CVE-2026-85475
Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:HCVSS and EPSS are reproduced from their sources (NVD, FIRST EPSS). Risk Priority is our own derived reading, not an NVD score.
Summary
CVE-2026-85475 is a high-severity Static Code Injection (CWE-96) vulnerability. Its CVSS base score is 7.2 (High).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Embedded Payloads (T1027.009); ranked at the 35th 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 SA-8 (Security and Privacy Engineering Principles) — see the control section below for these in your framework.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2026-85607
Vulnerability Data
A flaw was found in the Ansible Automation Platform automation controller. The external logging (rsyslog) configuration is generated by interpolating user-controlled settings — LOG_AGGREGATOR_HOST, LOG_AGGREGATOR_MAX_DISK_USAGE_PATH and LOG_AGGREGATOR_RSYSLOGD_ERROR_LOG_FILE — into an rsyslog RainerScript config file without neutralizing RainerScript syntax. A privileged…
more
(superuser) user can inject rsyslog directives, including an omprog action, causing arbitrary command execution inside the control-plane rsyslog component. This allows disclosure of the controller SECRET_KEY and database credentials, decryption of all stored credentials, and full compromise of the control plane.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
—
V1.3.2
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Developer testing and evaluation can discover missing neutralization of directives in saved code artifacts.
Engineering principles include secure input handling and neutralization requirements that structurally avoid static injection.
Input validation directly stops unneutralized directives from being inserted into static code resources.
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 neutralization to block static code injection into templates, configs, or libraries.
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 development life cycle mandates input validation and sanitization that directly prevents static code injection.
Application security requirements include rules for neutralizing untrusted input before it is stored in executable resources.
Secure architecture principles reduce injection surfaces but do not prescribe the specific neutralization techniques.
Secure coding explicitly requires proper neutralization of directives in templates, libraries and configuration files.
Security testing in development and acceptance will detect static code injection but does not prevent it at the source.
Change management can catch unsafe code changes but does not enforce input neutralization.