Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:HSummary
CVE-2026-25089 is a critical-severity OS Command Injection (CWE-78) vulnerability in Fortinet Fortisandbox. Its CVSS base score is 9.8 (Critical).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Command and Scripting Interpreter (T1059); ranked in the top 0.6% of CVEs by exploit likelihood; CISA has added it to the Known Exploited Vulnerabilities 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-2026-25089 is an OS command injection vulnerability, tracked under CWE-78, that affects multiple versions of Fortinet FortiSandbox including 5.0.0-5.0.5, 4.4.0-4.4.8, all releases of 4.2, and corresponding FortiSandbox Cloud and PaaS builds 5.0.4-5.0.5. The flaw stems from improper neutralization of special elements in OS commands and carries a CVSS 3.1 base score of 9.8.
An unauthenticated remote attacker can exploit the issue by sending specially crafted HTTP requests to the affected appliance, resulting in arbitrary command execution with full control over confidentiality, integrity, and availability of the system.
The Fortinet advisory FG-IR-26-141 provides official details on the vulnerability and is the primary source for mitigation guidance, including recommended upgrade paths for each affected branch.
EPSS remains low and unchanged at 0.0203 with no observed increase after disclosure.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2026-35443
Vulnerability Data
A improper neutralization of special elements used in an os command ('os command injection') vulnerability in Fortinet FortiSandbox 5.0.0 through 5.0.5, FortiSandbox 4.4.0 through 4.4.8, FortiSandbox 4.2 all versions, FortiSandbox Cloud 5.0.4 through 5.0.5, FortiSandbox PaaS 5.0.4 through 5.0.5 may…
more
allow an unauthenticated attacker to execute unauthorized commands via specifically crafted HTTP requests
- CWE(s)
- KEV Date Added
- 16 July 2026
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.