CVE-2026-13051
Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:NSummary
CVE-2026-13051 is a critical-severity Unsafe Reflection (CWE-470) vulnerability. Its CVSS base score is 9.1 (Critical).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Template Injection (T1221); ranked at the 38th 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 SI-10 (Information Input Validation) — see the control section below for these in your framework.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2026-58118
Vulnerability Data
Form::Processor::Field::HtmlArea versions from 0.06 through 1.162360 for Perl allow attacker selected method dispatch and resource exhaustion via an HTML::Tidy diagnostic that validate passes to add_error as a Locale::Maketext template. validate runs HTML::Tidy over the submitted markup and passes each resulting…
more
message to add_error as its first argument, which add_error hands to the language handle as the Locale::Maketext message key. The default handle's lexicon sets `_AUTO`, so a message that is not a lexicon entry is compiled as a bracket notation template instead of being looked up. Tidy diagnostics quote the offending attribute name or value, so a bracket group in the submitted markup reaches the template position, where the first token of the group names a method called on the language handle and the remaining tokens are its arguments. A group such as `[0]` makes the compile croak, and neither the field nor the handle catches it, so the exception leaves validate. `[sprintf,%2000000000d,7]` reaches CORE::sprintf with an attacker chosen field width. One submission of crafted markup to an HtmlArea field throws an unhandled exception out of form validation or allocates an arbitrary amount of memory, and an application whose language handle subclass defines side effecting public methods makes those callable with attacker chosen arguments. The other field types pass fixed templates with the submitted value in an argument slot, where it stays inert, and are unaffected.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
—
V1.3.2V1.3.7V1.3.10
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Developer testing and static analysis can discover missing neutralization of template directives.
Input validation directly stops externally supplied class or method names from selecting improper code via reflection.
Enforces authorization checks on the code or classes ultimately invoked, blocking unauthorized selections even if reflection is used.
Limits privileges of any code reached through unsafe reflection, reducing blast radius without stopping the selection itself.
Security engineering principles require use of safe templating APIs and proper escaping of external input.
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 avoid introducing externally controlled class selection via reflection.
Vulnerability identification processes can discover unsafe reflection during code review or scanning.
Preventing execution of unauthorized code can block exploitation of unsafe reflection at runtime.
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.
Secure coding standards directly forbid unsafe reflection and require whitelisting or static alternatives.
Security testing can detect and block unsafe reflection patterns before release.
Secure development lifecycle mandates input validation and design reviews that reduce unsafe reflection risks.
Application security requirements can explicitly prohibit or constrain reflection based on untrusted input.
Secure architecture principles discourage dynamic class loading from external data sources.
Access restrictions limit who can supply the malicious input but do not address the reflection flaw itself.