Cyber Resilience

CVE-2026-20675

Command Injection in Apple Macos 14.0 – 14.8.4

Published
11 February 2026
Modified
02 April 2026
Patch / advisory
CVSS Score v3.1 5.5
Click a component to see what it means
Raw vectorCVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N
EPSS Score 0.0025 16th percentile
Risk Priority 42 floored blend · peak EPSS

Summary

CVE-2026-20675 is a medium-severity Command Injection (CWE-77) vulnerability in Apple Macos. Its CVSS base score is 5.5 (Medium).

Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Command and Scripting Interpreter (T1059); ranked at the 16th 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.

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-2026-20675 is a vulnerability in Apple's operating systems addressed through improved bounds checks, associated with CWE-77 and CWE-125. It affects image processing in iOS prior to 18.7.5 and 26.3, iPadOS prior to 18.7.5 and 26.3, macOS Sequoia prior to 15.7.4, macOS Sonoma prior to 14.8.4, macOS Tahoe prior to 26.3, tvOS prior to 26.3, visionOS prior to 26.3, and watchOS prior to 26.3. Processing a maliciously crafted image may lead to disclosure of user information, with a CVSS v3.1 base score of 5.5 (AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N).

The attack requires local access, low complexity, no privileges, and user interaction. A local attacker can trick a user into processing a malicious image, achieving high-impact disclosure of user information without integrity or availability effects and without scope changes.

Apple security advisories at https://support.apple.com/en-us/126346, https://support.apple.com/en-us/126347, https://support.apple.com/en-us/126348, https://support.apple.com/en-us/126349, and https://support.apple.com/en-us/126350 detail the fixes via improved bounds checks in the specified versions.

OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)

EU & UK References

Vulnerability Data

The issue was addressed with improved bounds checks. This issue is fixed in iOS 18.7.5 and iPadOS 18.7.5, iOS 26.3 and iPadOS 26.3, macOS Sequoia 15.7.4, macOS Sonoma 14.8.4, macOS Tahoe 26.3, tvOS 26.3, visionOS 26.3, watchOS 26.3. Processing a…

more

maliciously crafted image may lead to disclosure of user information.

CWE(s)

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.
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.
T1059.001 PowerShell Execution
Adversaries may abuse PowerShell commands and scripts for execution.
T1059.003 Windows Command Shell Execution
Adversaries may abuse the Windows command shell for execution.
T1059.004 Unix Shell Execution
Adversaries may abuse Unix shell commands and scripts for execution.
T1059.008 Network Device CLI Execution
Adversaries may abuse scripting or built-in command line interpreters (CLI) on network devices to execute malicious command and payloads.
Derived from this CVE’s CWE(s) via the direct CWE→ATT&CK cross-walk.

CVEs Like This One

CVE-2026-20671Same product: Apple Ipados
CVE-2024-40806Same product: Apple Ipados
CVE-2024-44282Same product: Apple Ipados
CVE-2024-40799Same product: Apple Ipados
CVE-2024-27880Same product: Apple Ipados
CVE-2023-40396Same product: Apple Ipados
CVE-2024-40777Same product: Apple Ipados
CVE-2024-40779Same product: Apple Ipados
CVE-2024-40780Same product: Apple Ipados
CVE-2024-40789Same product: Apple Ipados

Affected Assets

apple
ipados
≤ 18.7.5 · 26.0 — 26.3
apple
iphone os
≤ 18.7.5 · 26.0 — 26.3
apple
macos
14.0 — 14.8.4 · 15.0 — 15.7.4 · 26.0 — 26.3
apple
tvos
≤ 26.3
apple
visionos
≤ 26.3
apple
watchos
≤ 26.3

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)
  • V1.2.3
  • V1.2.5
  • V1.2.8
  • V1.2.9

Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI

Developer testing and evaluation can discover command-construction flaws before deployment.

Input validation directly stops construction of commands from untrusted data containing special elements.

Secure engineering principles include proper neutralization and safe command construction practices.

Process isolation confines the effects of an out-of-bounds read to the compromised process.

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 neutralization that prevent command injection.

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.

PR.PS-02 partial match
prevents

Routine patching replaces vulnerable code containing out-of-bounds read flaws.

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.

prevents

Secure coding standards require proper escaping and parameterization of commands, directly eliminating CWE-77.

finds

Security testing in development catches command-injection vulnerabilities before release.

A.8.15 Logging partial match
finds

Logging can record evidence of an out-of-bounds read but does not prevent the weakness itself.

prevents

Secure development life cycle mandates input validation and command construction practices that directly prevent command injection.

prevents

Application security requirements explicitly call for controls against injection flaws including command injection.

prevents

Secure architecture principles reduce the attack surface but do not prescribe the specific neutralization techniques needed.

References