CVE-2026-12542 in Foreman
Summary
by MITRE • 10/01/2026
A flaw was found in Foreman. The foreman-tail utility is vulnerable to OS command injection due to the unsafe use of the eval command. The script takes user-supplied arguments and incorporates them directly into a string that is then executed by eval to expand file paths. Because the input is not sanitized or quoted, a local attacker can inject shell metacharacters (e.g., ;, &, |) to execute arbitrary system commands.
If you want to get the best quality for vulnerability data then you always have to consider VulDB.
Analysis
by VulDB Data Team • 10/01/2026
The vulnerability identified in Foreman centers on a critical implementation flaw within the foreman-tail utility, specifically involving the unsafe invocation of the eval command for processing file paths. This security defect arises from a fundamental failure in input validation and sanitization practices during script execution. The application accepts user-supplied arguments intended to specify log files or similar resources but fails to properly escape or quote these inputs before incorporating them into dynamic code strings. Instead of using safer alternatives such as direct array passing or strict variable expansion, the utility relies on eval to interpret the constructed string as executable shell code. This architectural choice introduces a significant attack surface because it treats untrusted data as part of the command structure rather than as mere parameters for file system operations.
From a technical perspective, this flaw constitutes an OS Command Injection vulnerability, which is formally categorized under CWE-78 in the Common Weakness Enumeration standard. The core issue lies in the lack of boundary enforcement between user input and executable commands. When the foreman-tail utility processes arguments containing shell metacharacters such as semicolons, ampersands, or pipes, these characters are interpreted by the underlying shell environment rather than being treated as literal filename components. This allows a local attacker to break out of the intended file path context and inject arbitrary commands into the execution pipeline. The severity is exacerbated by the fact that eval executes code with the privileges of the user running the script, potentially granting access to sensitive system resources or enabling further lateral movement within the environment if higher-privileged accounts are involved in log monitoring tasks.
The operational impact of this vulnerability allows for remote code execution at the local level, assuming an attacker has sufficient permissions to invoke the foreman-tail utility with crafted arguments. In a typical Foreman deployment, which manages infrastructure automation and provisioning, such utilities often run with elevated privileges or access sensitive configuration files. An adversary exploiting this flaw could execute arbitrary commands on the host system, leading to data exfiltration, modification of critical configurations, installation of persistent backdoors, or complete compromise of the management server. This aligns with techniques observed in the MITRE ATT&CK framework under Command and Scripting Interpreter categories, particularly those involving local command execution through injection flaws. The ability to execute arbitrary code undermines the integrity and confidentiality guarantees provided by the Foreman platform, potentially exposing sensitive infrastructure data stored or processed on the managed nodes.
Mitigation strategies must address both immediate remediation and long-term secure coding practices. Administrators should immediately apply vendor-provided patches that update the foreman-tail utility to versions where this vulnerability has been resolved through proper input sanitization and the removal of unsafe eval usage. In environments where patching is not instantly feasible, restricting access to the foreman-tail binary via file system permissions can limit exposure to trusted users only. Furthermore, implementing strict input validation that rejects or escapes shell metacharacters before they reach the execution layer provides a defensive barrier against injection attempts. Development teams should adopt secure coding guidelines that prohibit the use of eval for processing user-controlled data and instead utilize language-specific features designed for safe command construction. Regular security audits focusing on dynamic code evaluation patterns can help identify similar vulnerabilities across other components of the Foreman ecosystem, ensuring robust protection against command injection attacks in future releases.