Cyber Resilience

CVE-2025-15502

Command Injection in Sangfor Operation And Maintenance Security Management System ≤ 3.0.8

Public PoCCommand Injection
Published
10 January 2026
Modified
22 January 2026
CVSS Score v4 6.9
Click a component to see what it means
Raw vectorCVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/VA:L/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:P/CR:X/IR:X/AR:X/MAV:X/MAC:X/MAT:X/MPR:X/MUI:X/MVC:X/MVI:X/MVA:X/MSC:X/MSI:X/MSA:X/S:X/AU:X/R:X/V:X/RE:X/U:X
EPSS Score 0.057 92th percentile
Risk Priority 48 floored blend · peak EPSS

Summary

CVE-2025-15502 is a medium-severity Command Injection (CWE-77) vulnerability in Sangfor Operation And Maintenance Security Management System. Its CVSS base score is 6.9 (Medium).

Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Command and Scripting Interpreter (T1059); ranked in the top 8% of CVEs by exploit likelihood; it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog; a public proof-of-concept is referenced.

The strongest mitigations our analysis identified map to SA-11 (Developer Testing and Evaluation) and SI-10 (Information Input Validation) — see the control section below for these in your framework.

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-2025-15502 is an OS command injection vulnerability affecting Sangfor Operation and Maintenance Management System versions up to 3.0.8. The issue resides in the SessionController function within the file /isomp-protocol/protocol/session, where manipulation of the Hostname argument enables command injection. Classified under CWE-77 and CWE-78, it carries a CVSS v3.1 base score of 7.3 (AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L), indicating high severity due to its network accessibility and lack of prerequisites.

Remote attackers without authentication or privileges can exploit this vulnerability by sending crafted requests that inject malicious OS commands via the Hostname parameter. Successful exploitation allows limited impacts on confidentiality, integrity, and availability, potentially enabling arbitrary command execution on the affected system.

Advisories from VulDB and GitHub detail the vulnerability, noting that a public exploit is available and may be actively used. The vendor was notified early but has not responded or issued patches, leaving no official mitigations documented in the provided references.

OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)

A05:2025 Injection

EU & UK References

Vulnerability Data

A vulnerability was identified in Sangfor Operation and Maintenance Management System up to 3.0.8. The affected element is the function SessionController of the file /isomp-protocol/protocol/session. Such manipulation of the argument Hostname leads to os command injection. The attack can be…

more

executed remotely. The exploit is publicly available and might be used. The vendor was contacted early about this disclosure but did not respond in any way.

CWE(s)
CWE-77CWE-78

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-2026-1324Same product: Sangfor Operation And Maintenance Security Management System
CVE-2025-15501Same product: Sangfor Operation And Maintenance Security Management System
CVE-2026-1412Same product: Sangfor Operation And Maintenance Security Management System
CVE-2026-1413Same product: Sangfor Operation And Maintenance Security Management System
CVE-2026-1414Same product: Sangfor Operation And Maintenance Security Management System
CVE-2025-12916Same product: Sangfor Operation And Maintenance Security Management System
CVE-2025-15500Same vendor: Sangfor
CVE-2025-15499Same vendor: Sangfor
CVE-2023-30805Same vendor: Sangfor
CVE-2023-30806Same vendor: Sangfor

Affected Assets

sangfor
operation and maintenance security management system
≤ 3.0.8

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

Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI

SA-11 Developer Testing and Evaluation good match

Developer testing and evaluation can discover command-construction flaws before deployment.

SI-10 Information Input Validation good match

Input validation directly stops construction of commands from untrusted data containing special elements.

AC-6 Least Privilege partial match

Least privilege reduces the permissions available to any process that could be subverted by injected commands.

CM-7 Least Functionality partial match

Least functionality restricts available OS commands and interpreters, limiting the blast radius of injection.

SA-8 Security and Privacy Engineering Principles partial match

Secure engineering principles include proper neutralization and safe command construction practices.

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 require input validation and neutralization that prevent command injection.

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 in development catches command-injection vulnerabilities before release.

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