VulnerabilityPublished 26 May 2026

CVE-2026-48694: fastnetmon · OS Command Injection

Affects fastnetmonSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 8.1 High : upgrade to 1.2.10 soon.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 10:12 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

8.1High

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

EPSS: 0.2% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 14% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.
Patch: Available – fixed in 1.2.10

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

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: Low
User Interaction: None
Scope: Unchanged
Confidentiality: High
Integrity: High
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: 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: 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: None: There is no impact to availability within the impacted component.

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v3.1 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 26 May 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 26 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.
Weaponised: Public exploit code exists in Metasploit or Exploit-DB, 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 pavel-odintsov/fastnetmon to 1.2.10.

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
GitHubpavel-odintsov/fastnetmon`pkg:github/pavel-odintsov/fastnetmon`Other threats	Affected <1.2.10	Fixed in 1.2.10

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

AI-suggested

If you cannot patch yet, restrict access to the FastNetMon Juniper integration plugin and validate or sanitize inputs controlling the $IP_ATTACK variable to prevent injection. Monitor for unusual configuration changes on affected routers. Avoid exposing this functionality to untrusted users or networks.

Description

FastNetMon Community Edition through 1.2.9 contains a configuration injection vulnerability in the Juniper router integration plugin. In src/juniper_plugin/fastnetmon_juniper.php, the $IP_ATTACK variable (received from argv[1]) is directly interpolated into Juniper NETCONF set-configuration commands at lines 69 and 90 without any validation or sanitization. Line 69: $conn->load_set_configuration("set routing-options static route {$IP_ATTACK} community 65535:666 discard"). Line 90: $conn->load_set_configuration("delete routing-options static route {$IP_ATTACK}/32"). An attacker who can control the IP address string can inject additional Juniper CLI configuration commands by embedding newline characters followed by arbitrary set/delete commands. This could modify the router's routing table, firewall filters, user accounts, or any other configuration element accessible via NETCONF. The impact is full router compromise.

Impact

Successful exploitation allows an attacker with the ability to control the IP address input to inject arbitrary Juniper CLI configuration commands via NETCONF. This can result in modification of the router's routing table, firewall filters, user accounts, or any other configurable element accessible through NETCONF. The impact is a full compromise of the router's configuration, potentially leading to unauthorized network control and data interception or disruption.

Summary

CVE-2026-48694 affects FastNetMon Community Edition through 1.2.9 in the Juniper router integration plugin. The vulnerability is due to unsanitized interpolation of the $IP_ATTACK variable into Juniper NETCONF set-configuration commands in the PHP source file fastnetmon_juniper.php. Specifically, the variable is used at lines 69 and 90 to construct commands that set or delete static routes. Because the input is not validated, an attacker can inject newline characters and additional Juniper CLI commands, enabling arbitrary configuration changes on the router. This can lead to full router compromise. The CVSS 3.1 base score is 8.1, reflecting network attack vector, low attack complexity, required privileges, no user interaction, and high impact on confidentiality and integrity.

CWE-78Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in an OS Command ('OS Command Injection') (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessLikelihood of exploit: HighCWE Top 25 (2025): #9OWASP Top 10 A05:2025: Injection (opens in a new tab)
The product constructs all or part of an OS command using externally-influenced input from an upstream component, but it does not neutralize or incorrectly neutralizes special elements that could modify the intended OS 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.
Architecture and Design · Operation · Sandbox or Jail
Run the code in a "jail" or similar sandbox environment that enforces strict boundaries between the process and the operating system. This may effectively restrict which files can be accessed in a particular directory or which commands can be executed by the software.
Architecture and Design · Attack Surface Reduction
For any data that will be used to generate a command to be executed, keep as much of that data out of external control as possible. For example, in web applications, this may require storing the data locally in the session's state instead of sending it out to the client in a hidden form field.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Injection Prevention (opens in a new tab)
Injection Prevention in Java (opens in a new tab)
OS Command Injection Defense (opens in a new tab)
Abuse Case (opens in a new tab)
Deserialization (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V12.3.5 (opens in a new tab)
V5.3.8 (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)
Command Delimiters (opens in a new tab)
Exploiting Multiple Input Interpretation Layers (opens in a new tab)
Argument Injection (opens in a new tab)
OS Command 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 2 Jun 2026, 21:29 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-78

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats