Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:HSummary
CVE-2026-33504 is a high-severity SQL Injection (CWE-89) vulnerability in Ory Hydra. Its CVSS base score is 7.2 (High).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Exploit Public-Facing Application (T1190); ranked at the 28th 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-2026-33504 is a SQL injection vulnerability affecting Ory Hydra, an OAuth 2.0 Server and OpenID Connect Provider, in versions prior to 26.2.0. The flaw exists in the pagination implementation of the Admin APIs listOAuth2Clients, listOAuth2ConsentSessions, and listTrustedOAuth2JwtGrantIssuers. Pagination tokens are encrypted using the configured secret in secrets.pagination, or fall back to secrets.system if not set. This allows attackers who know the relevant secret to craft malicious tokens that inject SQL payloads.
An attacker with high privileges (PR:H per CVSS 3.1 score of 7.2) can exploit this if the affected Admin APIs are directly or indirectly accessible and they can pass a raw pagination token. By forging tokens with knowledge of secrets.pagination (if set) or secrets.system (if fallback), the attacker can execute arbitrary SQL queries, potentially compromising confidentiality, integrity, and availability (C:H/I:H/A:H) of the database.
The GitHub security advisory (GHSA-r9w3-57w2-gch2) recommends as a first defense configuring a custom, cryptographically secure random value for secrets.pagination immediately. The definitive mitigation is upgrading to Ory Hydra version 26.2.0, which addresses the pagination flaws.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2026-20070
Vulnerability Data
Ory Hydra is an OAuth 2.0 Server and OpenID Connect Provider. Prior to version 26.2.0, the listOAuth2Clients, listOAuth2ConsentSessions, and listTrustedOAuth2JwtGrantIssuers Admin APIs in Ory Hydra are vulnerable to SQL injection due to flaws in its pagination implementation. Pagination tokens are…
more
encrypted using the secret configured in `secrets.pagination`. If this value is not set, Hydra falls back to using `secrets.system`. An attacker who knows this secret can craft their own tokens, including malicious tokens that lead to SQL injection. This issue can be exploited when one or more admin APIs listed above are directly or indirectly accessible to the attacker; the attacker can pass a raw pagination token to the affected API; and the configuration value `secrets.pagination` is set and known to the attacker, or `secrets.pagination` is not set and `secrets.system` is known to the attacker. An attacker can execute arbitrary SQL queries through forged pagination tokens. As a first line of defense, immediately configure a custom value for `secrets.pagination` by generating a cryptographically secure random secret. Next, upgrade Hydra to the fixed version, 26.2.0 as soon as possible.
- 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.