Raw vector
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/SC:H/SI:H/SA:H/E:X/CR:X/IR:X/AR:X/MAV:X/MAC:X/MAT:X/MPR:X/MUI:X/MVC:X/MVI:X/MVA:X/MSC:X/MSI:X/MSA:X/S:X/AU:X/R:X/V:X/RE:X/U:XSummary
CVE-2026-33660 is a critical-severity Code Injection (CWE-94) vulnerability in N8N N8N. Its CVSS base score is 9.4 (Critical).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Command and Scripting Interpreter (T1059); ranked in the top 42% of CVEs by exploit likelihood; 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-2026-33660 is a high-severity vulnerability (CVSS 8.8) affecting n8n, an open-source workflow automation platform, in versions prior to 2.14.1, 2.13.3, and 1.123.26. The flaw stems from insufficient sandboxing in the AlaSQL library used by the Merge node's "Combine by SQL" mode (CWE-94: Improper Control of Generation of Code, CWE-89: Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in an SQL Command). This allows authenticated users with permissions to create or modify workflows to craft SQL statements that bypass restrictions, enabling arbitrary local file reads on the n8n host and potentially leading to remote code execution.
An attacker requires low-privilege network access as an authenticated user (PR:L) with workflow creation or modification rights, making exploitation straightforward with no user interaction needed (AC:L, UI:N). Successful attacks can result in high confidentiality, integrity, and availability impacts (C:H/I:H/A:H), such as exfiltrating sensitive server files or fully compromising the n8n instance through RCE, without scope changes (S:U).
The n8n security advisory recommends upgrading to versions 2.14.1, 2.13.3, or 1.123.26 or later for full remediation. As temporary measures, administrators should restrict workflow creation and editing to fully trusted users only and/or disable the Merge node by setting the `NODES_EXCLUDE` environment variable to include `n8n-nodes-base.merge`. These workarounds are not comprehensive and serve only as short-term protections. Details are available in the advisory at https://github.com/n8n-io/n8n/security/advisories/GHSA-58qr-rcgv-642v.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2026-15942
Vulnerability Data
n8n is an open source workflow automation platform. Prior to versions 2.14.1, 2.13.3, and 1.123.26, an authenticated user with permission to create or modify workflows could use the Merge node's "Combine by SQL" mode to read local files on the…
more
n8n host and achieve remote code execution. The AlaSQL sandbox did not sufficiently restrict certain SQL statements, allowing an attacker to access sensitive files on the server or even compromise the instance. The issue has been fixed in n8n versions 2.14.1, 2.13.3, and 1.123.26. Users should upgrade to one of these versions or later to remediate the vulnerability. If upgrading is not immediately possible, administrators should consider the following temporary mitigations: Limit workflow creation and editing permissions to fully trusted users only, and/or disable the Merge node by adding `n8n-nodes-base.merge` to the `NODES_EXCLUDE` environment variable. These workarounds do not fully remediate the risk and should only be used as short-term mitigation measures.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
—
V6.2.5V1.3.1
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Developer testing and evaluation finds code paths that accept and execute externally influenced strings.
Input validation directly stops untrusted data from being used to construct executable code without neutralization.
Least privilege limits the damage an injected code fragment can perform once executed.
Requiring documented secure development standards and tools enforces use of safe code-generation APIs and escaping.
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.
PR.PS-06's SDLC practices directly target injection flaws via secure coding and testing (mostly), yet as a single broad outcome it leaves many code-generation specifics unaddressed (partial).
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.
PR.DS-10 protects runtime data confidentiality/integrity but has no bearing on neutralizing externally influenced input during code generation, so neither direction shows any preventive effect.
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.
Banning unapproved code samples and unauthenticated web services, combined with secure-coding standards and SAST, prevents the dynamic generation or inclusion of attacker-supplied code.
Controls that restrict unauthorized or malicious code from being introduced via external networks or removable media limit opportunities for an attacker to inject and execute arbitrary code.