Cyber Resilience

CVE-2021-1498

RCE in Cisco Hyperflex Hx Data Platform ≤ 4.0\(2e\)

CISA KEVActive ExploitationEUVD ExploitedPublic PoCRCECommand Injection
Published
06 May 2021
Modified
28 October 2025
KEV Added
03 November 2021
Patch / advisory
View advisory
CVSS Score v3.1 9.8
Click a component to see what it means
Raw vectorCVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
EPSS Score 0.99 100.0th percentile
Risk Priority 97 floored blend · peak EPSS

Summary

CVE-2021-1498 is a critical-severity OS Command Injection (CWE-78) vulnerability in Cisco Hyperflex Hx Data Platform. Its CVSS base score is 9.8 (Critical).

Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Command and Scripting Interpreter (T1059); ranked in the top 0.0% of CVEs by exploit likelihood; CISA has added it to the Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog; a public proof-of-concept is referenced.

Deeper analysis AI-assisted summary

Synthesised by an AI model from the NVD description and linked references — a reading aid, not an authoritative source.

CVE-2021-1498 is a set of command injection vulnerabilities, tracked under CWE-78 and CWE-77, that affect the web-based management interface of Cisco HyperFlex HX. The flaws permit unauthenticated remote attackers to inject and execute arbitrary commands on affected devices, reflected in the maximum CVSS 3.1 base score of 9.8.

An unauthenticated attacker with network access can send specially crafted HTTP requests to the management interface and obtain full command execution, resulting in complete compromise of confidentiality, integrity, and availability without any user interaction.

The Cisco Security Advisory cisco-sa-hyperflex-rce-TjjNrkpR provides remediation guidance and patch information, while the vulnerability is also listed in the CISA Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog. Public exploit code demonstrating remote command execution has been published on Packet Storm.

OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)

A05:2025 Injection

EU & UK References

Vulnerability Data

Multiple vulnerabilities in the web-based management interface of Cisco HyperFlex HX could allow an unauthenticated, remote attacker to perform command injection attacks against an affected device. For more information about these vulnerabilities, see the Details section of this advisory.

CWE(s)
CWE-78CWE-77
KEV Date Added
03 November 2021

Related Threats

MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques

T1059 Command and Scripting Interpreter Execution
Adversaries may abuse command and script interpreters to execute commands, scripts, or binaries.
attack.mitre.org →
T1059.003 Windows Command Shell Execution
Adversaries may abuse the Windows command shell for execution.
attack.mitre.org →
T1059.004 Unix Shell Execution
Adversaries may abuse Unix shell commands and scripts for execution.
attack.mitre.org →
T1190 Exploit Public-Facing Application Initial Access
Adversaries may attempt to exploit a weakness in an Internet-facing host or system to initially access a network.
attack.mitre.org →
T1059.001 PowerShell Execution
Adversaries may abuse PowerShell commands and scripts for execution.
attack.mitre.org →
T1059.008 Network Device CLI Execution
Adversaries may abuse scripting or built-in command line interpreters (CLI) on network devices to execute malicious command and payloads.
attack.mitre.org →
Derived from this CVE’s CWE(s) via the direct CWE→ATT&CK cross-walk.

CVEs Like This One

CVE-2021-1497Same product: Cisco Hyperflex Hx220C Af M5both on KEV
CVE-2023-20118Same vendor: Ciscoboth on KEV
CVE-2016-6367Same vendor: Ciscoboth on KEV
CVE-2023-20219Same vendor: Cisco
CVE-2023-20153Same vendor: Cisco
CVE-2023-20122Same vendor: Cisco
CVE-2023-20170Same vendor: Cisco
CVE-2023-20121Same vendor: Cisco
CVE-2023-20013Same vendor: Cisco
CVE-2023-20017Same vendor: Cisco

Affected Assets

cisco
hyperflex hx data platform
≤ 4.0\(2e\) · 4.5 — 4.5\(2a\)

Mitigating Controls

Control response

Prevent
Stop it (NIST 800-53)

—

Detect
Catch it (NIST detect / respond)

—

Harden
Shrink the surface (DISA STIG)

—

Validate
Prove the fix (OWASP ASVS)
  • V1.2.3
  • V1.2.5
  • V1.2.8
  • V1.2.9

Likely Mitigating Controls AI

Per-CVE control mapping for this CVE has not run yet; the list below is derived from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry.

SC-27 Platform-independent Applications
addresses: CWE-78

Platform-independent apps typically execute inside a managed runtime or sandbox that restricts direct OS command execution, reducing the ability to exploit OS command injection.

SI-10 Information Input Validation
addresses: CWE-78

Validates inputs to block special elements that would alter OS command execution.

Mitigating Controls (NIST CSF 2.0) AI

Derived directly from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry via our AI-authored CWE→CSF cross-walk (authority under review) — links open the control.

PR.PS-06 mostly match
prevents

PR.PS-06's SDLC practices directly require secure coding and input handling that blocks command-injection defects, yet the single broad outcome leaves many specific neutralization vectors and verification gaps unaddressed.

DE.CM-09 partial match
prevents

Runtime monitoring of software and data can detect anomalous command execution resulting from injection.

ID.RA-01 partial match
prevents

Identifying recorded vulnerabilities enables remediation of command-injection flaws before exploitation.

PR.PS-02 partial match
prevents

Routine patching/maintenance can remediate known command-injection CVEs in dependencies (partial forward) but does nothing to stop developers from introducing improper neutralization in custom code (none reverse).

Mitigating Controls (ISO/IEC 27001:2022 Annex A) AI

Derived directly from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry via our AI-authored CWE→ISO cross-walk (authority under review) — links open the control.

A.8.28 Secure coding mostly match
prevents

Secure coding standards require proper escaping and parameterization of commands, directly eliminating CWE-77.

A.8.29 Security testing in development and acceptance mostly match
finds

Security testing and code review target insecure use of operating-system command interfaces, catching command-injection flaws introduced during development.

A.8.25 Secure development life cycle partial match
prevents

Secure development life cycle mandates input validation and command construction practices that directly prevent command injection.

A.8.26 Application security requirements partial match
prevents

Application security requirements explicitly call for controls against injection flaws including command injection.

A.8.27 Secure system architecture and engineering principles partial match
prevents

Secure architecture principles reduce the attack surface but do not prescribe the specific neutralization techniques needed.

A.8.31 Separation of development, test and production environments none match
none

Environment separation limits the blast radius of an exploited command injection but does not prevent the flaw itself.

References