Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:H/A:NSummary
CVE-2025-57516 is a high-severity OS Command Injection (CWE-78) vulnerability in Publiccms Publiccms. Its CVSS base score is 8.2 (High).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Command and Scripting Interpreter (T1059); ranked in the top 36% 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-2025-57516 is an OS command injection vulnerability (CWE-78) affecting PublicCMS versions V5.202506.a and V5.202506.b. The flaw resides in the backupDB.bat file, where unsanitized DATABASE, USERNAME, or PASSWORD variables are passed directly to operating system commands, enabling arbitrary command execution. It carries a CVSS 3.1 score of 8.2 with network attack vector, low complexity, and no required privileges or user interaction.
An unauthenticated attacker can supply crafted values for the affected variables over the network to execute arbitrary operating system commands on the host running the vulnerable backup script. Successful exploitation yields high integrity impact and limited confidentiality impact while leaving availability unaffected.
The single reference points to a GitHub issue without accompanying advisory text or patch details in the supplied data. The associated EPSS score remains low, moving only from 0.0287 to a peak of 0.0342.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2025-31576
Vulnerability Data
OS Command injection vulnerability in PublicCMS PublicCMS-V5.202506.a, and PublicCMS-V5.202506.b allowing attackers to execute arbitrary commands via crafted DATABASE, USERNAME, or PASSWORD variables to the backupDB.bat file.
- 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.