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-2026-28370 is a critical-severity Eval Injection (CWE-95) vulnerability in Openstack Vitrage. Its CVSS base score is 9.1 (Critical).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique JavaScript (T1059.007); ranked in the top 47% of CVEs by exploit likelihood; 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-2026-28370 is a code injection vulnerability (CWE-95) in the query parser of OpenStack Vitrage versions before 12.0.1, 13.0.0, 14.0.0, and 15.0.0. It affects the _create_query_function method in vitrage/graph/query.py, where a user with access to the Vitrage API can trigger arbitrary code execution on the Vitrage service host. All deployments exposing the Vitrage API are vulnerable, 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).
An authenticated user with high privileges (PR:H) who can access the Vitrage API over the network can exploit this flaw with low complexity and no user interaction required. Successful exploitation executes code on the Vitrage service host under the privileges of the service's running user, potentially granting unauthorized access to the host system and enabling further compromise of the Vitrage service itself.
Advisories recommend upgrading to OpenStack Vitrage 12.0.1, 13.0.0, 14.0.0, or 15.0.0, where the vulnerability is addressed. Additional details are available in the OpenStack storyboard at https://storyboard.openstack.org/#!/story/2011539, the OSS-security mailing list at http://www.openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2026/03/03/6, and the affected code at https://github.com/openstack/vitrage/blob/a1f86950e1314b0c740f9cd9b7e9dbab7d02af51/vitrage/graph/query.py#L70.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2026-8999
Vulnerability Data
In the query parser in OpenStack Vitrage before 12.0.1, 13.0.0, 14.0.0, and 15.0.0, a user allowed to access the Vitrage API may trigger code execution on the Vitrage service host as the user the Vitrage service runs under. This may…
more
result in unauthorized access to the host and further compromise of the Vitrage service. All deployments exposing the Vitrage API are affected. This occurs in _create_query_function in vitrage/graph/query.py.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
—
V1.3.2
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Developer testing and code analysis can discover eval-injection flaws but does not stop their introduction.
Input validation explicitly requires neutralizing untrusted data before it reaches dynamic evaluation constructs such as eval.
Secure-development standards and tools can mandate safe coding patterns that avoid unsafe dynamic evaluation.
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.
Secure SDLC practices directly require input neutralization and avoidance of unsafe dynamic evaluation.
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 in development can detect eval injection vulnerabilities before deployment.
Secure development life cycle mandates input validation and safe coding practices that directly prevent eval injection.
Application security requirements include rules against dynamic code execution of untrusted input.
Secure architecture principles discourage unsafe dynamic evaluation constructs.
Secure coding explicitly requires neutralization of input before dynamic evaluation, directly mitigating eval injection.