Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:HCVSS and EPSS are reproduced from their sources (NVD, FIRST EPSS). Risk Priority is our own derived reading, not an NVD score.
Summary
CVE-2026-26026 is a critical-severity Code Injection (CWE-94) vulnerability in Glpi-Project Glpi. Its CVSS base score is 9.1 (Critical).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Command and Scripting Interpreter (T1059); ranked in the top 5% 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-2026-26026 is a template injection vulnerability in GLPI, a free asset and IT management software package. It affects versions from 11.0.0 up to but not including 11.0.6, where an administrator can trigger remote code execution (RCE) through malicious template input. The issue is classified under CWE-94 (Code Injection) and CWE-1336 (Incorrect Handling of Code Blocks in Templating Engine), with a CVSS v3.1 base score of 9.1 (AV:N/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H), indicating critical severity due to its network accessibility, low complexity, and high impact across confidentiality, integrity, and availability after privilege escalation.
An authenticated administrator (PR:H) can exploit this vulnerability over the network with low complexity and no user interaction required. Successful exploitation leads to RCE with scope expansion (S:C), allowing full compromise of the affected GLPI instance, including arbitrary code execution, data exfiltration, or further lateral movement within the environment.
The GLPI security advisory at https://github.com/glpi-project/glpi/security/advisories/GHSA-2c98-648q-h27h confirms the vulnerability and states it is fixed in version 11.0.6. Administrators should upgrade to GLPI 11.0.6 or later to mitigate the issue.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2026-19246
Vulnerability Data
GLPI is a free asset and IT management software package. From 11.0.0 to before 11.0.6, template injection by an administrator lead to RCE. This vulnerability is fixed in 11.0.6.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
—
V1.3.2V1.3.7V1.3.10V1.3.1
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Developer testing and evaluation finds code paths that accept and execute externally influenced strings.
Input validation directly stops untrusted data from being used to construct executable code without neutralization.
Least privilege limits the damage an injected code fragment can perform once executed.
Requiring documented secure development standards and tools enforces use of safe code-generation APIs and escaping.
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.
PR.PS-06's SDLC practices directly target injection flaws via secure coding and testing (mostly), yet as a single broad outcome it leaves many code-generation specifics unaddressed (partial).
PR.DS-10 protects runtime data confidentiality/integrity but has no bearing on neutralizing externally influenced input during code generation, so neither direction shows any preventive effect.
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 development life cycle mandates input validation and sanitization that directly prevents template-injection weaknesses.
Application security requirements explicitly call for neutralizing special elements in template engines.
Secure architecture principles reduce the likelihood of unsafe template processing but do not prescribe specific neutralization techniques.
Banning unapproved code samples and unauthenticated web services, combined with secure-coding standards and SAST, prevents the dynamic generation or inclusion of attacker-supplied code.
Security testing can detect template-injection flaws but does not itself implement neutralization controls.