Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:HSummary
CVE-2026-11325 is a high-severity OS Command Injection (CWE-78) vulnerability. Its CVSS base score is 8.8 (High).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Command and Scripting Interpreter (T1059); ranked at the 41th percentile by exploit likelihood (below the median); it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog.
The strongest mitigations our analysis identified map to SA-11 (Developer Testing and Evaluation) and SA-22 (Unsupported System Components) — see the control section below for these in your framework.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2026-57178
Vulnerability Data
Description Cloudflare was recently notified by external researchers of vulnerabilities in this archived repository, including a remote code execution issue in `src/index.ts` reachable from certain GitHub Actions workflow configurations. Successful exploitation may expose workflow secrets such as CLOUDFLARE_API_TOKEN and GITHUB_TOKEN…
more
to an attacker. Because this repository has been deprecated since 2024, Cloudflare will not be issuing patches. To remediate this issue, we recommend migrating to `cloudflare/wrangler-action` immediately. Consumers who have already migrated are not affected. Sunset Date The cloudflare/pages-action repository will be removed on 2026-09-18. Consumers must complete migration before 18th September to avoid CI disruption. Affected Versions All published versions of cloudflare/pages-action, including consumers pinned to the v1 moving tag. Patched Versions None. This repository will not receive further updates, including security patches. Resolution / Migration Path Migrate all workflows using cloudflare/pages-action to `cloudflare/wrangler-action` before 2026-09-18. Refer to the wrangler-action README for the equivalent step configuration and migration guidance. Credit Thanks to @agentka99 and @beg1nn3r for reporting their findings via Cloudflare's HackerOne program that informe
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
- 1 hardening rule · 1 OS baseline
V15.1.2V1.2.5V1.2.8V15.2.5
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Developer testing and evaluation can discover missing or incorrect command sanitization during development.
SA-22 triggers when support LAPSES: the weakness arises, then the control removes it — the remediates lifecycle. The pre-adoption slice is not in SA-22's text, so no second verb stands. The or-branch is compatible with removal (a component under alternative support is receiving maintenance), but the discussion's exceptions for isolated and mission-critical systems are SANCTIONED INNOCENT RESIDUE, which defeats `full` under tightened-full; prefer-lower settles the grades-as-ceilings counter-argument.
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.
GV.RM-04's high-level risk-response criteria can indirectly discourage unmaintained third-party use via policy, but alone removes none of the concrete supply-chain or maintenance decisions that produce CWE-1104.
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.
A maintained asset inventory plus scheduled scanning and patching directly reduces the window during which known vulnerable third-party components remain exploitable.
Periodic validation, certification demands, and life-cycle monitoring of supplier components help surface and replace unmaintained third-party elements before they become exploitable liabilities.
Regular exposure to external advisories and vulnerability disclosures helps teams identify and replace unmaintained third-party components before attackers can exploit known weaknesses in them.
Hardening callouts derived
Configuration rules from DISA STIG baselines that bear on weaknesses of the type cited by this CVE. Each rule is shown with the relationship its mapping actually records, against the CWE it was authored against. Derived via CVE→CWE over `controls_xwalks` (authoritative rows only; rows rated `none` are excluded).
Oracle Linux 8 (1 rule)
- V-248521 OL 8 must be a vendor-supported release. prevents CWE-1104