CVE Vulnerabilities

CVE-2025-50688

Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in a Command ('Command Injection')

Published: Aug 05, 2025 | Modified: Aug 05, 2025
CVSS 3.x
N/A
Source:
NVD
CVSS 2.x
RedHat/V2
RedHat/V3
Ubuntu

A command injection vulnerability exists in TwistedWeb (version 14.0.0) due to improper input sanitization in the file upload functionality. An attacker can exploit this vulnerability by sending a specially crafted HTTP PUT request to upload a malicious file (e.g., a reverse shell script). Once uploaded, the attacker can trigger the execution of arbitrary commands on the target system, allowing for remote code execution. This could lead to escalation of privileges depending on the privileges of the web server process. The attack does not require physical access and can be conducted remotely, posing a significant risk to the confidentiality and integrity of the system.

Weakness

The product constructs all or part of a command using externally-influenced input from an upstream component, but it does not neutralize or incorrectly neutralizes special elements that could modify the intended command when it is sent to a downstream component.

Extended Description

Command injection vulnerabilities typically occur when:

Many protocols and products have their own custom command language. While OS or shell command strings are frequently discovered and targeted, developers may not realize that these other command languages might also be vulnerable to attacks. Command injection is a common problem with wrapper programs.

Potential Mitigations

  • Assume all input is malicious. Use an “accept known good” input validation strategy, i.e., use a list of acceptable inputs that strictly conform to specifications. Reject any input that does not strictly conform to specifications, or transform it into something that does.
  • When performing input validation, consider all potentially relevant properties, including length, type of input, the full range of acceptable values, missing or extra inputs, syntax, consistency across related fields, and conformance to business rules. As an example of business rule logic, “boat” may be syntactically valid because it only contains alphanumeric characters, but it is not valid if the input is only expected to contain colors such as “red” or “blue.”
  • Do not rely exclusively on looking for malicious or malformed inputs. This is likely to miss at least one undesirable input, especially if the code’s environment changes. This can give attackers enough room to bypass the intended validation. However, denylists can be useful for detecting potential attacks or determining which inputs are so malformed that they should be rejected outright.

References