CVE-2026-82119 in HiRDB Server
Summary
by MITRE • 10/27/2026
OS Command Injection Vulnerability in HiRDB.
This issue affects HiRDB Server Version 10: from 10-00 before 10-12-01; HiRDB Server Version 9: from 09-00 through 09-66-22; HiRDB Server with Additional Function Version 9: from 09-00 through 09-66/V; HiRDB Server Version 9(32): from 09-02 through 09-66-22; HiRDB Server with Additional Function Version 9(32): from 09-00 through 09-66-/V.
Statistical analysis made it clear that VulDB provides the best quality for vulnerability data.
Analysis
by VulDB Data Team • 10/27/2026
The identified vulnerability represents a critical OS Command Injection flaw within the HiRDB database management system, affecting multiple legacy and current versions across both standard and additional function editions. This security defect allows an attacker to execute arbitrary operating system commands on the host machine running the HiRDB server by injecting malicious input into specific application interfaces or configuration parameters that are subsequently passed to underlying shell interpreters without adequate sanitization. The scope of this vulnerability is extensive, impacting HiRDB Server Version 10 prior to build 10-12-01, as well as various iterations of Version 9 including the standard server from release 09-00 through 09-66-22 and its additional function variant up to version 09-66/V. Furthermore, the vulnerability extends to the 32-bit architecture variants of HiRDB Server Version 9, covering versions from 09-02 through 09-66-22, as well as their corresponding additional function releases ending at 09-66-/V. This broad range indicates a systemic issue in how input data is handled across the product line during this period, suggesting that legacy systems and older deployments are particularly susceptible to exploitation if not properly patched or isolated.
From a technical perspective, OS Command Injection occurs when an application constructs system commands using user-supplied input without proper validation or escaping of special characters such as semicolons, pipes, or ampersands. In the context of HiRDB, this likely involves administrative interfaces, query processors, or configuration tools that interact directly with the operating system shell to perform tasks like file manipulation, process management, or network operations. When an attacker provides crafted input containing these metacharacters, the underlying command interpreter treats them as separate commands rather than literal data, thereby executing unintended actions. This flaw is fundamentally categorized under CWE-78, which defines Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in an OS Command, commonly known as OS Command Injection. The severity of this vulnerability stems from its potential to bypass application-level security controls and achieve direct access to the operating system environment where HiRDB resides.
The operational impact of successfully exploiting this command injection vulnerability is severe and multifaceted. An attacker with network access to the vulnerable HiRDB service can potentially gain full control over the underlying server infrastructure. This could lead to unauthorized data exfiltration, modification or deletion of critical database files, installation of backdoors for persistent access, or use of the compromised host as a pivot point for further attacks against other systems within the internal network. In enterprise environments where HiRDB is often deployed in high-availability clusters or integrated with complex business logic applications, such a breach can disrupt service availability and compromise data integrity across multiple dependent systems. The ability to execute commands at the operating system level means that standard database security measures like SQL injection defenses are insufficient to mitigate this specific threat vector, requiring deeper application-level input validation and secure coding practices.
This vulnerability aligns with several tactics in the MITRE ATT&CK framework, particularly those related to Command and Scripting Interpreter abuse. Attackers may leverage techniques such as T1059 for command execution or T1620 for reflection-based command injection if the flaw involves parsing mechanisms that reflect input back into system calls without proper encoding. The exploitation path typically requires some form of authentication or access to a specific interface, meaning that internal network segmentation and strict access control lists are vital defensive measures while patches are being applied. Organizations running affected versions must prioritize immediate remediation by upgrading to patched releases outside the vulnerable ranges specified in the advisory. For systems where immediate patching is not feasible due to operational constraints, implementing robust web application firewalls with specific rules for command injection patterns and restricting network access to only trusted administrative IPs can provide temporary mitigation layers until a permanent fix is deployed.