Raw vector
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:H/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/SC:H/SI:H/SA:H/E:X/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:XSummary
CVE-2025-34134 is a critical-severity OS Command Injection (CWE-78) vulnerability in Nagios Nagios Xi. Its CVSS base score is 9.4 (Critical).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Command and Scripting Interpreter (T1059); ranked in the top 19% 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.
Nagios XI versions prior to 2024R1.4.2 contain a remote code execution vulnerability in the Business Process Intelligence (BPI) component. Insufficient validation and sanitization of administrator-controlled BPI configuration parameters, notably bpi_logfile and bpi_configfile, allow an authenticated administrative user to cause the product to create or overwrite files within the webroot and subsequently edit them via the BPI configuration editor. When such files carry executable extensions and are served by the web application, arbitrary code may be executed in the context of the web application user. The issue is tracked as CWE-78 and carries a CVSS 4.0 score of 9.4.
An authenticated administrative user can exploit the flaw to achieve arbitrary command execution with the privileges of the Nagios XI web application user. Successful exploitation can be leveraged to gain further control of the underlying host operating system.
Nagios advisory information and the product changelog indicate that the vulnerability is addressed in version 2024R1.4.2. Administrators are directed to apply the update available from the vendor's security and changelog resources.
The associated EPSS score remains low at 0.0135 with no material increase from its peak value.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2025-37210
Vulnerability Data
Nagios XI versions prior to 2024R1.4.2 contain a remote code execution vulnerability in the Business Process Intelligence (BPI) component. Insufficient validation and sanitization of administrator-controlled BPI configuration parameters (notably bpi_logfile and bpi_configfile) allow an authenticated administrative user to cause the…
more
product to create or overwrite files within the webroot and subsequently edit them via the BPI configuration editor. When such files carry executable extensions and are served by the web application, arbitrary code may be executed in the context of the web application user. Successful exploitation results in arbitrary command execution with the privileges of the Nagios XI web application user and can be leveraged to gain further control of the underlying host operating system.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
—
V1.2.5V1.2.8V15.2.5
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Developer testing and evaluation can discover missing or incorrect command sanitization during development.
Input validation directly neutralizes or rejects special characters that would otherwise alter OS command structure.
Least privilege reduces the permissions available to any process that could be subverted by injected commands.
Least functionality restricts available OS commands and interpreters, limiting the blast radius of injection.
Secure engineering principles require proper neutralization of untrusted input before command construction.
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'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.
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.
Security testing and code review target insecure use of operating-system command interfaces, catching command-injection flaws introduced during development.