Raw vector
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:P/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-2026-41304 is a high-severity Command Injection (CWE-77) vulnerability in Wwbn Avideo. Its CVSS base score is 8.9 (High).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Command and Scripting Interpreter (T1059); ranked in the top 19% of CVEs by exploit likelihood; 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 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.
WWBN AVideo is an open source video platform that contains a command injection vulnerability in versions 29.0 and below. The flaw resides in the cloneServer.json.php endpoint of the CloneSite plugin, which constructs shell commands by directly concatenating unsanitized user input from the url parameter into a wget command executed via exec(). This allows an attacker to break out of the intended URL context using shell metacharacters such as semicolons, resulting in arbitrary command execution on the server. The issue is tracked under CWE-77 and carries a CVSS 4.0 score of 8.9.
Unauthenticated remote attackers can exploit the endpoint over the network without authentication or user interaction to achieve full remote code execution, gaining the ability to run arbitrary shell commands on the affected server.
The vulnerability is fixed in commit 473c609fc2defdea8b937b00e86ce88eba1f15bb, with details published in the associated GitHub security advisory GHSA-xr6f-h4x7-r6qp.
The EPSS score reached a peak of 0.0131 from a current value of 0.0065, indicating limited but observable post-disclosure interest.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2026-24578
Vulnerability Data
WWBN AVideo is an open source video platform. In versions 29.0 and below, the `cloneServer.json.php` endpoint in the CloneSite plugin constructs shell commands using user-controlled input (`url` parameter) without proper sanitization. The input is directly concatenated into a `wget` command…
more
executed via `exec()`, allowing command injection. An attacker can inject arbitrary shell commands by breaking out of the intended URL context using shell metacharacters (e.g., `;`). This leads to Remote Code Execution (RCE) on the server. Commit 473c609fc2defdea8b937b00e86ce88eba1f15bb contains a fix.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
—
V1.2.3V1.2.5V1.2.8V1.2.9
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Developer testing and evaluation can discover command-construction flaws before deployment.
Input validation directly stops construction of commands from untrusted data containing special elements.
Secure engineering principles include proper neutralization and safe command construction practices.
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 neutralization that prevent command injection.
Runtime monitoring of software and data can detect anomalous command execution resulting from injection.
Identifying recorded vulnerabilities enables remediation of command-injection flaws before exploitation.
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.
Secure coding standards require proper escaping and parameterization of commands, directly eliminating CWE-77.
Security testing in development catches command-injection vulnerabilities before release.
Secure development life cycle mandates input validation and command construction practices that directly prevent command injection.
Application security requirements explicitly call for controls against injection flaws including command injection.
Secure architecture principles reduce the attack surface but do not prescribe the specific neutralization techniques needed.
Environment separation limits the blast radius of an exploited command injection but does not prevent the flaw itself.