Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:HSummary
CVE-2026-25836 is a high-severity OS Command Injection (CWE-78) vulnerability in Fortinet Fortisandbox Cloud. Its CVSS base score is 7.2 (High).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Command and Scripting Interpreter (T1059); ranked in the top 24% of CVEs by exploit likelihood; 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-2026-25836 is an OS command injection vulnerability (CWE-78) in Fortinet FortiSandbox Cloud version 5.0.4, arising from improper neutralization of special elements used in OS commands. Published on 2026-03-10, it has a CVSS v3.1 base score of 7.2 (AV:N/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H), indicating high-impact potential with network accessibility and low attack complexity once privileges are obtained.
The vulnerability can be exploited by a privileged attacker with super-admin profile and CLI access, who can send crafted HTTP requests to execute unauthorized code or commands on the affected system. Successful exploitation grants high confidentiality, integrity, and availability impacts within the target's scope.
Fortinet has issued PSIRT advisory FG-IR-26-096, available at https://fortiguard.fortinet.com/psirt/FG-IR-26-096, which provides further details on the vulnerability and recommended mitigations.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2026-10531
Vulnerability Data
An improper neutralization of special elements used in an os command ('os command injection') vulnerability in Fortinet FortiSandbox Cloud 5.0.4, FortiSandbox PaaS 5.0.4 may allow a privileged attacker with super-admin profile and CLI access to execute unauthorized code or commands…
more
via crafted HTTP requests.
- CWE(s)
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.