Cyber Resilience

CVE-2021-41288

SQLi in Zohocorp Manageengine Opmanager ≤ 12.4

High EPSSSQLi
Published
30 September 2021
Modified
21 November 2024
Patch / 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 0.80 99.6th percentile
Risk Priority 97 floored blend · peak EPSS

Summary

CVE-2021-41288 is a critical-severity SQL Injection (CWE-89) vulnerability in Zohocorp Manageengine Opmanager. Its CVSS base score is 9.8 (Critical).

Operationally, ranked in the top 0.4% of CVEs by exploit likelihood; it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog.

OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)

EU & UK References

Vulnerability Data

Zoho ManageEngine OpManager version 125466 and below is vulnerable to SQL Injection in the getReportData API.

CWE(s)

Related Threats

Likely ATT&CK TechniquesAI

Techniques this vulnerability likely enables, inferred from its description, weakness type, and attributed-actor tradecraft. Confidence is per-technique.

T1190 Exploit Public-Facing Application Initial Accessconfidence: HIGH
SQL injection in a public-facing API directly enables exploitation of the web application.
T1059 Command and Scripting Interpreter Executionconfidence: MEDIUM
Successful SQLi can be leveraged to execute arbitrary commands or queries on the database server.
inferred from description + CWE · MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise v19.0

CVEs Like This One

CVE-2019-17602Same product: Zohocorp Manageengine Opmanager
CVE-2021-40493Same product: Zohocorp Manageengine Opmanager
CVE-2018-17243Same product: Zohocorp Manageengine Opmanager
CVE-2022-29535Same product: Zohocorp Manageengine Opmanager
CVE-2024-36514Same product class: network monitoring / SIEM
CVE-2022-43671Same product class: network monitoring / SIEM
CVE-2023-48793Same product class: network monitoring / SIEM
CVE-2024-36516Same product class: network monitoring / SIEM
CVE-2023-49334Same product class: network monitoring / SIEM
CVE-2024-48878Same product class: network monitoring / SIEM

Affected Assets

zohocorp
manageengine opmanager
12.5 · ≤ 12.4

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)
  • V6.2.5

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.

addresses: CWE-89

Penetration testing uses SQL injection payloads against database interfaces, identifying and supporting fixes for SQL injection weaknesses.

addresses: CWE-89

Validates query inputs to prevent SQL syntax or command manipulation.

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

Secure SDLC practices directly target injection flaws during coding and review so largely prevent CWE-89 introduction, yet the single broad outcome leaves residual risk from incomplete neutralization techniques or missed edge cases.

PR.AT-02 partial match
prevents

Training raises developer awareness of SQLi risks and can reduce introduction likelihood (partial) but removes none of the actual coding flaw's risk by itself since technical neutralization is still required.

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.

detects

The same secure-coding and static-analysis activities surface missing neutralization of SQL metacharacters before the system is accepted.

prevents

Early warnings and shared best-practice information help organizations apply the latest remediation techniques against SQL-injection vulnerabilities.

prevents

Threat-intelligence feeds that surface new SQL-injection campaigns enable rapid updates to query-construction defenses and detection signatures before exploitation occurs.

prevents

Secure-coding rules and security testing phases mandate the use of parameterized queries or equivalent escaping, preventing the construction of dynamic SQL statements from untrusted input.

prevents

Language-specific secure coding rules, peer review and SAST together prevent the construction of SQL statements from untrusted data without proper parameterization or escaping.

References