Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:NSummary
CVE-2026-29096 is a high-severity SQL Injection (CWE-89) vulnerability in Suitecrm Suitecrm. Its CVSS base score is 8.1 (High).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Exploit Public-Facing Application (T1190); ranked at the 24th 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-2026-29096 is a second-order SQL injection vulnerability in SuiteCRM, an open-source enterprise Customer Relationship Management (CRM) software application. The issue affects versions prior to 7.15.1 and 8.9.3, specifically in the AOR_Reports module. When creating or editing a report, the `field_function` parameter from POST data is saved directly into the `aor_fields` table without validation. Subsequently, when the report is executed or viewed, this value is concatenated directly into a SQL SELECT query without sanitization, enabling the injection.
Any authenticated user with access to the Reports module can exploit this vulnerability. By injecting malicious SQL payloads into the `field_function` parameter during report creation or editing, attackers can extract arbitrary database contents, including password hashes, API tokens, and configuration values. On MySQL instances where the database user has FILE privileges, attackers could achieve remote code execution via SELECT INTO OUTFILE. The vulnerability has a CVSS v3.1 base score of 8.1 (AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N) and is associated with CWE-89.
SuiteCRM versions 7.15.1 and 8.9.3 address the vulnerability by patching the validation and sanitization issues in the AOR_Reports module. Security practitioners should upgrade to these versions immediately. Additional details are available in the SuiteCRM 7.15.x release documentation at https://docs.suitecrm.com/admin/releases/7.15.x and the GitHub security advisory at https://github.com/SuiteCRM/SuiteCRM/security/advisories/GHSA-vh42-gmqm-q55m.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2026-13351
Vulnerability Data
SuiteCRM is an open-source, enterprise-ready Customer Relationship Management (CRM) software application. Prior to versions 7.15.1 and 8.9.3, when creating or editing a report (AOR_Reports module), the `field_function` parameter from POST data is saved directly into the `aor_fields` table without any…
more
validation. Later, when the report is executed/viewed, this value is concatenated directly into a SQL SELECT query without sanitization, enabling second-order SQL injection. Any authenticated user with Reports access can extract arbitrary database contents (password hashes, API tokens, config values). On MySQL with FILE privilege, this could lead to RCE via SELECT INTO OUTFILE. Versions 7.15.1 and 8.9.3 patch the issue.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
—
V6.2.5
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Developer testing and evaluation can discover SQLi flaws before deployment but does not stop their introduction.
Input validation directly stops untrusted data from reaching SQL query construction without neutralization.
Secure engineering principles require parameterized queries and input sanitization that structurally eliminate SQLi.
System monitoring can identify attempted SQLi exploitation via anomalous queries after the weakness exists.
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 target injection flaws during coding and review so largely prevent CWE-89 introduction, yet the single broad outcome leaves residual risk from incomplete neutralization techniques or missed edge cases.
Training raises developer awareness of SQLi risks and can reduce introduction likelihood (partial) but removes none of the actual coding flaw's risk by itself since technical neutralization is still required.
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.
The same secure-coding and static-analysis activities surface missing neutralization of SQL metacharacters before the system is accepted.
Early warnings and shared best-practice information help organizations apply the latest remediation techniques against SQL-injection vulnerabilities.
Threat-intelligence feeds that surface new SQL-injection campaigns enable rapid updates to query-construction defenses and detection signatures before exploitation occurs.
Secure-coding rules and security testing phases mandate the use of parameterized queries or equivalent escaping, preventing the construction of dynamic SQL statements from untrusted input.
Language-specific secure coding rules, peer review and SAST together prevent the construction of SQL statements from untrusted data without proper parameterization or escaping.