Cyber Resilience

CVE-2026-1412

Command Injection in Sangfor Operation And Maintenance Security Management System ≤ 3.0.12

Public PoCCommand Injection
Published
26 January 2026
Modified
30 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 0.039 89th percentile
Risk Priority 47 floored blend · peak EPSS

Summary

CVE-2026-1412 is a medium-severity Injection (CWE-74) 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 11% 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.

A command injection vulnerability affects the Sangfor Operation and Maintenance Security Management System up to version 3.0.12. The flaw resides in an unknown function within the /fort/audit/get_clip_img component of the HTTP POST Request Handler, where manipulation of the frame/dirno argument allows arbitrary command execution. The issue is tracked under CWE-74 and CWE-77 and carries a CVSS 4.0 score of 6.9.

Remote attackers can exploit the vulnerability without authentication or user interaction by sending crafted POST requests, resulting in limited impacts to confidentiality, integrity, and availability on the affected system. Publicly disclosed exploit code increases the risk of unauthenticated remote code execution in exposed deployments.

Reference entries on Vuldb and a GitHub issue repository document the flaw and proof-of-concept details but do not include vendor patch information or specific mitigation steps. The EPSS score has risen from a baseline of 0.0009 to a peak of 0.0102, indicating growing exploitation interest after disclosure.

OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)

A05:2025 Injection

EU & UK References

Vulnerability Data

A vulnerability has been found in Sangfor Operation and Maintenance Security Management System up to 3.0.12. The impacted element is an unknown function of the file /fort/audit/get_clip_img of the component HTTP POST Request Handler. Such manipulation of the argument frame/dirno…

more

leads to command injection. It is possible to launch the attack remotely. The exploit has been disclosed to the public and may be used.

CWE(s)
CWE-74CWE-77

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 →
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 →
T1221 Template Injection Stealth
Adversaries may create or modify references in user document templates to conceal malicious code or force authentication attempts.
attack.mitre.org →
T1659 Content Injection Initial Access
Adversaries may gain access and continuously communicate with victims by injecting malicious content into systems through online network traffic.
attack.mitre.org →
T1674 Input Injection Execution
Adversaries may simulate keystrokes on a victim’s computer by various means to perform any type of action on behalf of the user, such as launching the command interpreter using keyboard shortcuts, typing an inline script to be executed,…
attack.mitre.org →
T1059.001 PowerShell Execution
Adversaries may abuse PowerShell commands and scripts for execution.
attack.mitre.org →
Derived from this CVE’s CWE(s) via the direct CWE→ATT&CK cross-walk.

CVEs Like This One

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-2026-1324Same product: Sangfor Operation And Maintenance Security Management System
CVE-2025-15502Same product: Sangfor Operation And Maintenance Security Management System
CVE-2025-15501Same product: Sangfor Operation And Maintenance Security Management System
CVE-2025-15500Same vendor: Sangfor
CVE-2025-15499Same vendor: Sangfor
CVE-2026-1548Shared CWE-74, CWE-77
CVE-2026-8753Shared CWE-74, CWE-77

Affected Assets

sangfor
operation and maintenance security management system
≤ 3.0.12

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)
  • V1.2.1
  • V1.2.3
  • V1.2.5
  • V1.2.8

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

SI-10 directly requires validation of information inputs to reject malformed or special-element content before it reaches downstream parsers.

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 output encoding that prevent injection flaws.

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.

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 injection vulnerabilities before release.

A.8.15 Logging partial match
finds

Logging supports detection of injection attempts but does not prevent the weakness.

A.8.16 Monitoring activities partial match
finds

Monitoring activities can identify active injection attacks after they occur.

A.8.25 Secure development life cycle partial match
prevents

Secure development life cycle mandates input validation and output encoding that directly prevent injection flaws.

A.8.26 Application security requirements partial match
prevents

Application security requirements explicitly call for controls against injection attacks in software design.

References