CWE-94: Improper Control of Generation of Code ('Code Injection')

The product constructs all or part of a code segment using externally-influenced input from an upstream component, but it does not neutralize or incorrectly neutralizes special elements that could modify the syntax or behavior of the intended code segment.

Consequences

• Access Control: Bypass Protection Mechanism
• Access Control: Gain Privileges or Assume Identity
• Integrity, Confidentiality, Availability: Execute Unauthorized Code or Commands
• Non-Repudiation: Hide Activities

How to prevent it

• Architecture and Design: Refactor your program so that you do not have to dynamically generate code.
• Architecture and Design: Run your code in a "jail" or similar sandbox environment that enforces strict boundaries between the process and the operating system. This may effectively restrict which code can be executed by your product. Examples include the Unix chroot jail and AppArmor. In general, managed code may provide some protection. This may not be a feasible solution, and it only limits the impact to the operating system; the rest of your application may still be subject to compromise. Be careful to avoid CWE-243 and other weaknesses related to jails.
• Implementation: 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. When performing input validation, consider all potentially relevant properties, including length, type of input, the full range of acceptable values, missing or extra inputs, syntax, consistency across related fields, and conformance to business rules. As an example of business rule logic, "boat" may be syntactically valid because it only contains alphanumeric characters, but it is not valid if the input is only expected to contain colors such as "red" or "blue." Do not rely exclusively on looking for malicious or malformed inputs. This is likely to miss at least one undesirable input, especially if the code's environment changes. This can give attackers enough room to bypass the intended validation. However, denylists can be useful for detecting potential attacks or determining which inputs are so malformed that they should be rejected outright. To reduce the likelihood of code injection, use stringent allowlists that limit which constructs are allowed. If you are dynamically constructing code that invokes a function, then verifying that the input is alphanumeric might be insufficient. An attacker might still be able to reference a dangerous function that you did not intend to allow, such as system(), exec(), or exit().
• Testing: Use dynamic tools and techniques that interact with the product using large test suites with many diverse inputs, such as fuzz testing (fuzzing), robustness testing, and fault injection. The product's operation may slow down, but it should not become unstable, crash, or generate incorrect results.
• Operation: Run the code in an environment that performs automatic taint propagation and prevents any command execution that uses tainted variables, such as Perl's "-T" switch. This will force the program to perform validation steps that remove the taint, although you must be careful to correctly validate your inputs so that you do not accidentally mark dangerous inputs as untainted (see CWE-183 and CWE-184).
• Operation: Run the code in an environment that performs automatic taint propagation and prevents any command execution that uses tainted variables, such as Perl's "-T" switch. This will force the program to perform validation steps that remove the taint, although you must be careful to correctly validate your inputs so that you do not accidentally mark dangerous inputs as untainted (see CWE-183 and CWE-184).
• Implementation: For Python programs, it is frequently encouraged to use the ast.literal_eval() function instead of eval, since it is intentionally designed to avoid executing code. However, an adversary could still cause excessive memory or stack consumption via deeply nested structures [REF-1372], so the python documentation discourages use of ast.literal_eval() on untrusted data [REF-1373].

Recent advisories

• GHSA-26p8-2jq9-3vq9 — MLflow vulnerable to remote code execution on unauthenticated servers via third-party scorer deserialization importing caller-placed artifact modules
• GHSA-h3rc-6mm3-gc2m — vLLM: Request-controlled mm_processor_kwargs.code_revision allows remote code execution
• GHSA-qxg6-89mg-rqv8 — Vitest: Code injection via unauthenticated manual mock registration
• CVE-2026-0322 — A remote code execution (RCE) vulnerability in the management interface of Palo Alto Networks PAN-OS® software enables an authenticated attacker with network…
• GHSA-p393-cf76-4jmr — Nginx UI: Authenticated Remote Code Execution via Backup Restore App Config Overwrite
• GHSA-8r5x-fm3f-whwj — Handlebars: JavaScript Injection via AST Type Confusion in compile (bypass of CVE-2026-33937)
• GHSA-97rh-rhh2-7vjv — Payload: Remote Code Execution through first-register
• GHSA-27vj-qcqg-25rc — fsspec: Server-Side Template Injection in ReferenceFileSystem leads to Remote Code Execution
• GHSA-788w-68h3-cvxp — Ghost: Remote Code Execution via Bookmark Card Images
• GHSA-jj74-hc2q-xrvm — Ghost: Remote Code Execution via Theme Translation Files
• GHSA-w584-2h2r-2hvf — Langflow: Title Authenticated Remote Code Execution in validate_code via Malicious Decorators Description
• GHSA-jjq7-m736-w977 — OpenC3 COSMOS: Authenticated remote code execution via the user-writable config overlay (table definitions, cmd/tlm definitions, and script suites)
• GHSA-6vmq-24h2-pj7j — MCP Atlassian: Incomplete path traversal fix allows intra-CWD module overwrite and RCE (bypass of GHSA-xjgw-4wvw-rgm4)
• GHSA-647f-g98j-qq25 — vm2: GHSA-m283-3h24-438v fix bypass leads to host RCE via call/apply indirection
• PYSEC-2026-3985 — vLLM before 0.28.0 contains a remote code execution vulnerability in the LlavaOnevision2 processor loader that ignores the trust_remote_code parameter when…

All advisories for CWE-94