Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:HSummary
CVE-2026-27574 is a critical-severity Code Injection (CWE-94) vulnerability in Hackerbay Oneuptime. Its CVSS base score is 9.9 (Critical).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Command and Scripting Interpreter (T1059); ranked at the 41th percentile by exploit likelihood (below the median); it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog; a public proof-of-concept is referenced.
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-2026-27574 affects OneUptime, an open-source solution for monitoring and managing online services, specifically in versions 9.5.13 and below. The vulnerability resides in the custom JavaScript monitor feature, which relies on Node.js's node:vm module—explicitly documented as not intended for security—to execute user-supplied code. This design flaw enables a trivial sandbox escape using a well-known one-liner, granting attackers full access to the underlying probe process.
Any anonymous user can exploit this vulnerability due to OneUptime's default open registration, which allows creation of monitors at the lowest ProjectMember role with low privileges required (PR:L). By supplying malicious JavaScript during monitor creation, attackers can escape the sandbox in seconds. The probe process runs with host networking privileges and exposes all cluster credentials—including ONEUPTIME_SECRET, DATABASE_PASSWORD, REDIS_PASSWORD, and CLICKHOUSE_PASSWORD—in environment variables, enabling full cluster compromise with confidentiality, integrity, and availability impacts (CVSS 9.9: AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H; CWE-94).
The OneUptime security advisory (GHSA-v264-xqh4-9xmm) and corresponding fix in commit 7f9ed4d43945574702a26b7c206e38cc344fe427 confirm the issue was resolved in version 10.0.5. Security practitioners should upgrade to 10.0.5 or later and review configurations to disable open registration where possible.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2026-7709
Vulnerability Data
OneUptime is a solution for monitoring and managing online services. In versions 9.5.13 and below, custom JavaScript monitor feature uses Node.js's node:vm module (explicitly documented as not a security mechanism) to execute user-supplied code, allowing trivial sandbox escape via a…
more
well-known one-liner that grants full access to the underlying process. Because the probe runs with host networking and holds all cluster credentials (ONEUPTIME_SECRET, DATABASE_PASSWORD, REDIS_PASSWORD, CLICKHOUSE_PASSWORD) in its environment variables, and monitor creation is available to the lowest role (ProjectMember) with open registration enabled by default, any anonymous user can achieve full cluster compromise in about 30 seconds. This issue has been fixed in version 10.0.5.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
—
V1.3.1
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.
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.
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.