CVE-2025-27378VulnerabilityPublished 22 Jan 2026

CVE-2025-27378: Altium AES · SQL Injection

Affects Altium AESSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 8.6 High : upgrade to 7.0.6 soon.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 06:26 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

8.6High

How severe the flaw is on the 0–10 CVSS scale.

EPSS: 0.3% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 32% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.
Patch: Available – fixed in 7.0.6

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:L/A:L

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: None
User Interaction: None
Scope: Unchanged
Confidentiality: High
Integrity: Low
Availability: Low

Bold values are the worst case: easiest to exploit or largest impact.

Attack Vector: Network: The vulnerable component is bound to the network stack and the set of possible attackers extends beyond the other options listed, up to and including the entire Internet. Such a vulnerability is often termed 'remotely exploitable' and can be thought of as an attack being exploitable at the protocol level one or more network hops away (e.g., across one or more routers).
Attack Complexity: Low: Specialized access conditions or extenuating circumstances do not exist. An attacker can expect repeatable success against the vulnerable component.
Privileges Required: None: The attacker is unauthorized prior to attack, and therefore does not require any access to settings or files to carry out an attack.
User Interaction: None: The vulnerable system can be exploited without any interaction from any user.
Scope: Unchanged: An exploited vulnerability can only affect resources managed by the same security authority. In this case, the vulnerable component and the impacted component are either the same, or both are managed by the same security authority.
Confidentiality: High: There is total loss of confidentiality, resulting in all resources within the impacted component being divulged to the attacker. Alternatively, access to only some restricted information is obtained, but the disclosed information presents a direct, serious impact.
Integrity: Low: Modification of data is possible, but the attacker does not have control over the consequence of a modification, or the amount of modification is limited. The data modification does not have a direct, serious impact on the impacted component.
Availability: Low: Performance is reduced or there are interruptions in resource availability. Even if repeated exploitation of the vulnerability is possible, the attacker does not have the ability to completely deny service to legitimate users. The resources in the impacted component are either partially available all of the time, or fully available only some of the time, but overall there is no direct, serious consequence to the impacted component.

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v3.1 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 22 Jan 2026
Detectable: no evidence on record.
No public nuclei template indexed
Weaponised: no evidence on record.
No public exploit code indexed in Metasploit or Exploit-DB
Exploited in the wildExploited: no evidence on record.
Not in CISA KEV and no source reports exploitation
Observed by OffSeq MirageSeen by Mirage: no evidence on record.
No attack traffic recorded by OffSeq Mirage sensors

A missing step is not evidence of safety. Sources: cve.org (opens in a new tab), the Metasploit, Exploit-DB and nuclei-templates index as of 2026-10-26.

Disclosed: The CVE record is public on cve.org. Its publication is t = 0.
Detectable: A public nuclei template can find exposed instances, for defenders and attackers alike.
Weaponised: Public exploit code exists in Metasploit or Exploit-DB, or CISA SSVC reports a public proof of concept.
Exploited in the wild: CISA KEV lists it, CISA SSVC rates exploitation active, or a source reports attacks.
Observed by OffSeq Mirage: OffSeq Mirage honeypot sensors recorded attack traffic for this CVE, or found exposed hosts without attack traffic.

Moments are spaced evenly, not to scale; a dashed line marks a gap of six months or more. Deltas count from t = 0. Sources that give only a date (CISA KEV, Exploit-DB, or a time of exactly 00:00Z) read “same day” rather than hours. Metasploit modules carry the flaw’s disclosure date, not their release date, and nuclei templates carry no date, so both appear above but not on the timeline.

What to do

Upgrade Altium AES to 7.0.6.

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
AltiumAES	Affected >=7.0.3 <7.0.6	Fixed in 7.0.6

AI-suggested

Immediate mitigation should focus on enabling the correct configuration that activates the latest SQL parsing logic within Altium AES 7.0.3 to prevent improper input handling. Organizations should audit their AES deployments to verify configuration settings and restrict network access to AES management interfaces using firewalls or VPNs. Monitoring and logging SQL queries and application behavior can help detect suspicious activity indicative of exploitation attempts. Additionally, implementing Web Application Firewalls (WAFs) with SQL injection detection rules can provide an additional layer of defense. Conducting regular security assessments and penetration testing focused on injection flaws will help identify residual risks. Finally, ensure backups of critical data are maintained and tested for recovery to mitigate potential data loss or corruption.

Description

CVE-2025-27378 is a high-severity SQL injection vulnerability in Altium AES version 7.0.3 caused by an inactive configuration that disables the latest SQL parsing logic. This flaw allows unauthenticated remote attackers to inject and execute arbitrary SQL queries, potentially compromising confidentiality, integrity, and availability of the affected system. The vulnerability requires no user interaction and can be exploited over the network, making it highly accessible. Although no known exploits are currently reported in the wild, the ease of exploitation and impact severity warrant immediate attention. European organizations using Altium AES 7.0.3, especially in critical infrastructure or manufacturing sectors, are at risk. Mitigation involves enabling the correct configuration to activate the updated SQL parsing logic or applying vendor patches once available.

Impact

For European organizations, especially those in sectors relying on Altium AES for electronic design and manufacturing, this vulnerability poses a significant risk. Exploitation could lead to unauthorized access to sensitive design data, intellectual property theft, or manipulation of critical configuration databases. This could disrupt production lines, cause financial losses, and damage reputations. The ability to execute arbitrary SQL queries may also allow attackers to pivot within networks, escalating attacks to other systems. Given the network-based exploitation and no authentication requirement, attackers can target exposed AES instances directly, increasing the threat surface. Industries such as automotive, aerospace, and electronics manufacturing, which are prominent in countries like Germany, France, and the UK, could face operational disruptions and compliance violations under GDPR if personal or sensitive data is compromised.

Summary

CVE-2025-27378 identifies a SQL injection vulnerability in Altium AES version 7.0.3, a product widely used for electronic design automation. The root cause is an inactive configuration setting that prevents the application of the latest SQL parsing logic designed to sanitize and validate SQL inputs properly. Without this configuration enabled, the system improperly handles crafted input, allowing attackers to inject malicious SQL commands. This can lead to unauthorized data access, modification, or deletion, impacting confidentiality, integrity, and availability. The vulnerability is remotely exploitable without authentication or user interaction, increasing its risk profile. The CVSS 3.1 score of 8.6 reflects its high impact, with network attack vector, low attack complexity, no privileges required, and no user interaction needed. Although no public exploits are currently known, the vulnerability's nature suggests it could be leveraged for data exfiltration or disruption of services. The CWE identifiers CWE-89 (SQL Injection) and CWE-20 (Improper Input Validation) highlight the underlying coding and configuration issues. The lack of a patch at the time of publication emphasizes the need for immediate configuration changes or vendor updates once released.

CWE-89Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in an SQL Command ('SQL Injection') (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessLikelihood of exploit: HighCWE Top 25 (2025): #2OWASP Top 10 A05:2025: Injection (opens in a new tab)
The product constructs all or part of an SQL command using externally-influenced input from an upstream component, but it does not neutralize or incorrectly neutralizes special elements that could modify the intended SQL command when it is sent to a downstream component. Without sufficient removal or quoting of SQL syntax in user-controllable inputs, the generated SQL query can cause those inputs to be interpreted as SQL instead of ordinary user data.
Architecture and Design · Libraries or Frameworks
Use a vetted library or framework that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid.
Architecture and Design · Parameterization
If available, use structured mechanisms that automatically enforce the separation between data and code. These mechanisms may be able to provide the relevant quoting, encoding, and validation automatically, instead of relying on the developer to provide this capability at every point where output is generated.
Architecture and Design · Operation · Environment Hardening
Run your code using the lowest privileges that are required to accomplish the necessary tasks. If possible, create isolated accounts with limited privileges that are only used for a single task. That way, a successful attack will not immediately give the attacker access to the rest of the software or its environment.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Query Parameterization (opens in a new tab)
Unvalidated Redirects and Forwards (opens in a new tab)
XML Security (opens in a new tab)
XML External Entity Prevention (opens in a new tab)
File Upload (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V5.3.4 (opens in a new tab)
V5.3.5 (opens in a new tab)
V1.5.1 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Command Line Execution through SQL Injection (opens in a new tab)
Object Relational Mapping Injection (opens in a new tab)
SQL Injection through SOAP Parameter Tampering (opens in a new tab)
Expanding Control over the Operating System from the Database (opens in a new tab)
SQL Injection (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).
CWE-20Improper Input Validation (opens in a new tab)
Class weaknessLikelihood of exploit: HighCWE Top 25 (2025): #18OWASP Top 10 A05:2025: Injection (opens in a new tab)
The product receives input or data, but it does not validate or incorrectly validates that the input has the properties that are required to process the data safely and correctly.
MITRE discourages mapping vulnerabilities to this broad entry; the root cause is usually a more specific weakness.
Architecture and Design · Attack Surface Reduction
Consider using language-theoretic security (LangSec) techniques that characterize inputs using a formal language and build "recognizers" for that language. This effectively requires parsing to be a distinct layer that effectively enforces a boundary between raw input and internal data representations, instead of…
Architecture and Design · Libraries or Frameworks
Use an input validation framework such as Struts or the OWASP ESAPI Validation API. Note that using a framework does not automatically address all input validation problems; be mindful of weaknesses that could arise from misusing the framework itself (CWE-1173).
Architecture and Design · Implementation · Attack Surface Reduction
Understand all the potential areas where untrusted inputs can enter the product, including but not limited to: parameters or arguments, cookies, anything read from the network, environment variables, reverse DNS lookups, query results, request headers, URL components, e-mail, files, filenames, databases, and any…
OWASP Cheat Sheets
XML Security (opens in a new tab)
Mass Assignment (opens in a new tab)
Injection Prevention (opens in a new tab)
SQL Injection Prevention (opens in a new tab)
Injection Prevention in Java (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V13.3.1 (opens in a new tab)
V5.1.4 (opens in a new tab)
V5.1.3 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Buffer Overflow via Environment Variables (opens in a new tab)
Server Side Include (SSI) Injection (opens in a new tab)
Cross Zone Scripting (opens in a new tab)
Command Line Execution through SQL Injection (opens in a new tab)
Object Relational Mapping Injection (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).

References

altium.com/platform/security-compliance/security-advisories (opens in a new tab)

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 29 Jan 2026, 08:43 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-89, CWE-20

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats