CVE-2024-22197VulnerabilityPublished 11 Jan 2024Updated 6 Jul 2026

CVE-2024-22197: Nginx UI · Authenticated (user role) remote command execution by modifying `nginx` settings (GHSL-2023-269)

Affects github.com/0xJacky/Nginx-UISource GCVE Database

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 7.7 High : upgrade to 1.9.10-0.20231219184941-827e76c46e63 soon.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 06:26 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

7.7High

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.
Patch: Available – fixed in 1.9.10-0.20231219184941-827e76c46e63

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

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: High
Privileges Required: None
User Interaction: None
Scope: Unchanged
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: High: A successful attack depends on conditions beyond the attacker's control. That is, a successful attack cannot be accomplished at will, but requires the attacker to invest in some measurable amount of effort in preparation or execution against the vulnerable component before a successful attack can be expected. For example, a successful attack may require an attacker to: gather knowledge about the environment in which the vulnerable target/component exists; prepare the target environment to improve exploit reliability; or inject themselves into the logical network path between the target and the resource requested by the victim in order to read and/or modify network communications (e.g., a man in the middle attack).
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: 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 11 Jan 2024
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 github.com/0xJacky/Nginx-UI to 1.9.10-0.20231219184941-827e76c46e63.

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
Gogithub.com/0xJacky/Nginx-UI	Affected <1.9.10-0.20231219184941-827e76c46e63	Fixed in 1.9.10-0.20231219184941-827e76c46e63

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 application to trusted users only. Consider implementing additional authorization checks on the settings modification API to restrict which users can change critical command settings.

Description

### Summary The `Home > Preference` page exposes a small list of nginx settings such as `Nginx Access Log Path` and `Nginx Error Log Path`. However, the API also exposes `test_config_cmd`, `reload_cmd` and `restart_cmd`. While the UI doesn't allow users to modify any of these settings, it is possible to do so by sending a request to the [API](https://github.com/0xJacky/nginx-ui/blob/04bf8ec487f06ab17a9fb7f34a28766e5f53885e/api/system/router.go#L13). ```go func InitPrivateRouter(r *gin.RouterGroup) { r.GET("settings", GetSettings) r.POST("settings", SaveSettings) ... } ``` The [`SaveSettings`](https://github.com/0xJacky/nginx-ui/blob/04bf8ec487f06ab17a9fb7f34a28766e5f53885e/api/system/settings.go#L18) function is used to save the settings. It is protected by the [`authRequired`](https://github.com/0xJacky/nginx-ui/blob/04bf8ec487f06ab17a9fb7f34a28766e5f53885e/router/middleware.go#L45) middleware, which requires a valid JWT token or a `X-Node-Secret` which must equal the `Node Secret` configuration value. However, given the lack of authorization roles, any authenticated user can modify the settings. The `SaveSettings` function is defined as follows: ```go func SaveSettings(c *gin.Context) { var json struct { ... Nginx settings.Nginx `json:"nginx"` ... } ... settings.NginxSettings = json.Nginx ... err := settings.Save() ... } ``` The `test_config_cmd` setting is stored as [`settings.NginxSettings.TestConfigCmd`](https://github.com/0xJacky/nginx-ui/blob/04bf8ec487f06ab17a9fb7f34a28766e5f53885e/settings/nginx.go#L8). When the application wants to test the nginx configuration, it uses the [`TestConf`](https://github.com/0xJacky/nginx-ui/blob/04bf8ec487f06ab17a9fb7f34a28766e5f53885e/internal/nginx/nginx.go#L26) function: ```go func TestConf() (out string) { if settings.NginxSettings.TestConfigCmd != "" { out = execShell(settings.NginxSettings.TestConfigCmd) return } out = execCommand("nginx", "-t") return } ``` The [`execShell`](https://github.com/0xJacky/nginx-ui/blob/04bf8ec487f06ab17a9fb7f34a28766e5f53885e/internal/nginx/nginx.go#L8) function is defined as follows: ```go func execShell(cmd string) (out string) { bytes, err := exec.Command("/bin/sh", "-c", cmd).CombinedOutput() out = string(bytes) if err != nil { out += " " + err.Error() } return } ``` Where the `cmd` argument is user-controlled and is passed to `/bin/sh -c`. This issue was found using CodeQL for Go: [Command built from user-controlled sources](https://codeql.github.com/codeql-query-help/go/go-command-injection/). #### Proof of Concept > Based on [this setup](https://github.com/0xJacky/nginx-ui/blob/04bf8ec487f06ab17a9fb7f34a28766e5f53885e/README.md?plain=1#L210) using `uozi/nginx-ui:v2.0.0-beta.7`. 1. Login as a newly created user. 2. Send the following request to modify the settings with `"test_config_cmd":"touch /tmp/pwned"`. ```http POST /api/settings HTTP/1.1 Host: 127.0.0.1:8080 Content-Length: 528 Authorization: <<JWT TOKEN> Content-Type: application/json {"nginx":{"access_log_path":"","error_log_path":"","config_dir":"","pid_path":"","test_config_cmd":"touch /tmp/pwned","reload_cmd":"","restart_cmd":""},"openai":{"base_url":"","token":"","proxy":"","model":""},"server":{"http_host":"0.0.0.0","http_port":"9000","run_mode":"debug","jwt_secret":"foo","node_secret":"foo","http_challenge_port":"9180","email":"foo","database":"foo","start_cmd":"","ca_dir":"","demo":false,"page_size":10,"github_proxy":""}} ``` 3. Add a new site in `Home > Manage Sites > Add Site` with random data. The previously-modified `test_config_cmd` setting will be used [when the application tries to test the nginx configuration](https://github.com/0xJacky/nginx-ui/blob/04bf8ec487f06ab17a9fb7f34a28766e5f53885e/api/sites/domain.go#L256). 4. Verify that `/tmp/pwned` exists. ``` $ docker exec -it $(docker ps -q) ls -al /tmp -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 0 Dec 14 21:10 pwned ``` ### Impact This issue may lead to authenticated Remote Code Execution, Privilege Escalation, and Information Disclosure.

Impact

This vulnerability allows any authenticated user to execute arbitrary shell commands on the host system with the privileges of the application process. This can lead to remote code execution, privilege escalation, and potential information disclosure depending on the environment and application privileges.

Summary

The Nginx-UI application exposes an API endpoint (/api/settings) protected only by authentication but lacking authorization role checks. Authenticated users can modify nginx-related command settings including test_config_cmd, reload_cmd, and restart_cmd. The test_config_cmd is executed by the application using /bin/sh -c, allowing arbitrary command execution. This leads to authenticated remote code execution. The vulnerability stems from the SaveSettings function accepting user-controlled input for these commands and executing them without validation or authorization restrictions. Proof of concept demonstrates creating a file /tmp/pwned by setting test_config_cmd to 'touch /tmp/pwned'.

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

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 6 Jul 2026, 23:51 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-77

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats