Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:HSummary
CVE-2026-27626 is a critical-severity OS Command Injection (CWE-78) vulnerability in Olivetin Olivetin. 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 43th 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-2026-27626 is an OS command injection vulnerability (CWE-78) in OliveTin, a web interface for executing predefined shell commands, affecting versions up to and including 3000.10.0. The flaw stems from two independent vectors in shell mode. The first involves the `checkShellArgumentSafety` function, which blocks several dangerous argument types but fails to sanitize `password`-typed arguments, allowing injection of shell metacharacters. The second vector bypasses type safety checks entirely when processing JSON values extracted from unauthenticated webhooks before they reach `sh -c` execution.
Any authenticated user—who can register by default or access instances with `authType: none` enabled by default—can exploit the first vector to execute arbitrary OS commands on the OliveTin host with the process's permissions. The second vector enables unauthenticated remote code execution (RCE) if the instance receives webhooks from external sources, a common OliveTin configuration. Combining both vectors allows unauthenticated RCE on any OliveTin instance using shell mode with webhook-triggered actions. The vulnerability carries a CVSS v3.1 score of 9.9 (AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H).
The primary advisory, published on GitHub at https://github.com/OliveTin/OliveTin/security/advisories/GHSA-49gm-hh7w-wfvf, details the vectors but notes that no patched version was available as of the CVE publication date on 2026-02-25. Security practitioners should monitor for updates from the OliveTin project and consider disabling shell mode, webhooks, or default registration until mitigation is released.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2026-8600
Vulnerability Data
OliveTin gives access to predefined shell commands from a web interface. In versions up to and including 3000.10.0, OliveTin's shell mode safety check (`checkShellArgumentSafety`) blocks several dangerous argument types but not `password`. A user supplying a `password`-typed argument can inject…
more
shell metacharacters that execute arbitrary OS commands. A second independent vector allows unauthenticated RCE via webhook-extracted JSON values that skip type safety checks entirely before reaching `sh -c`. When exploiting vector 1, any authenticated user (registration enabled by default, `authType: none` by default) can execute arbitrary OS commands on the OliveTin host with the permissions of the OliveTin process. When exploiting vector 2, an unauthenticated attacker can achieve the same if the instance receives webhooks from external sources, which is a primary OliveTin use case. When an attacker exploits both vectors, this results in unauthenticated RCE on any OliveTin instance using Shell mode with webhook-triggered actions. As of time of publication, a patched version is not available.
- 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.