CVE-2026-108161: FusionPBX through 5.6.5 OS Command Injection via Caller ID in Recording ZIP Download
Noroxi assessment
Priority: Monitor (action score 30/100)
- 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: 1.1% (FIRST EPSS); higher than 65.9% of all records.
- Anyone who can reach it over the internet can trigger it. No account or password is required. Special conditions such as timing or configuration are required.
- No fixed version is recorded, but the references include a patch (commit or PR) link.
Low priority for now. See the fix and affected versions sections below.
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
FusionPBX through 5.6.5 contains an OS command injection vulnerability in call_recordings::download() that allows unauthenticated attackers to execute commands by placing calls with malicious caller ID values. When the record_name filename template is enabled, attackers can embed shell metacharacters like $(...) in the Caller-ID name or number, executing commands as the web server user once a privileged user downloads multiple recordings as a ZIP.
- Published
- Oct 10, 2026
- Updated
- Oct 16, 2026
- EPSS
- 1.1% · 65th percentile
- CWE
- CWE-78
Report tools
Action score
30
Monitor
Low priority for now.
- CVSS
- 30 / 40 · 7.7 / 10
- CISA KEV
- 0 / 30 · Not listed
- EPSS
- 0 / 30 · 1.1%
CISA SSVC decision
- Exploitation
- none
- Automatable
- no
- Technical impact
- total
Vulnrichment: CISA's decision-tree inputs.
CNA vs NVD score
- NVD
- —
- CNA · VulnCheck
- 7.7
- NVD has not scored this yet; the score shown is the CNA’s.
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:H/AT:P/PR:N/UI:P/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N
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
- No fixed version yet
If any of these changes, we'll tell you in the daily email digest.
Is your version affected? Check itNoroxi 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.
—
Versions reported by the vendor
Affected version ranges reported by the assigning authority (VulnCheck). Independent of NVD's CPE analysis and usually ahead of it.
fusionpbx fusionpbx
- up to and including 5.6.5affected · semver
Same product
fusionpbx: all recordsOther highest-scoring records for the same primary product.
- CVE-2019-11409app/operator_panel/exec.php in the Operator Panel module in FusionPBX 4.4.3 suffers from a command injection vulnerability due to a lack of…61This week
- CVE-2021-43405An issue was discovered in FusionPBX before 4.5.30.46Plan
- CVE-2022-35153FusionPBX 5.0.1 was discovered to contain a command injection vulnerability via /fax/fax_send.php.40Plan
Published before and after this one in the same product
- ← EarlierCVE-2021-43403Sep 28, 2022 · An issue was discovered in FusionPBX before 4.5.30.26Monitor
- ← EarlierCVE-2024-23387Jan 19, 2024 · FusionPBX prior to 5.1.0 contains a cross-site scripting vulnerability.19Monitor
- ← EarlierCVE-2024-24539Mar 17, 2024 · FusionPBX before 5.2.0 does not validate a session.21Monitor
Remediation
Which version to upgrade to
Fix versions compiled from the vendor, package registries and Microsoft. Verify the vendor's note before upgrading.
No fix version is recorded for this entry. Check the references for vendor advisories.
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.
Credits
All researchersFinders, reporters and analysts named in the CNA record. Click a name for that researcher’s other records.
- Dilshod Gofurovfinder
Variant candidates
Same product, same weakness class, within 18 months. If the patch missed the root cause, the sibling bug is here.
No nightly-computed relations.
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
- Anyone who can reach it over the internet can trigger it.
- No account or password is required.
- Special conditions such as timing or configuration are required.
If successful
- Confidentiality
- Integrity
- Availability
- Attack vector
- Network
- Attack complexity
- High
- Privileges required
- None
- User interaction
- P
- Scope
- X
Weakness class (CWE)
CWE-78 · Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in an OS Command ('OS Command Injection')CVSS vector
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:H/AT:P/PR:N/UI:P/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:X/CR:X/IR:X/AR:X/MAV:X/MAC:X/MAT:X/MPR:X/MUI:X/MVC:X/MVI:X/MVA:X/MSC:X/MSI:X/MSA:X/S:X/AU:X/R:X/V:X/RE:X/U:X
nvd-secondary
Root cause
User input is inserted as text into a shell command. The shell may interpret special characters in the input as part of the command.
The bug in code
The whole CWE-78 classA representative example of this vulnerability class. Not the vendor's source code; it shows the faulty pattern and its fix.
Vulnerable
const host = req.body.host;
exec("ping -c 1 " + host, onResult);Fixed
const host = req.body.host;
if (!/^[a-z0-9.-]{1,253}$/i.test(host)) return res.sendStatus(400);
execFile("ping", ["-c", "1", host], onResult);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)
- Command Line Execution through SQL InjectionCAPEC-108likelihood: Low · Very High
- Command DelimitersCAPEC-15likelihood: High · High
- Exploiting Multiple Input Interpretation LayersCAPEC-43likelihood: Medium · High
- Argument InjectionCAPEC-6likelihood: High · High
- OS Command InjectionCAPEC-88likelihood: High · High
ATT&CK techniques
—
Change log
- SSVC exploitation— → none
- Exploit maturity— → none
For records you follow, these changes also arrive as notifications. →
References
Show all references (3 more)Show less
- github.com/fusionpbx/fusionpbx/blob/ac4cd29870e3af67506390800904e262fee7e0ec/app/call_recordings/resources/classes/call_recordings.php#L736-L776
- github.com/fusionpbx/fusionpbx/commit/074a69310100f95171c67db62643cc2aac4f4d37
- www.vulncheck.com/advisories/fusionpbx-through-5.6.5-os-command-injection-via-caller-id-in-recording-zip-download
Vendor advisories and official records. Exploit/PoC links are deliberately left out.