VulnerabilityPublished 18 Mar 2026

CVE-2026-31891: Cockpit · SQL Injection

Affects CockpitSource CVE Database V5

Compare

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 7.7 High : upgrade to 2.13.5 soon.

Data as of 31 Oct 2026, 20:20 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

7.7High

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

EPSS: 0.4% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 34% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.
Patch: Available – fixed in 2.13.5

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

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

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: Low: The attacker is authorized with (i.e., requires) privileges that provide basic user capabilities that could normally affect only settings and files owned by a user. Alternatively, an attacker with Low privileges may have the ability to cause an impact only to non-sensitive resources.
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: None: There is no loss of integrity within the impacted component.
Availability: None: There is no impact to availability within the impacted component.

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v3.1 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 18 Mar 2026
Detectable: no evidence on record.
No public nuclei template indexed
Weaponized: evidence found.
Public exploit code: GitHub proofs of concept
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), GitHub proofs of concept, the Metasploit, Exploit-DB and nuclei-templates index as of 31 Oct 2026.

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.
Weaponized: A Metasploit exploit module or Exploit-DB entry exists (Metasploit scanner modules do not count), or CISA SSVC or the CVSS exploit maturity 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 Cockpit and cockpit-hq/Cockpit to 2.13.5.

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
Cockpit-HQCockpit	Affected <2.13.5	Fixed in 2.13.5
GitHubcockpit-hq/Cockpit`pkg:github/cockpit-hq/Cockpit`Other threats	Affected <2.13.5	Fixed in 2.13.5

Check your own hosts for these packages with threat-finder (opens in a new tab), our free open-source scanner.

AI-suggested

Organizations should immediately upgrade all Cockpit CMS instances to version 2.13.5 or later, where the vulnerability is patched. If upgrading is not immediately feasible, restrict access to the /api/content/aggregate/{model} endpoint by implementing network-level controls such as IP whitelisting, VPN access, or firewall rules to limit API access to trusted users only. Review and rotate API keys regularly, especially read-only keys, to reduce the risk of key compromise. Implement strict API key management policies, including least privilege principles and monitoring for anomalous API usage patterns. Conduct thorough audits of API endpoint exposure and ensure that no untrusted or public users can access sensitive aggregation APIs. Consider deploying Web Application Firewalls (WAFs) with custom rules to detect and block suspicious aggregation query patterns or SQL injection attempts targeting the vulnerable endpoint. Finally, monitor vendor advisories and threat intelligence feeds for any emerging exploit attempts or proof-of-concept code related to this vulnerability.

Description

Cockpit is a headless content management system. Any Cockpit CMS instance running version 2.13.4 or earlier with API access enabled is potentially affected by a a SQL Injection vulnerability in the MongoLite Aggregation Optimizer. Any deployment where the `/api/content/aggregate/{model}` endpoint is publicly accessible or reachable by untrusted users may be vulnerable, and attackers in possession of a valid read-only API key (the lowest privilege level) can exploit this vulnerability — no admin access is required. An attacker can inject arbitrary SQL via unsanitized field names in aggregation queries, bypass the `_state=1` published-content filter to access unpublished or restricted content, and extract unauthorized data from the underlying SQLite content database. This vulnerability has been patched in version 2.13.5. The fix applies the same field-name sanitization introduced in v2.13.3 for `toJsonPath()` to the `toJsonExtractRaw()` method in `lib/MongoLite/Aggregation/Optimizer.php`, closing the injection vector in the Aggregation Optimizer.

Impact

The primary impact of this vulnerability is unauthorized disclosure of sensitive content stored within Cockpit CMS instances. Attackers can bypass content publication filters to access unpublished drafts, restricted documents, or other sensitive data that should not be publicly accessible. This can lead to data leakage of intellectual property, internal communications, or user data, potentially causing reputational damage, regulatory compliance violations, and competitive disadvantage. Since exploitation requires only a read-only API key, which may be easier to obtain or guess than administrative credentials, the attack surface is significant. The vulnerability does not allow data modification or denial of service, but the confidentiality breach alone is critical. Organizations using Cockpit CMS in sectors such as media, publishing, government, or enterprises relying on content confidentiality are at heightened risk. Publicly exposed API endpoints or weak API key management practices exacerbate the risk. The lack of known exploits in the wild suggests limited active exploitation currently, but the vulnerability’s simplicity and severity warrant urgent remediation.

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).

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 18 Mar 2026, 03:43 UTC

Public exploits and detectionGitHub proofs of concept

WeaknessesCWE-89

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats