CVE-2026-33148
Tandoor Recipes ≤ 2.6.0
Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:HSummary
CVE-2026-33148 is a medium-severity Injection (CWE-74) vulnerability in Tandoor Recipes. Its CVSS base score is 6.5 (Medium).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Application or System Exploitation (T1499.004); ranked at the 38th 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 SC-5 (Denial-of-service Protection) and SI-10 (Information Input Validation) — see the control section below for these in your framework.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2026-16311
Vulnerability Data
Tandoor Recipes is an application for managing recipes, planning meals, and building shopping lists. In versions prior to 2.6.0, the FDC (USDA FoodData Central) search endpoint constructs an upstream API URL by directly interpolating the user-supplied `query` parameter into the…
more
URL string without URL-encoding. An attacker can inject additional URL parameters by including `&` characters in the query value. This allows overriding the API key, manipulating upstream query behavior, and causing server crashes (HTTP 500) via malformed requests — a Denial of Service condition. Version 2.6.0 patches the issue.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise TechniquesAI
Why these techniques?
Parameter injection enables direct application crashes resulting in DoS via exploitation.
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Requires validation and encoding of the user-supplied query parameter before URL interpolation, directly blocking the parameter-injection vector that leads to API-key override and DoS.
Mandates protection mechanisms that limit the impact of malformed upstream requests, preventing the crafted query strings from causing server crashes (HTTP 500).
Ensures graceful error handling for invalid inputs instead of allowing unencoded query values to trigger unhandled exceptions and service-denial conditions.
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 validation and output encoding that prevent injection flaws.
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 catches injection vulnerabilities before release.
Logging supports detection of injection attempts but does not prevent the weakness.
Monitoring activities can identify active injection attacks after they occur.
Secure development life cycle mandates input validation and output encoding that directly prevent injection flaws.
Application security requirements explicitly call for controls against injection attacks in software design.
Secure architecture principles reduce injection surfaces but do not prescribe specific neutralization techniques.