CVE-2025-59470VulnerabilityPublished 8 Jan 2026Updated 26 Feb 2026

CVE-2025-59470: Veeam Backup and Recovery · Command Injection

Affects Veeam Backup and RecoverySource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 9.0 Critical.

Data as of 25 Oct 2026, 19:02 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

9.0Critical

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

EPSS: 1.5% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 74% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

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

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: High
User Interaction: None
Scope: Changed
Confidentiality: High
Integrity: High
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: High: The attacker is authorized with (i.e., requires) privileges that provide significant (e.g., administrative) control over the vulnerable component that could affect component-wide settings and files.
User Interaction: None: The vulnerable system can be exploited without any interaction from any user.
Scope: Changed: An exploited vulnerability can affect resources beyond the security scope managed by the security authority of the vulnerable component. In this case, the vulnerable component and the impacted component are different and managed by different security authorities.
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: High: There is a total loss of integrity, or a complete loss of protection. For example, the attacker is able to modify any/all files protected by the impacted component. Alternatively, only some files can be modified, but malicious modification would present a direct, serious consequence to 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 8 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 2026-10-25.

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

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
VeeamBackup and Recovery	Affected >=13.0.0 <=13.0.0	Fixed in–

AI-suggested

To mitigate CVE-2025-59470, organizations should implement the following specific measures: 1) Immediately restrict Backup Operator privileges to only trusted personnel and enforce the principle of least privilege. 2) Monitor and audit all Backup Operator activities for unusual or unauthorized commands, especially those involving interval or order parameters. 3) Implement network segmentation and access controls to limit exposure of the Veeam Backup and Recovery server to untrusted networks or users. 4) Employ application-layer firewalls or intrusion detection systems to detect and block suspicious payloads targeting the vulnerable parameters. 5) Regularly review and update backup server configurations to minimize attack surface, disabling unnecessary services or interfaces. 6) Prepare for rapid deployment of vendor patches once released, including testing in isolated environments before production rollout. 7) Consider temporary compensating controls such as disabling remote access to backup management interfaces if feasible. 8) Educate backup administrators about this vulnerability and the importance of secure operational practices. These targeted steps go beyond generic advice by focusing on privilege management, monitoring, and network controls specific to the vulnerability's attack vector.

Description

This vulnerability allows a Backup Operator to perform remote code execution (RCE) as the postgres user by sending a malicious interval or order parameter.

Impact

The impact of CVE-2025-59470 is significant for organizations relying on Veeam Backup and Recovery version 13.0.0. Exploitation allows an attacker with Backup Operator privileges to execute arbitrary code as the 'postgres' user, potentially leading to full compromise of the backup server. This can result in unauthorized access to sensitive backup data, manipulation or deletion of backups, and disruption of backup and recovery processes. Confidentiality is severely impacted as attackers can access or exfiltrate sensitive information stored in backups. Integrity is compromised through unauthorized modification of backup data or system configurations. Availability impact is lower but still present, as attackers could disrupt backup operations or cause service interruptions. Given that backup systems are critical for disaster recovery and data protection, compromise could have cascading effects on organizational resilience and incident response. The vulnerability also increases the risk of ransomware or other malware attacks leveraging compromised backup infrastructure. Organizations with high-value data, regulated industries, or critical infrastructure are particularly at risk.

CWE-77Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in a Command ('Command Injection') (opens in a new tab)
Class weaknessLikelihood of exploit: HighCWE Top 25 (2025): #23OWASP Top 10 A05:2025: Injection (opens in a new tab)
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.
Architecture and Design
If at all possible, use library calls rather than external processes to recreate the desired functionality.
Implementation
If possible, ensure that all external commands called from the program are statically created.
Implementation · Input Validation
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.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Abuse Case (opens in a new tab)
Deserialization (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
V1.5.1 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
LDAP Injection (opens in a new tab)
Command Delimiters (opens in a new tab)
IMAP/SMTP Command Injection (opens in a new tab)
Manipulating Writeable Terminal Devices (opens in a new tab)
Exploiting Multiple Input Interpretation Layers (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).

References

veeam.com/kb4792 (opens in a new tab)

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 27 Feb 2026, 07:31 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-77

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats