Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:HSummary
CVE-2023-51448 is a high-severity SQL Injection (CWE-89) vulnerability in Cacti Cacti. Its CVSS base score is 8.8 (High).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Exploit Public-Facing Application (T1190); ranked in the top 0.8% of CVEs by exploit likelihood; it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV 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.
Cacti version 1.2.25 contains a blind SQL injection vulnerability in the SNMP Notification Receivers feature implemented in managers.php. An authenticated user who possesses the Settings/Utilities permission can supply a crafted SQL payload via the selected_graphs_array parameter in an HTTP GET request to the /cacti/managers.php endpoint, allowing arbitrary SQL execution against the underlying database.
An attacker meeting these authentication and permission requirements can read or modify database contents and potentially escalate to full compromise of the Cacti instance, corresponding to the CVSS 8.8 rating that reflects high impact on confidentiality, integrity, and availability.
The referenced GitHub security advisory and distribution notices confirm that no patched release existed at the time of disclosure; administrators are therefore advised to restrict the Settings/Utilities permission and monitor the managers.php endpoint until an update becomes available. The associated EPSS score reached a peak of 0.3755, indicating moderate and sustained exploitation interest after publication.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2023-56163
Vulnerability Data
Cacti provides an operational monitoring and fault management framework. Version 1.2.25 has a Blind SQL Injection (SQLi) vulnerability within the SNMP Notification Receivers feature in the file `‘managers.php’`. An authenticated attacker with the “Settings/Utilities” permission can send a crafted HTTP…
more
GET request to the endpoint `‘/cacti/managers.php’` with an SQLi payload in the `‘selected_graphs_array’` HTTP GET parameter. As of time of publication, no patched versions exist.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
—
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.
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.
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.
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.
The same secure-coding and static-analysis activities surface missing neutralization of SQL metacharacters before the system is accepted.
Early warnings and shared best-practice information help organizations apply the latest remediation techniques against SQL-injection vulnerabilities.
Threat-intelligence feeds that surface new SQL-injection campaigns enable rapid updates to query-construction defenses and detection signatures before exploitation occurs.
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.
Language-specific secure coding rules, peer review and SAST together prevent the construction of SQL statements from untrusted data without proper parameterization or escaping.