Attack ChainAIDerived
Hypothetical attack flow derived from CVE metadata – not a confirmed exploit chain
-
AccessReach Guardium management interface
-
DeliverySubmit input with shell metacharacters
-
ExploitBypass improper input neutralization (CWE-78)
-
ExecutionExecute arbitrary OS commands
-
ImpactFull compromise of data-protection appliance
Vulnerability Assessment
| Weakness |
CWE
OWASP Top 10:2025
A05:2025 - Injection
ASVS 5.0
V1 - Encoding and Sanitization OS command sanitization, avoid shell exec
MITRE ATT&CK
2 techniques across 1 tactic: Execution The technique list with ATT&CK links and the kill-chain view is part of the Basic plan and up. |
| Exploitation Conditions | The only prerequisite stated by IBM is network reachability to IBM Guardium Data Protection 12.2.2 or 12.1 and the ability to supply input that reaches an OS command without neutralization of special elements (CWE-78); no non-default feature or configuration toggle is named in the description. The practical limiting factor is deployment context: Guardium is a data-security appliance normally placed on internal/management networks rather than internet-facing, substantially narrowing the realistic attacker population despite the AV:N rating. A secondary unresolved limit is authentication - CVSS asserts PR:N (none), but IBM's text does not confirm whether reaching the vulnerable command path requires a valid console/API session; defenders should verify this against IBM advisory node 7288832 before treating it as fully unauthenticated. |
| Impact | Signals are mixed. The CVSS 3.1 vector (AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N) describes a trivially exploitable, network-reachable, unauthenticated OS command injection with total technical impact (C:H/I:H/A:H), yielding a CRITICAL 9.8 - and SSVC agrees on Technical Impact: total. However, the forward-looking exploitation signals do NOT corroborate an emergency: EPSS is only 0.36% (28th percentile), the CVE is NOT in CISA KEV, no public exploit code is identified, and CISA SSVC records Exploitation: none and Automatable: no. The low EPSS and SSVC 'not automatable' rating are consistent with a product that is not mass-scanned on the open internet (Guardium is an internal database-activity-monitoring appliance), so despite the 9.8 this is better characterized as a high-value-but-not-yet-exploited patch-soon issue rather than a drop-everything actively-exploited threat. One tension to verify: CVSS marks PR:N (unauthenticated), yet the IBM description only says 'remote attacker' without confirming the authentication context - command-injection flaws in Guardium's management interface often require some authenticated access, so the true PR should be confirmed against IBM advisory node 7288832. A patch is available, which is the decisive mitigating fact. |
| Exploit ScenarioDerived | A remote attacker with network access to the Guardium Data Protection management interface submits input containing shell metacharacters into a field that is passed to an OS command without proper neutralization (CWE-78), causing arbitrary commands to execute on the appliance. Given AV:N/AC:L, no special timing or race is needed, but no public proof-of-concept exists and exploitation would require reachability to the appliance, which is typically deployed on internal/management networks. Successful exploitation yields full command execution with the privileges of the Guardium service. |
Get an e-mail when this CVE is exploited, patched or re-scored. Free account.
Alert meAnalysisAIv2 – Oct 14, 2026
OS command injection in IBM Guardium Data Protection 12.2.2 and 12.1 lets a remote attacker execute arbitrary operating-system commands with the privileges of the vulnerable service, yielding a full compromise of confidentiality, integrity, and availability (CVSS 9.8, CWE-78). The CVSS vector rates the flaw as unauthenticated (PR:N) over the network (AV:N) with no user interaction, although IBM's own text does not confirm whether a valid console or API session is needed to reach the vulnerable command path, and the practical risk is narrowed by the fact that Guardium appliances are normally deployed on internal management networks rather than being internet-facing. As of analysis, there is no public exploit code identified, EPSS is low at 0.36% (28th percentile), CISA SSVC records Exploitation: none with Automatable: no, and there is no KEV listing, so the dominant driver of urgency is the severity of impact if an attacker does obtain a path to the interface rather than observed exploitation.
Earlier versions of this analysis (1)
OS command injection in IBM Guardium Data Protection 12.2.2 and 12.1 lets unauthenticated remote attackers execute arbitrary commands on the underlying system, with a CVSS 3.1 base score of 8.1 (AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N, high confidentiality, integrity, and availability impact). Exploitation requires no credentials and no user interaction, but the high attack complexity means the attacker must satisfy conditions outside their control or craft a precise payload, so trivial opportunistic attacks are unlikely; no public exploit code has been identified at time of analysis and there is no KEV listing. The practical exposure limit is network reachability of the Guardium management interface, which in well-segmented deployments is confined to internal administrative networks.
RemediationAI
IBM has released a fix, referenced as a patch in the CVE record and available from the vendor; because the input does not specify an exact fix-pack or build number, administrators should obtain the precise patched level for their 12.2.2 or 12.1 deployment from IBM support node 7288832 (https://www.ibm.com/support/pages/node/7288832) and apply it after a normal change-control and backup cycle, since appliance upgrades can interrupt audit data collection and policy enforcement. If immediate patching is not possible, the highest-value compensating control is to eliminate the attack surface by restricting who can reach the Guardium web console and API: place the appliance on a dedicated management VLAN, firewall the management interfaces so only trusted administrator jump hosts and subnet ranges are permitted, and remove any internet or broad-intranet exposure, with the trade-off that remote administration and integration with external ticketing/SIEM tooling must be re-pointed through those permitted paths. Additionally, verify the authentication posture before assuming the flaw is exploitable without credentials, since IBM's advisory text does not confirm the PR:N claim in the CVSS vector, and enforce strong unique administrative credentials plus session logging on the appliance. Deploy network or host-based inspection that flags shell metacharacters such as semicolons, pipes, backticks, and command substitution sequences in requests to the Guardium management interface, and alert on unexpected child processes or shell invocations spawned by the appliance's web or API service, accepting that signature-based detection of command injection is prone to false negatives in obfuscated payloads. Monitor IBM's advisory page for any revision to affected versions or fix levels, and track EPSS/KEV status in case exploitation activity emerges.
Affected VersionsENISA
Affected Packages
Source: OSV (Open Source Vulnerabilities)
Affects your stack
Affects 1 package in euvd
Checking this CVE against your own stacks and servers is part of the Basic plan and up.
Technical ContextAI · show details
The root cause is CWE-78, improper neutralization of special elements used in an OS command, commonly called OS command injection. Somewhere in the Guardium Data Protection web console, REST API, or appliance management path, user-supplied input is concatenated into a shell command line without escaping shell metacharacters, so an attacker who can supply that input can append or substitute their own commands and have them run under the context of the affected service. Guardium is a database activity monitoring and data-protection appliance, typically handling audit traffic, policy enforcement, and privileged credentials for monitored databases, which is why a successful injection into it has outsized consequences even though the CVSS scope is unchanged (S:U). The CPE string cpe:2.3:a:ibm:guardium_data_protection:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:* is version-wildcarded, so precise build-level coverage must be taken from IBM advisory node 7288832 rather than from the CPE alone; the EUVD record (EUVD-2026-95331) explicitly enumerates 12.2.2 and 12.1 as the affected releases. CISA's SSVC decision point of Automatable: no is notable and suggests that, per that framework's inputs, the attack cannot be reliably scripted or driven at scale across targets, which is consistent with a low EPSS score and no observed exploitation.
Know when Guardium Data Protection gets its next vulnerability
- Watch products and get an email when something new is published
- Check this CVE against your own stack and servers
- Exploit and PoC references, threat intelligence from 22 sources
No credit card · 7-day full trial
Severity by source
AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
Network-reachable OS command injection with low complexity and no described auth or interaction; arbitrary command execution gives total C/I/A, though PR:N is uncertain and may be PR:L if console access is required.
Primary rating from Vendor (ibm).
CVSS VectorNVD
Lifecycle Timeline
3DescriptionNVD
IBM Guardium Data Protection 12.2.2, and 12.1 could allow a remote attacker to execute arbitrary commands due to improper neutralization of special elements used in an OS command.
Executive ViewAI
IBM Guardium Data Protection versions 12.2.2 and 12.1 carry a critical unauthenticated OS command injection flaw that would let a network attacker execute commands with the privileges of the Guardium service, handing over the very appliance that monitors and protects enterprise database activity. No public exploit code has been identified at time of analysis and these appliances normally sit on internal management networks, so exploitation would likely require an attacker who already has an internal foothold - but the consequence would be loss of visibility, integrity, and control over a core data-security system. Leadership should prioritize remediation because the affected product occupies a trusted position in the data protection architecture, and a compromise there undermines downstream compliance and monitoring assurances.
Apply vendor patch.
Threat Intelligence Overview
How this decision was reached
The engine reads each signal below and applies a fixed list of rules from top to bottom. The first rule that matches sets the recommended action – like a statement, every line is shown.
What every action level means
SSVC AssessmentENISA
Priority Score
Attack Technique
OS command injection occurs when an application passes unsanitized user input directly into system shell commands.
More in Guardium Data Protection
View allSQL injection in IBM Guardium Data Protection 12.2 allows a remote authenticated attacker to execute arbitrary SQL comma
Unauthenticated remote attackers can bypass security restrictions in IBM Guardium Data Protection 12.2 through the Chang
Missing authentication in the LoadBalancerServlet of IBM Guardium Data Protection 12.2 allows unauthenticated, network-r
Unauthenticated remote code execution in IBM Guardium Data Protection 12.2 lets a network attacker who can reach the app
Unauthenticated path traversal in IBM Guardium Data Protection 12.0, 12.1, and 12.2 can be leveraged by remote attackers
Unauthenticated insecure deserialization in the Change Audit System (CAS) listener of IBM Guardium Data Protection 12.2
Authentication bypass in IBM Guardium Data Protection 12.2 lets an unauthenticated remote attacker evade the IP-based ac
Missing authentication on a critical management function in IBM Guardium Data Protection 12.2 and 12.2.2 allows unauthen
Missing authentication in the edge-controller component of IBM Guardium Data Protection 12.1 and 12.2.2 allows unauthent
Unauthenticated SQL injection in IBM Guardium Data Protection 12.2 lets a remote attacker submit crafted input that is c
A heap-based buffer overflow in IBM Guardium Data Protection's S-TAP TrafficTap TDS login reassembly routine allows an u
Second-order SQL injection in IBM Guardium Data Protection 12.2 allows an unauthenticated remote attacker to submit SQL
EUVD-2026-95331
GHSA-wr2f-8qmg-xp64
NVD
CVE.org
EPSS
Vulnrichment
Exploit-DB