 – Published: 2026-04-06 14:39 – Updated: 2026-04-07 13:06
VLAI
Title
GLPI has an Authenticated SQL Injection via log exports
Summary
GLPI is a free asset and IT management software package. From 10.0.0 to before 10.0.24 and 11.0.6, an authenticated user can perform a SQL injection via the logs export feature. This vulnerability is fixed in 10.0.24 and 11.0.6.
Severity
7.2 (High)
SSVC
Exploitation: none
Automatable: no
Technical Impact: total
CISA Coordinator (v2.0.3)
CWE
- CWE-89 - Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in an SQL Command ('SQL Injection')
Assigner
References
1 reference
| URL | Tags |
|---|---|
| https://github.com/glpi-project/glpi/security/adv… | x_refsource_CONFIRM |
Impacted products
1 product
| Vendor | Product | Version | |
|---|---|---|---|
| glpi-project | glpi |
Affected:
>= 10.0.0, 10.0.24
Affected: >= 11.0.0-alpha, < 11.0.6 |
{
"containers": {
"adp": [
{
"metrics": [
{
"other": {
"content": {
"id": "CVE-2026-29047",
"options": [
{
"Exploitation": "none"
},
{
"Automatable": "no"
},
{
"Technical Impact": "total"
}
],
"role": "CISA Coordinator",
"timestamp": "2026-04-07T03:55:43.970616Z",
"version": "2.0.3"
},
"type": "ssvc"
}
}
],
"providerMetadata": {
"dateUpdated": "2026-04-07T13:06:57.659Z",
"orgId": "134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0",
"shortName": "CISA-ADP"
},
"title": "CISA ADP Vulnrichment"
}
],
"cna": {
"affected": [
{
"product": "glpi",
"vendor": "glpi-project",
"versions": [
{
"status": "affected",
"version": "\u003e= 10.0.0, 10.0.24"
},
{
"status": "affected",
"version": "\u003e= 11.0.0-alpha, \u003c 11.0.6"
}
]
}
],
"descriptions": [
{
"lang": "en",
"value": "GLPI is a free asset and IT management software package. From 10.0.0 to before 10.0.24 and 11.0.6, an authenticated user can perform a SQL injection via the logs export feature. This vulnerability is fixed in 10.0.24 and 11.0.6."
}
],
"metrics": [
{
"cvssV3_1": {
"attackComplexity": "LOW",
"attackVector": "NETWORK",
"availabilityImpact": "HIGH",
"baseScore": 7.2,
"baseSeverity": "HIGH",
"confidentialityImpact": "HIGH",
"integrityImpact": "HIGH",
"privilegesRequired": "HIGH",
"scope": "UNCHANGED",
"userInteraction": "NONE",
"vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
"version": "3.1"
}
}
],
"problemTypes": [
{
"descriptions": [
{
"cweId": "CWE-89",
"description": "CWE-89: Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in an SQL Command (\u0027SQL Injection\u0027)",
"lang": "en",
"type": "CWE"
}
]
}
],
"providerMetadata": {
"dateUpdated": "2026-04-06T14:39:15.996Z",
"orgId": "a0819718-46f1-4df5-94e2-005712e83aaa",
"shortName": "GitHub_M"
},
"references": [
{
"name": "https://github.com/glpi-project/glpi/security/advisories/GHSA-3m49-qf92-vccr",
"tags": [
"x_refsource_CONFIRM"
],
"url": "https://github.com/glpi-project/glpi/security/advisories/GHSA-3m49-qf92-vccr"
}
],
"source": {
"advisory": "GHSA-3m49-qf92-vccr",
"discovery": "UNKNOWN"
},
"title": "GLPI has an Authenticated SQL Injection via log exports"
}
},
"cveMetadata": {
"assignerOrgId": "a0819718-46f1-4df5-94e2-005712e83aaa",
"assignerShortName": "GitHub_M",
"cveId": "CVE-2026-29047",
"datePublished": "2026-04-06T14:39:15.996Z",
"dateReserved": "2026-03-03T17:50:11.243Z",
"dateUpdated": "2026-04-07T13:06:57.659Z",
"state": "PUBLISHED"
},
"dataType": "CVE_RECORD",
"dataVersion": "5.2"
}
CVE-2026-29073 (GCVE-0-2026-29073)
Vulnerability from cvelistv5 – Published: 2026-03-06 07:18 – Updated: 2026-03-09 20:03
VLAI
Title
SiYuan: Direct SQL Query API accessible to Reader-level users enables unauthorized database access
Summary
SiYuan is a personal knowledge management system. Prior to version 3.6.0, the /api/query/sql lets a user run sql directly, but it only checks basic auth, not admin rights, any logged-in user, even readers, can run any sql query on the database. This issue has been patched in version 3.6.0.
Severity
SSVC
Exploitation: poc
Automatable: yes
Technical Impact: partial
CISA Coordinator (v2.0.3)
CWE
Assigner
References
1 reference
| URL | Tags |
|---|---|
| https://github.com/siyuan-note/siyuan/security/ad… | x_refsource_CONFIRM |
Impacted products
1 product
| Vendor | Product | Version | |
|---|---|---|---|
| siyuan-note | siyuan |
Affected:
< 3.6.0
|
{
"containers": {
"adp": [
{
"metrics": [
{
"other": {
"content": {
"id": "CVE-2026-29073",
"options": [
{
"Exploitation": "poc"
},
{
"Automatable": "yes"
},
{
"Technical Impact": "partial"
}
],
"role": "CISA Coordinator",
"timestamp": "2026-03-09T20:03:08.140957Z",
"version": "2.0.3"
},
"type": "ssvc"
}
}
],
"providerMetadata": {
"dateUpdated": "2026-03-09T20:03:19.344Z",
"orgId": "134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0",
"shortName": "CISA-ADP"
},
"title": "CISA ADP Vulnrichment"
}
],
"cna": {
"affected": [
{
"product": "siyuan",
"vendor": "siyuan-note",
"versions": [
{
"status": "affected",
"version": "\u003c 3.6.0"
}
]
}
],
"descriptions": [
{
"lang": "en",
"value": "SiYuan is a personal knowledge management system. Prior to version 3.6.0, the /api/query/sql lets a user run sql directly, but it only checks basic auth, not admin rights, any logged-in user, even readers, can run any sql query on the database. This issue has been patched in version 3.6.0."
}
],
"metrics": [
{
"cvssV4_0": {
"attackComplexity": "LOW",
"attackRequirements": "NONE",
"attackVector": "NETWORK",
"baseScore": 5.7,
"baseSeverity": "MEDIUM",
"privilegesRequired": "LOW",
"subAvailabilityImpact": "NONE",
"subConfidentialityImpact": "NONE",
"subIntegrityImpact": "NONE",
"userInteraction": "NONE",
"vectorString": "CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:H/VI:N/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:P",
"version": "4.0",
"vulnAvailabilityImpact": "NONE",
"vulnConfidentialityImpact": "HIGH",
"vulnIntegrityImpact": "NONE"
}
}
],
"problemTypes": [
{
"descriptions": [
{
"cweId": "CWE-862",
"description": "CWE-862: Missing Authorization",
"lang": "en",
"type": "CWE"
}
]
},
{
"descriptions": [
{
"cweId": "CWE-89",
"description": "CWE-89: Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in an SQL Command (\u0027SQL Injection\u0027)",
"lang": "en",
"type": "CWE"
}
]
}
],
"providerMetadata": {
"dateUpdated": "2026-03-06T07:18:03.462Z",
"orgId": "a0819718-46f1-4df5-94e2-005712e83aaa",
"shortName": "GitHub_M"
},
"references": [
{
"name": "https://github.com/siyuan-note/siyuan/security/advisories/GHSA-jqwg-75qf-vmf9",
"tags": [
"x_refsource_CONFIRM"
],
"url": "https://github.com/siyuan-note/siyuan/security/advisories/GHSA-jqwg-75qf-vmf9"
}
],
"source": {
"advisory": "GHSA-jqwg-75qf-vmf9",
"discovery": "UNKNOWN"
},
"title": "SiYuan: Direct SQL Query API accessible to Reader-level users enables unauthorized database access"
}
},
"cveMetadata": {
"assignerOrgId": "a0819718-46f1-4df5-94e2-005712e83aaa",
"assignerShortName": "GitHub_M",
"cveId": "CVE-2026-29073",
"datePublished": "2026-03-06T07:18:03.462Z",
"dateReserved": "2026-03-03T20:51:43.482Z",
"dateUpdated": "2026-03-09T20:03:19.344Z",
"state": "PUBLISHED"
},
"dataType": "CVE_RECORD",
"dataVersion": "5.2"
}
CVE-2026-29080 (GCVE-0-2026-29080)
Vulnerability from cvelistv5 – Published: 2026-05-06 16:44 – Updated: 2026-05-06 17:21
VLAI
Title
Rucio SQL Injection in FilterEngine Oracle JSON Path via DID Search API
Summary
A SQL injection vulnerability in `FilterEngine.create_sqla_query()` allows any authenticated Rucio user to execute arbitrary SQL against the backend database through the DID search endpoint (`GET /dids/<scope>/dids/search`). On Oracle deployments attacker-controlled filter keys and values are interpolated directly into `sqlalchemy.text()` via Python `.format()`, completely bypassing parameterization. This enables full database compromise including extraction of authentication tokens, password hashes, and all managed data identifiers. This affects versions 1.27.0 and later before 35.8.5, 38.5.5, 39.4.2, and 40.1.1.
The vulnerability exists in `lib/rucio/core/did_meta_plugins/filter_engine.py` within the `create_sqla_query()` method. When the database dialect is Oracle, filter expressions for JSON metadata columns are constructed using `text()` with Python string formatting. Both `key` and `value` are attacker-controlled strings derived from HTTP query parameters. The `text()` function creates a raw SQL fragment — it does **not** escape or parameterize its contents.
Any authenticated Rucio user can exploit this through the DID search API to execute arbitrary SQL against the backend database. This can expose all managed data identifiers and sensitive tables such as identities, tokens, accounts, rse_settings, and rules, and may allow modification of database contents. The issue affects Oracle deployments using the default json_meta plugin and does not affect PostgreSQL or MySQL deployments using that plugin.
This vulnerability has been fixed in versions 35.8.5, 38.5.5, 39.4.2, and 40.1.1.
Severity
SSVC
Exploitation: none
Automatable: no
Technical Impact: total
CISA Coordinator (v2.0.3)
CWE
- CWE-89 - Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in an SQL Command ('SQL Injection')
Assigner
References
1 reference
| URL | Tags |
|---|---|
| https://github.com/rucio/rucio/security/advisorie… | x_refsource_CONFIRM |
Impacted products
{
"containers": {
"adp": [
{
"metrics": [
{
"other": {
"content": {
"id": "CVE-2026-29080",
"options": [
{
"Exploitation": "none"
},
{
"Automatable": "no"
},
{
"Technical Impact": "total"
}
],
"role": "CISA Coordinator",
"timestamp": "2026-05-06T17:21:09.695320Z",
"version": "2.0.3"
},
"type": "ssvc"
}
}
],
"providerMetadata": {
"dateUpdated": "2026-05-06T17:21:43.543Z",
"orgId": "134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0",
"shortName": "CISA-ADP"
},
"title": "CISA ADP Vulnrichment"
}
],
"cna": {
"affected": [
{
"product": "rucio",
"vendor": "rucio",
"versions": [
{
"status": "affected",
"version": "\u003e= 1.27.0, \u003c 35.8.5"
},
{
"status": "affected",
"version": "\u003e= 35.9.0, \u003c 38.5.5"
},
{
"status": "affected",
"version": "\u003e= 38.6.0, \u003c 39.4.2"
},
{
"status": "affected",
"version": "\u003e= 40.0.0, \u003c 40.1.1"
}
]
}
],
"descriptions": [
{
"lang": "en",
"value": "A SQL injection vulnerability in `FilterEngine.create_sqla_query()` allows any authenticated Rucio user to execute arbitrary SQL against the backend database through the DID search endpoint (`GET /dids/\u003cscope\u003e/dids/search`). On Oracle deployments attacker-controlled filter keys and values are interpolated directly into `sqlalchemy.text()` via Python `.format()`, completely bypassing parameterization. This enables full database compromise including extraction of authentication tokens, password hashes, and all managed data identifiers. This affects versions 1.27.0 and later before 35.8.5, 38.5.5, 39.4.2, and 40.1.1.\n\nThe vulnerability exists in `lib/rucio/core/did_meta_plugins/filter_engine.py` within the `create_sqla_query()` method. When the database dialect is Oracle, filter expressions for JSON metadata columns are constructed using `text()` with Python string formatting. Both `key` and `value` are attacker-controlled strings derived from HTTP query parameters. The `text()` function creates a raw SQL fragment \u2014 it does **not** escape or parameterize its contents.\n\nAny authenticated Rucio user can exploit this through the DID search API to execute arbitrary SQL against the backend database. This can expose all managed data identifiers and sensitive tables such as identities, tokens, accounts, rse_settings, and rules, and may allow modification of database contents. The issue affects Oracle deployments using the default json_meta plugin and does not affect PostgreSQL or MySQL deployments using that plugin. \n\nThis vulnerability has been fixed in versions 35.8.5, 38.5.5, 39.4.2, and 40.1.1."
}
],
"metrics": [
{
"cvssV4_0": {
"attackComplexity": "LOW",
"attackRequirements": "NONE",
"attackVector": "NETWORK",
"baseScore": 9.4,
"baseSeverity": "CRITICAL",
"privilegesRequired": "LOW",
"subAvailabilityImpact": "HIGH",
"subConfidentialityImpact": "HIGH",
"subIntegrityImpact": "HIGH",
"userInteraction": "NONE",
"vectorString": "CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/SC:H/SI:H/SA:H",
"version": "4.0",
"vulnAvailabilityImpact": "HIGH",
"vulnConfidentialityImpact": "HIGH",
"vulnIntegrityImpact": "HIGH"
}
}
],
"problemTypes": [
{
"descriptions": [
{
"cweId": "CWE-89",
"description": "CWE-89: Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in an SQL Command (\u0027SQL Injection\u0027)",
"lang": "en",
"type": "CWE"
}
]
}
],
"providerMetadata": {
"dateUpdated": "2026-05-06T16:44:54.393Z",
"orgId": "a0819718-46f1-4df5-94e2-005712e83aaa",
"shortName": "GitHub_M"
},
"references": [
{
"name": "https://github.com/rucio/rucio/security/advisories/GHSA-vjr5-c9qv-hgm3",
"tags": [
"x_refsource_CONFIRM"
],
"url": "https://github.com/rucio/rucio/security/advisories/GHSA-vjr5-c9qv-hgm3"
}
],
"source": {
"advisory": "GHSA-vjr5-c9qv-hgm3",
"discovery": "UNKNOWN"
},
"title": "Rucio SQL Injection in FilterEngine Oracle JSON Path via DID Search API"
}
},
"cveMetadata": {
"assignerOrgId": "a0819718-46f1-4df5-94e2-005712e83aaa",
"assignerShortName": "GitHub_M",
"cveId": "CVE-2026-29080",
"datePublished": "2026-05-06T16:44:54.393Z",
"dateReserved": "2026-03-03T20:51:43.483Z",
"dateUpdated": "2026-05-06T17:21:43.543Z",
"state": "PUBLISHED"
},
"dataType": "CVE_RECORD",
"dataVersion": "5.2"
}
CVE-2026-29081 (GCVE-0-2026-29081)
Vulnerability from cvelistv5 – Published: 2026-03-05 20:23 – Updated: 2026-03-06 17:02
VLAI
Title
Frappe: Possibility of SQL Injection due to improper fieldname sanitization
Summary
Frappe is a full-stack web application framework. Prior to versions 14.100.1 and 15.100.0, an endpoint was vulnerable to SQL injection through specially crafted requests, which would allow a malicious actor to extract sensitive information. This issue has been patched in versions 14.100.1 and 15.100.0.
Severity
6.5 (Medium)
SSVC
Exploitation: none
Automatable: no
Technical Impact: partial
CISA Coordinator (v2.0.3)
CWE
- CWE-89 - Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in an SQL Command ('SQL Injection')
Assigner
References
1 reference
| URL | Tags |
|---|---|
| https://github.com/frappe/frappe/security/advisor… | x_refsource_CONFIRM |
Impacted products
{
"containers": {
"adp": [
{
"metrics": [
{
"other": {
"content": {
"id": "CVE-2026-29081",
"options": [
{
"Exploitation": "none"
},
{
"Automatable": "no"
},
{
"Technical Impact": "partial"
}
],
"role": "CISA Coordinator",
"timestamp": "2026-03-06T17:01:52.901429Z",
"version": "2.0.3"
},
"type": "ssvc"
}
}
],
"providerMetadata": {
"dateUpdated": "2026-03-06T17:02:00.462Z",
"orgId": "134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0",
"shortName": "CISA-ADP"
},
"title": "CISA ADP Vulnrichment"
}
],
"cna": {
"affected": [
{
"product": "frappe",
"vendor": "frappe",
"versions": [
{
"status": "affected",
"version": "\u003c 15.100.0"
},
{
"status": "affected",
"version": "\u003c 14.100.1"
}
]
}
],
"descriptions": [
{
"lang": "en",
"value": "Frappe is a full-stack web application framework. Prior to versions 14.100.1 and 15.100.0, an endpoint was vulnerable to SQL injection through specially crafted requests, which would allow a malicious actor to extract sensitive information. This issue has been patched in versions 14.100.1 and 15.100.0."
}
],
"metrics": [
{
"cvssV3_1": {
"attackComplexity": "LOW",
"attackVector": "NETWORK",
"availabilityImpact": "NONE",
"baseScore": 6.5,
"baseSeverity": "MEDIUM",
"confidentialityImpact": "HIGH",
"integrityImpact": "NONE",
"privilegesRequired": "LOW",
"scope": "UNCHANGED",
"userInteraction": "NONE",
"vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N",
"version": "3.1"
}
}
],
"problemTypes": [
{
"descriptions": [
{
"cweId": "CWE-89",
"description": "CWE-89: Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in an SQL Command (\u0027SQL Injection\u0027)",
"lang": "en",
"type": "CWE"
}
]
}
],
"providerMetadata": {
"dateUpdated": "2026-03-05T20:23:13.490Z",
"orgId": "a0819718-46f1-4df5-94e2-005712e83aaa",
"shortName": "GitHub_M"
},
"references": [
{
"name": "https://github.com/frappe/frappe/security/advisories/GHSA-w3g7-m7xr-2w38",
"tags": [
"x_refsource_CONFIRM"
],
"url": "https://github.com/frappe/frappe/security/advisories/GHSA-w3g7-m7xr-2w38"
}
],
"source": {
"advisory": "GHSA-w3g7-m7xr-2w38",
"discovery": "UNKNOWN"
},
"title": "Frappe: Possibility of SQL Injection due to improper fieldname sanitization"
}
},
"cveMetadata": {
"assignerOrgId": "a0819718-46f1-4df5-94e2-005712e83aaa",
"assignerShortName": "GitHub_M",
"cveId": "CVE-2026-29081",
"datePublished": "2026-03-05T20:23:13.490Z",
"dateReserved": "2026-03-03T20:51:43.483Z",
"dateUpdated": "2026-03-06T17:02:00.462Z",
"state": "PUBLISHED"
},
"dataType": "CVE_RECORD",
"dataVersion": "5.2"
}
CVE-2026-29090 (GCVE-0-2026-29090)
Vulnerability from cvelistv5 – Published: 2026-05-06 17:21 – Updated: 2026-05-06 18:17
VLAI
Title
Rucio SQL injection in postgres_meta DID search path compromises PostgreSQL metadata database
Summary
### Summary
A SQL injection vulnerability exists in Rucio versions 1.30.0 and later before 35.8.5, 38.5.5, 39.4.2, and 40.1.1, in `FilterEngine.create_postgres_query()`. This allows any authenticated Rucio user to execute arbitrary SQL against the PostgreSQL metadata database through the DID search endpoint (`GET /dids/<scope>/dids/search`). When the `postgres_meta` metadata plugin is configured, attacker-controlled filter keys and values are interpolated directly into raw SQL strings via Python `.format()`, then passed to `psycopg3`'s `sql.SQL()` which treats the string as trusted SQL syntax.
Depending on the database privileges assigned to the service account, exploitation can expose sensitive tables, modify or delete metadata, access server-side files, or achieve code execution through PostgreSQL features such as COPY ... FROM PROGRAM. This issue affects deployments that explicitly use the postgres_meta metadata plugin. This vulnerability has been fixed in versions 35.8.5, 38.5.5, 39.4.2, and 40.1.1.
Severity
SSVC
Exploitation: none
Automatable: no
Technical Impact: total
CISA Coordinator (v2.0.3)
CWE
- CWE-89 - Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in an SQL Command ('SQL Injection')
Assigner
References
1 reference
| URL | Tags |
|---|---|
| https://github.com/rucio/rucio/security/advisorie… | x_refsource_CONFIRM |
Impacted products
{
"containers": {
"adp": [
{
"metrics": [
{
"other": {
"content": {
"id": "CVE-2026-29090",
"options": [
{
"Exploitation": "none"
},
{
"Automatable": "no"
},
{
"Technical Impact": "total"
}
],
"role": "CISA Coordinator",
"timestamp": "2026-05-06T18:17:46.352636Z",
"version": "2.0.3"
},
"type": "ssvc"
}
}
],
"providerMetadata": {
"dateUpdated": "2026-05-06T18:17:58.146Z",
"orgId": "134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0",
"shortName": "CISA-ADP"
},
"title": "CISA ADP Vulnrichment"
}
],
"cna": {
"affected": [
{
"product": "rucio",
"vendor": "rucio",
"versions": [
{
"status": "affected",
"version": "\u003e= 1.30.0, \u003c 35.8.5"
},
{
"status": "affected",
"version": "\u003e= 35.9.0, \u003c 38.5.5"
},
{
"status": "affected",
"version": "\u003e= 38.6.0, \u003c 39.4.2"
},
{
"status": "affected",
"version": "\u003e= 40.0.0, \u003c 40.1.1"
}
]
}
],
"descriptions": [
{
"lang": "en",
"value": "### Summary\n\nA SQL injection vulnerability exists in Rucio versions 1.30.0 and later before 35.8.5, 38.5.5, 39.4.2, and 40.1.1, in `FilterEngine.create_postgres_query()`. This allows any authenticated Rucio user to execute arbitrary SQL against the PostgreSQL metadata database through the DID search endpoint (`GET /dids/\u003cscope\u003e/dids/search`). When the `postgres_meta` metadata plugin is configured, attacker-controlled filter keys and values are interpolated directly into raw SQL strings via Python `.format()`, then passed to `psycopg3`\u0027s `sql.SQL()` which treats the string as trusted SQL syntax. \n\nDepending on the database privileges assigned to the service account, exploitation can expose sensitive tables, modify or delete metadata, access server-side files, or achieve code execution through PostgreSQL features such as COPY ... FROM PROGRAM. This issue affects deployments that explicitly use the postgres_meta metadata plugin. This vulnerability has been fixed in versions 35.8.5, 38.5.5, 39.4.2, and 40.1.1."
}
],
"metrics": [
{
"cvssV4_0": {
"attackComplexity": "LOW",
"attackRequirements": "PRESENT",
"attackVector": "NETWORK",
"baseScore": 9,
"baseSeverity": "CRITICAL",
"privilegesRequired": "LOW",
"subAvailabilityImpact": "HIGH",
"subConfidentialityImpact": "HIGH",
"subIntegrityImpact": "HIGH",
"userInteraction": "NONE",
"vectorString": "CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:L/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/SC:H/SI:H/SA:H",
"version": "4.0",
"vulnAvailabilityImpact": "HIGH",
"vulnConfidentialityImpact": "HIGH",
"vulnIntegrityImpact": "HIGH"
}
}
],
"problemTypes": [
{
"descriptions": [
{
"cweId": "CWE-89",
"description": "CWE-89: Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in an SQL Command (\u0027SQL Injection\u0027)",
"lang": "en",
"type": "CWE"
}
]
}
],
"providerMetadata": {
"dateUpdated": "2026-05-06T17:21:24.141Z",
"orgId": "a0819718-46f1-4df5-94e2-005712e83aaa",
"shortName": "GitHub_M"
},
"references": [
{
"name": "https://github.com/rucio/rucio/security/advisories/GHSA-6j7p-qjhg-9947",
"tags": [
"x_refsource_CONFIRM"
],
"url": "https://github.com/rucio/rucio/security/advisories/GHSA-6j7p-qjhg-9947"
}
],
"source": {
"advisory": "GHSA-6j7p-qjhg-9947",
"discovery": "UNKNOWN"
},
"title": "Rucio SQL injection in postgres_meta DID search path compromises PostgreSQL metadata database"
}
},
"cveMetadata": {
"assignerOrgId": "a0819718-46f1-4df5-94e2-005712e83aaa",
"assignerShortName": "GitHub_M",
"cveId": "CVE-2026-29090",
"datePublished": "2026-05-06T17:21:24.141Z",
"dateReserved": "2026-03-03T21:54:06.707Z",
"dateUpdated": "2026-05-06T18:17:58.146Z",
"state": "PUBLISHED"
},
"dataType": "CVE_RECORD",
"dataVersion": "5.2"
}
CVE-2026-29096 (GCVE-0-2026-29096)
Vulnerability from cvelistv5 – Published: 2026-03-19 22:37 – Updated: 2026-03-25 14:57
VLAI
Title
SuiteCRM vulnerable to Authenticated SQL Injection via unsanitized field_function in Report Fields
Summary
SuiteCRM is an open-source, enterprise-ready Customer Relationship Management (CRM) software application. Prior to versions 7.15.1 and 8.9.3, when creating or editing a report (AOR_Reports module), the `field_function` parameter from POST data is saved directly into the `aor_fields` table without any validation. Later, when the report is executed/viewed, this value is concatenated directly into a SQL SELECT query without sanitization, enabling second-order SQL injection. Any authenticated user with Reports access can extract arbitrary database contents (password hashes, API tokens, config values). On MySQL with FILE privilege, this could lead to RCE via SELECT INTO OUTFILE. Versions 7.15.1 and 8.9.3 patch the issue.
Severity
8.1 (High)
SSVC
Exploitation: none
Automatable: no
Technical Impact: partial
CISA Coordinator (v2.0.3)
CWE
- CWE-89 - Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in an SQL Command ('SQL Injection')
Assigner
References
2 references
| URL | Tags |
|---|---|
| https://github.com/SuiteCRM/SuiteCRM/security/adv… | x_refsource_CONFIRM |
| https://docs.suitecrm.com/admin/releases/7.15.x | x_refsource_MISC |
Impacted products
{
"containers": {
"adp": [
{
"metrics": [
{
"other": {
"content": {
"id": "CVE-2026-29096",
"options": [
{
"Exploitation": "none"
},
{
"Automatable": "no"
},
{
"Technical Impact": "partial"
}
],
"role": "CISA Coordinator",
"timestamp": "2026-03-25T14:56:51.699648Z",
"version": "2.0.3"
},
"type": "ssvc"
}
}
],
"providerMetadata": {
"dateUpdated": "2026-03-25T14:57:40.389Z",
"orgId": "134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0",
"shortName": "CISA-ADP"
},
"title": "CISA ADP Vulnrichment"
}
],
"cna": {
"affected": [
{
"product": "SuiteCRM",
"vendor": "SuiteCRM",
"versions": [
{
"status": "affected",
"version": "\u003c 7.15.1"
},
{
"status": "affected",
"version": "\u003e= 8.0.0, \u003c 8.9.3"
}
]
}
],
"descriptions": [
{
"lang": "en",
"value": "SuiteCRM is an open-source, enterprise-ready Customer Relationship Management (CRM) software application. Prior to versions 7.15.1 and 8.9.3, when creating or editing a report (AOR_Reports module), the `field_function` parameter from POST data is saved directly into the `aor_fields` table without any validation. Later, when the report is executed/viewed, this value is concatenated directly into a SQL SELECT query without sanitization, enabling second-order SQL injection. Any authenticated user with Reports access can extract arbitrary database contents (password hashes, API tokens, config values). On MySQL with FILE privilege, this could lead to RCE via SELECT INTO OUTFILE. Versions 7.15.1 and 8.9.3 patch the issue."
}
],
"metrics": [
{
"cvssV3_1": {
"attackComplexity": "LOW",
"attackVector": "NETWORK",
"availabilityImpact": "NONE",
"baseScore": 8.1,
"baseSeverity": "HIGH",
"confidentialityImpact": "HIGH",
"integrityImpact": "HIGH",
"privilegesRequired": "LOW",
"scope": "UNCHANGED",
"userInteraction": "NONE",
"vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N",
"version": "3.1"
}
}
],
"problemTypes": [
{
"descriptions": [
{
"cweId": "CWE-89",
"description": "CWE-89: Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in an SQL Command (\u0027SQL Injection\u0027)",
"lang": "en",
"type": "CWE"
}
]
}
],
"providerMetadata": {
"dateUpdated": "2026-03-19T22:44:51.372Z",
"orgId": "a0819718-46f1-4df5-94e2-005712e83aaa",
"shortName": "GitHub_M"
},
"references": [
{
"name": "https://github.com/SuiteCRM/SuiteCRM/security/advisories/GHSA-vh42-gmqm-q55m",
"tags": [
"x_refsource_CONFIRM"
],
"url": "https://github.com/SuiteCRM/SuiteCRM/security/advisories/GHSA-vh42-gmqm-q55m"
},
{
"name": "https://docs.suitecrm.com/admin/releases/7.15.x",
"tags": [
"x_refsource_MISC"
],
"url": "https://docs.suitecrm.com/admin/releases/7.15.x"
}
],
"source": {
"advisory": "GHSA-vh42-gmqm-q55m",
"discovery": "UNKNOWN"
},
"title": "SuiteCRM vulnerable to Authenticated SQL Injection via unsanitized field_function in Report Fields"
}
},
"cveMetadata": {
"assignerOrgId": "a0819718-46f1-4df5-94e2-005712e83aaa",
"assignerShortName": "GitHub_M",
"cveId": "CVE-2026-29096",
"datePublished": "2026-03-19T22:37:51.208Z",
"dateReserved": "2026-03-03T21:54:06.708Z",
"dateUpdated": "2026-03-25T14:57:40.389Z",
"state": "PUBLISHED"
},
"dataType": "CVE_RECORD",
"dataVersion": "5.2"
}
CVE-2026-29099 (GCVE-0-2026-29099)
Vulnerability from cvelistv5 – Published: 2026-03-19 22:46 – Updated: 2026-03-25 14:59
VLAI
Title
SuiteCRM has Authenticated Blind SQL Injection in OutboundEmail Legacy Functionality.
Summary
SuiteCRM is an open-source, enterprise-ready Customer Relationship Management (CRM) software application. Prior to versions 7.15.1 and 8.9.3, the `retrieve()` function in `include/OutboundEmail/OutboundEmail.php` fails to properly neutralize the user controlled `$id` parameter. It is assumed that the function calling `retrieve()` will appropriately quote and sanitize the user input. However, two locations have been identified that can be reached through the `EmailUIAjax` action on the `Email()` module where this is not the case. As such, it is possible for an authenticated user to perform SQL injection through the `retrieve()` function. This affects the latest major versions 7.15 and 8.9. As there do not appear to be restrictions on which tables can be called, it would be possible for an attacker to retrieve arbitrary information from the database, including user information and password hashes. Versions 7.15.1 and 8.9.3 patch the issue.
Severity
8.8 (High)
SSVC
Exploitation: none
Automatable: no
Technical Impact: total
CISA Coordinator (v2.0.3)
CWE
- CWE-89 - Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in an SQL Command ('SQL Injection')
Assigner
References
2 references
| URL | Tags |
|---|---|
| https://github.com/SuiteCRM/SuiteCRM/security/adv… | x_refsource_CONFIRM |
| https://docs.suitecrm.com/admin/releases/7.15.x | x_refsource_MISC |
Impacted products
{
"containers": {
"adp": [
{
"metrics": [
{
"other": {
"content": {
"id": "CVE-2026-29099",
"options": [
{
"Exploitation": "none"
},
{
"Automatable": "no"
},
{
"Technical Impact": "total"
}
],
"role": "CISA Coordinator",
"timestamp": "2026-03-25T14:59:05.543643Z",
"version": "2.0.3"
},
"type": "ssvc"
}
}
],
"providerMetadata": {
"dateUpdated": "2026-03-25T14:59:47.571Z",
"orgId": "134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0",
"shortName": "CISA-ADP"
},
"title": "CISA ADP Vulnrichment"
}
],
"cna": {
"affected": [
{
"product": "SuiteCRM",
"vendor": "SuiteCRM",
"versions": [
{
"status": "affected",
"version": "\u003c 7.15.1"
},
{
"status": "affected",
"version": "\u003e= 8.0.0, \u003c 8.9.3"
}
]
}
],
"descriptions": [
{
"lang": "en",
"value": "SuiteCRM is an open-source, enterprise-ready Customer Relationship Management (CRM) software application. Prior to versions 7.15.1 and 8.9.3, the `retrieve()` function in `include/OutboundEmail/OutboundEmail.php` fails to properly neutralize the user controlled `$id` parameter. It is assumed that the function calling `retrieve()` will appropriately quote and sanitize the user input. However, two locations have been identified that can be reached through the `EmailUIAjax` action on the `Email()` module where this is not the case. As such, it is possible for an authenticated user to perform SQL injection through the `retrieve()` function. This affects the latest major versions 7.15 and 8.9. As there do not appear to be restrictions on which tables can be called, it would be possible for an attacker to retrieve arbitrary information from the database, including user information and password hashes. Versions 7.15.1 and 8.9.3 patch the issue."
}
],
"metrics": [
{
"cvssV3_1": {
"attackComplexity": "LOW",
"attackVector": "NETWORK",
"availabilityImpact": "HIGH",
"baseScore": 8.8,
"baseSeverity": "HIGH",
"confidentialityImpact": "HIGH",
"integrityImpact": "HIGH",
"privilegesRequired": "LOW",
"scope": "UNCHANGED",
"userInteraction": "NONE",
"vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
"version": "3.1"
}
}
],
"problemTypes": [
{
"descriptions": [
{
"cweId": "CWE-89",
"description": "CWE-89: Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in an SQL Command (\u0027SQL Injection\u0027)",
"lang": "en",
"type": "CWE"
}
]
}
],
"providerMetadata": {
"dateUpdated": "2026-03-19T22:46:56.418Z",
"orgId": "a0819718-46f1-4df5-94e2-005712e83aaa",
"shortName": "GitHub_M"
},
"references": [
{
"name": "https://github.com/SuiteCRM/SuiteCRM/security/advisories/GHSA-38rf-h37x-7767",
"tags": [
"x_refsource_CONFIRM"
],
"url": "https://github.com/SuiteCRM/SuiteCRM/security/advisories/GHSA-38rf-h37x-7767"
},
{
"name": "https://docs.suitecrm.com/admin/releases/7.15.x",
"tags": [
"x_refsource_MISC"
],
"url": "https://docs.suitecrm.com/admin/releases/7.15.x"
}
],
"source": {
"advisory": "GHSA-38rf-h37x-7767",
"discovery": "UNKNOWN"
},
"title": "SuiteCRM has Authenticated Blind SQL Injection in OutboundEmail Legacy Functionality."
}
},
"cveMetadata": {
"assignerOrgId": "a0819718-46f1-4df5-94e2-005712e83aaa",
"assignerShortName": "GitHub_M",
"cveId": "CVE-2026-29099",
"datePublished": "2026-03-19T22:46:56.418Z",
"dateReserved": "2026-03-03T21:54:06.708Z",
"dateUpdated": "2026-03-25T14:59:47.571Z",
"state": "PUBLISHED"
},
"dataType": "CVE_RECORD",
"dataVersion": "5.2"
}
Mitigation ID: MIT-4
Phase: Architecture and Design
Strategy: Libraries or Frameworks
Description:
- Use a vetted library or framework that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid [REF-1482].
- For example, consider using persistence layers such as Hibernate or Enterprise Java Beans, which can provide significant protection against SQL injection if used properly.
Mitigation ID: MIT-27
Phase: Architecture and Design
Strategy: Parameterization
Description:
- 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.
- Process SQL queries using prepared statements, parameterized queries, or stored procedures. These features should accept parameters or variables and support strong typing. Do not dynamically construct and execute query strings within these features using "exec" or similar functionality, since this may re-introduce the possibility of SQL injection. [REF-867]
Mitigation ID: MIT-17
Phases: Architecture and Design, Operation
Strategy: Environment Hardening
Description:
- 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.
- Specifically, follow the principle of least privilege when creating user accounts to a SQL database. The database users should only have the minimum privileges necessary to use their account. If the requirements of the system indicate that a user can read and modify their own data, then limit their privileges so they cannot read/write others' data. Use the strictest permissions possible on all database objects, such as execute-only for stored procedures.
Mitigation ID: MIT-15
Phase: Architecture and Design
Description:
- 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 ID: MIT-28
Phase: Implementation
Strategy: Output Encoding
Description:
- 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).
- Instead of building a new implementation, such features may be available in the database or programming language. For example, the Oracle DBMS_ASSERT package can check or enforce that parameters have certain properties that make them less vulnerable to SQL injection. For MySQL, the mysql_real_escape_string() API function is available in both C and PHP.
Mitigation ID: MIT-5
Phase: Implementation
Strategy: Input Validation
Description:
- 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 SQL query 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 SQL 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 SQL injection, especially if you are required to support free-form text fields that could contain arbitrary characters. For example, the name "O'Reilly" would likely pass the validation step, since it is a common last name in the English language. However, it cannot be directly inserted into the database because it contains the "'" apostrophe character, which would need to be escaped or otherwise handled. In this case, stripping the apostrophe might reduce the risk of SQL injection, but it would produce incorrect behavior because the wrong name would be recorded.
- When feasible, it may be safest to disallow meta-characters entirely, instead of escaping them. This will provide some defense in depth. After the data is entered into the database, later processes may neglect to escape meta-characters before use, and you may not have control over those processes.
Mitigation ID: MIT-21
Phase: Architecture and Design
Strategy: Enforcement by Conversion
Description:
- 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 ID: MIT-39
Phase: Implementation
Description:
- 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 SQL Injection, error messages revealing the structure of a SQL query can help attackers tailor successful attack strings.
Mitigation ID: MIT-29
Phase: Operation
Strategy: Firewall
Description:
- 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 ID: MIT-16
Phases: Operation, Implementation
Strategy: Environment Hardening
Description:
- 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-109: Object Relational Mapping Injection
An attacker leverages a weakness present in the database access layer code generated with an Object Relational Mapping (ORM) tool or a weakness in the way that a developer used a persistence framework to inject their own SQL commands to be executed against the underlying database. The attack here is similar to plain SQL injection, except that the application does not use JDBC to directly talk to the database, but instead it uses a data access layer generated by an ORM tool or framework (e.g. Hibernate). While most of the time code generated by an ORM tool contains safe access methods that are immune to SQL injection, sometimes either due to some weakness in the generated code or due to the fact that the developer failed to use the generated access methods properly, SQL injection is still possible.
CAPEC-110: SQL Injection through SOAP Parameter Tampering
An attacker modifies the parameters of the SOAP message that is sent from the service consumer to the service provider to initiate a SQL injection attack. On the service provider side, the SOAP message is parsed and parameters are not properly validated before being used to access a database in a way that does not use parameter binding, thus enabling the attacker to control the structure of the executed SQL query. This pattern describes a SQL injection attack with the delivery mechanism being a SOAP message.
CAPEC-470: Expanding Control over the Operating System from the Database
An attacker is able to leverage access gained to the database to read / write data to the file system, compromise the operating system, create a tunnel for accessing the host machine, and use this access to potentially attack other machines on the same network as the database machine. Traditionally SQL injections attacks are viewed as a way to gain unauthorized read access to the data stored in the database, modify the data in the database, delete the data, etc. However, almost every data base management system (DBMS) system includes facilities that if compromised allow an attacker complete access to the file system, operating system, and full access to the host running the database. The attacker can then use this privileged access to launch subsequent attacks. These facilities include dropping into a command shell, creating user defined functions that can call system level libraries present on the host machine, stored procedures, etc.
CAPEC-66: SQL Injection
This attack exploits target software that constructs SQL statements based on user input. An attacker crafts input strings so that when the target software constructs SQL statements based on the input, the resulting SQL statement performs actions other than those the application intended. SQL Injection results from failure of the application to appropriately validate input.
CAPEC-7: Blind SQL Injection
Blind SQL Injection results from an insufficient mitigation for SQL Injection. Although suppressing database error messages are considered best practice, the suppression alone is not sufficient to prevent SQL Injection. Blind SQL Injection is a form of SQL Injection that overcomes the lack of error messages. Without the error messages that facilitate SQL Injection, the adversary constructs input strings that probe the target through simple Boolean SQL expressions. The adversary can determine if the syntax and structure of the injection was successful based on whether the query was executed or not. Applied iteratively, the adversary determines how and where the target is vulnerable to SQL Injection.