Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:N/A:NSummary
CVE-2026-27464 is a high-severity Code Injection (CWE-94) vulnerability in Metabase Metabase. Its CVSS base score is 7.7 (High).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Template Injection (T1221); ranked at the 17th 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-2026-27464 is a vulnerability in Metabase, an open-source data analytics platform, affecting versions prior to 0.57.13 and versions 0.58.x through 0.58.6. It enables authenticated users to retrieve sensitive information from a Metabase instance, including database access credentials. Testing confirmed that low-privileged users can extract this sensitive data, such as database credentials, into the email body through template evaluation. The flaw is associated with CWE-94 (code injection) and CWE-1336 (insufficient control of implicit action), and carries a CVSS v3.1 base score of 7.7 (AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:N/A:N).
A low-privileged authenticated user can exploit this vulnerability remotely over the network with low attack complexity and no user interaction. Exploitation occurs via access to vulnerable endpoints involved in email notifications and template processing, allowing the attacker to disclose high-impact confidential data like database credentials without affecting integrity or availability.
Metabase has fixed the issue in versions 0.57.13 and 0.58.7. As a workaround, users can disable notifications in their Metabase instance to prevent access to the vulnerable endpoints. Additional details are provided in the Metabase security advisory at GHSA-vcj8-rcm8-gfj9 and the release notes for the patched versions.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2026-7720
Vulnerability Data
Metabase is an open-source data analytics platform. In versions prior to 0.57.13 and versions 0.58.x through 0.58.6, authenticated users are able to retrieve sensitive information from a Metabase instance, including database access credentials. During testing, it was confirmed that a…
more
low-privileged user can extract sensitive information including database credentials, into the email body via template evaluation. This issue has been fixed in versions 0.57.13 and 0.58.7. To workaround this issue, users can disable notifications in their Metabase instance to disallow access to the vulnerable endpoints.
- 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.
Security testing can detect template-injection flaws but does not itself implement neutralization controls.
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.
Controls that restrict unauthorized or malicious code from being introduced via external networks or removable media limit opportunities for an attacker to inject and execute arbitrary code.