Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:L/A:LCVSS and EPSS are reproduced from their sources (NVD, FIRST EPSS). Risk Priority is our own derived reading, not an NVD score.
Summary
CVE-2026-31952 is a high-severity SQL Injection (CWE-89) vulnerability in Xibosignage Xibo. Its CVSS base score is 7.6 (High).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Exploit Public-Facing Application (T1190); ranked at the 32th 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-2026-31952 is an SQL injection vulnerability in the API routes responsible for filtering DataSets within the Xibo content management system (CMS), part of the open-source Xibo digital signage platform that includes a web CMS and Windows display player software. The flaw affects Xibo CMS versions 1.7 through 4.4.0 and is classified under CWE-89 (SQL Injection) and CWE-184 (Incomplete List of Disallowed Inputs).
An authenticated user with either the "Access to DataSet Feature" privilege or the "Access to the Layout Feature" privilege can exploit this vulnerability over the network with low complexity and no user interaction required. By injecting specially crafted values into the API filter parameter, the attacker can obtain sensitive data from the Xibo database and modify arbitrary data, potentially leading to high confidentiality impact, low integrity and availability impacts, as reflected in the CVSS v3.1 base score of 7.6 (AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:L/A:L).
Advisories recommend upgrading to Xibo CMS version 4.4.1, which remediates the issue. Customers hosting their CMS with Xibo Signage on versions 4.4, 4.3, 3.3, 2.3, or 1.8 have already been patched. Patches are also available for out-of-support versions 3.3, 2.3, and 1.8, with relevant fixes detailed in GitHub commits and the security advisory GHSA-rq92-f6fv-3629.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2026-25357
Vulnerability Data
Xibo is an open source digital signage platform with a web content management system and Windows display player software. Versions 1.7 through 4.4.0 have an SQL injection vulnerability in the API routes inside the CMS responsible for Filtering DataSets. This…
more
allows an authenticated user to to obtain and modify arbitrary data from the Xibo database by injecting specially crafted values in to the API filter parameter. Exploitation of the vulnerability is possible on behalf of an authorized user who has either of the `Access to DataSet Feature` privilege or the `Access to the Layout Feature` privilege. Users should upgrade to version 4.4.1 which fixes this issue. Customers who host their CMS with Xibo Signage have been patched if they are using 4.4, 4.3, 3.3, 2.3 or 1.8. Upgrading to a fixed version is necessary to remediate. Patches are available for earlier versions of Xibo CMS that are out of support, namely 3.3, 2.3, and 1.8.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
- 2 hardening rules · 1 OS baseline
V3.5.2V4.4.2V16.2.5V6.2.5
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.
Language-specific secure coding rules, peer review and SAST together prevent the construction of SQL statements from untrusted data without proper parameterization or escaping.
created from the owner's anchor; an owner grade is a row and does not wait for an instrument (Mythos 2026-09-29T15:58Z).