An ACAP configuration file has improper permissions, which could allow command injection and potentially lead to privilege escalation.
Noroxi assessment
Priority: Monitor (action score 26/100)
- The sources we track (CISA KEV, Exploit-DB, Metasploit, Nuclei, GitHub) show no public exploit code or exploitation in the wild.
- Probability of exploitation in the next 30 days: 1% (FIRST EPSS); higher than 63.5% of all records.
- Someone with local access to the system can trigger it. Administrator privileges are required. No user action is required. No special conditions are required; it is repeatable.
- Fixed version: Axis Communications AB AXIS OS 12.6.40.
Low priority for now. Upgrade to Axis Communications AB AXIS OS 12.6.40 or later.
Generated automatically from the record's data: CVSS (NVD and CNA), CISA KEV and SSVC, FIRST EPSS, exploit sources, fixed versions. How we calculate it
Primary sources: NVD · CVE.org · FIRST EPSS
An ACAP configuration file has improper permissions, which could allow command injection and potentially lead to privilege escalation. This vulnerability can only be exploited if the Axis device is configured to allow the installation of unsigned ACAP applications, and if an attacker convinces the victim to install a malicious ACAP application.
- Published
- Nov 11, 2025
- Updated
- Jun 17, 2026
- EPSS
- 1.0% · 63th percentile
- CWE
- CWE-732
Report tools
Action score
26
Monitor
Low priority for now.
- CVSS
- 26 / 40 · 6.7 / 10
- CISA KEV
- 0 / 30 · Not listed
- EPSS
- 0 / 30 · 1.0%
CISA SSVC decision
- Exploitation
- none
- Automatable
- no
- Technical impact
- total
Vulnrichment: CISA's decision-tree inputs.
CNA vs NVD score
- NVD
- —
- CNA · Axis
- 6.7
- NVD has not scored this yet; the score shown is the CNA’s.
The score given by the assigning authority versus NVD’s independent score. A gap means the severity is contested.
Get told when this record changes
- Not in KEV: no record of exploitation in the wild
- No public exploit code on record
- A fix has been released
If any of these changes, we'll tell you in the daily email digest.
Running WordPress? Scan your site free with WP Lens
Noroxi analysis
What does it mean in your environment?
The assessment above is generated automatically from the record's data; it doesn't know your environment. Our team verifies on your systems whether this vulnerability is actually exploitable and which mitigation is enough.
We use this product, ask for helpAffected systems
Is your version affected?
Pick the product and type the version you run. It's compared with this record's version ranges in your browser; the version isn't sent anywhere.
| Vendor | Product | CPE |
|---|---|---|
| axis | axis os | cpe:2.3:o:axis:axis_os |
| axis | a1210 \(-b\) | cpe:2.3:h:axis:a1210_\(-b\) |
| axis | a1214 | cpe:2.3:h:axis:a1214 |
| axis | a1601 | cpe:2.3:h:axis:a1601 |
| axis | a1610 \(-b\) | cpe:2.3:h:axis:a1610_\(-b\) |
| axis | a1710-b | cpe:2.3:h:axis:a1710-b |
| axis | a1810-b | cpe:2.3:h:axis:a1810-b |
| axis | a8207-ve mk ii | cpe:2.3:h:axis:a8207-ve_mk_ii |
| axis | c1110-e | cpe:2.3:h:axis:c1110-e |
| axis | c1111-e | cpe:2.3:h:axis:c1111-e |
| axis | c1210-e | cpe:2.3:h:axis:c1210-e |
| axis | c1211-e | cpe:2.3:h:axis:c1211-e |
and 188 more
Using axis os? Add it to your stack and be the first to know about CVEs like this one. (IP camera)
Affected versions
NVD version ranges (for catalog products). Add the product to your stack with a version and matching uses these.
- axis axis os12.0.0 and later · before 12.6.40
Versions reported by the vendor
Affected version ranges reported by the assigning authority (Axis). Independent of NVD's CPE analysis and usually ahead of it.
Axis Communications AB AXIS OS
- 12.0.0 and later · before 12.6.40affected · semver
Same product
axis: all recordsOther highest-scoring records for the same primary product.
- CVE-2026-1185A configuration file on the local file system had improper input validation which could allow code execution and potentially lead to privile35Monitor
- CVE-2025-11142The VAPIX API mediaclip.cgi that did not have a sufficient input validation allowing for a possible remote code execution.35Monitor
- CVE-2025-0358During an annual penetration test conducted on behalf of Axis Communication, Truesec discovered a flaw in the VAPIX Device Configuration fra35Monitor
- CVE-2025-0324The VAPIX Device Configuration framework allowed a privilege escalation, enabling a lower-privileged user to gain administrator privileges.35Monitor
- CVE-2023-5800Insufficient input validation in VAPIX API create_overlay.cgi35Monitor
- CVE-2021-31988A user controlled parameter related to SMTP test functionality is not correctly validated making it possible to add the Carriage Return and 35Monitor
Remediation
Which version to upgrade to
Fix versions compiled from the vendor, package registries and Microsoft. Verify the vendor's note before upgrading.
| Product / package | Fixed version | Source |
|---|---|---|
| Axis Communications AB AXIS OS | 12.6.40 | Vendor (CNA) |
Exploit status
No known public exploit
No public exploit has been observed yet. That doesn't mean you're safe, only that the bar is a little higher.
Research context
For pentesters and researchers: attack profile, score disagreement, timeline, patch commits, credits, variant and chain candidates, bug bounty scope. All derived from existing data; no exploit code.
Timeline
From publication to today: proof of concept, Metasploit module, CISA KEV and fix record. Dates are as reported by the sources.
No dated events beyond publication.
FIRST EPSS daily score; only changes of 0.01 or more are recorded (step chart).
Patch and commit links
Commit, PR and diff links among the references. A starting point for patch-diffing and variant hunting; fixes, not exploits.
No commit or PR link among the references.
Credits
All researchersFinders, reporters and analysts named in the CNA record. Click a name for that researcher’s other records.
- URCQfinder
Variant candidates
Same product, same weakness class, within 18 months. If the patch missed the root cause, the sibling bug is here.
- CVE-2026-1185182 days apartA configuration file on the local file system had improper input validation which could allow code execution and potentially lead to privile35Monitor
- CVE-2026-0541182 days apartACAP applications can gain elevated privileges due to improper input validation during the installation process, potentially leading to priv29Monitor
- CVE-2025-81080 days apartAn ACAP configuration file has improper permissions and lacks input validation, which could potentially lead to privilege escalation.26Monitor
Chain candidates
An authentication bypass and a privilege-requiring bug in the same product, published close together: combined they may become an unauthenticated path.
—
Bug bounty scope
No known public program.
Source: bounty-targets-data (public HackerOne, Bugcrowd, Intigriti, YesWeHack listings).
Technical details
Attack conditions
- Someone with local access to the system can trigger it.
- Administrator privileges are required.
- No user action is required.
- No special conditions are required; it is repeatable.
If successful
- Confidentiality
- high · data can be read
- Integrity
- high · data or configuration can be modified
- Availability
- high · the service can be disrupted
- Attack vector
- Local
- Attack complexity
- Low
- Privileges required
- High
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality impact
- High
- Integrity impact
- High
- Availability impact
- High
Weakness class (CWE)
CWE-732 · Incorrect Permission Assignment for Critical ResourceCVSS vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
nvd-secondary
Attack context
MITRE CAPEC attack patterns and ATT&CK techniques for this weakness class (CWE). A starting point for detection rules and threat hunting.
Attack patterns (CAPEC)
- Accessing Functionality Not Properly Constrained by ACLsCAPEC-1likelihood: High · High
- Privilege AbuseCAPEC-122likelihood: High · Medium
- Directory IndexingCAPEC-127likelihood: High · Medium
- Using Malicious FilesCAPEC-17likelihood: High · Very High
- Exploiting Incorrectly Configured Access Control Security LevelsCAPEC-180likelihood: High · Medium
- Signing Malicious CodeCAPEC-206Very High
- Hijacking a privileged processCAPEC-234Medium
- Reusing Session IDs (aka Session Replay)CAPEC-60likelihood: High · High
ATT&CK techniques
- File and Directory DiscoveryT1083
- Access Token Manipulation:Token Impersonation/TheftT1134.001
- Server Software Component: Terminal Services DLLT1505.005
- Abuse Elevation Control MechanismT1548
- Use Alternate Authentication Material:Web Session CookieT1550.004
- Subvert Trust Controls:Code SigningT1553.002
- Compromise Client Software BinaryT1554
- Hijack Execution Flow:Executable Installer File Permissions WeaknessT1574.005
- Hijack Execution Flow: ServicesFile Permissions WeaknessT1574.010
Change log
- Fix✗ → ✓
For records you follow, these changes also arrive as notifications. →
References
Vendor advisories and official records. Exploit/PoC links are deliberately left out.