CVE-2026-17561
Improper Control of Generation of Code ('Code Injection') vulnerability in Innotim Software, Telecommunications and Consulting Trade Ltd. Co
CVSS
9.8
Critical
EPSS
—
KEV
—
Exploit Today
—
0-100
Published: Jul 31, 2026 · Last modified: Jul 31, 2026 · CWE-94
Not enough EPSS history yet.
Improper Control of Generation of Code ('Code Injection') vulnerability in Innotim Software, Telecommunications and Consulting Trade Ltd. Co. Logsign SIEM allows Code Injection. This issue affects Logsign SIEM: before 6.4.108.
CVECVSSEPSSKEVRExploitTitleMod.
CVE-2026-133927.2 HIG—
——0The ElementsKit Elementor Addons WordPress plugin before 3.10.01 does not prevent a custom-widget definition saved by a user with administrative capabilities from being written verbatim into a generated PHP file that the ElementsKit Elementor Addons WordPress plugin before 3.10.01 subsequently executes, allowing arbitrary PHP code to run on the server; on a multisite network this lets a non-super subsite Administrator, who is otherwise denied code/file editing, reach host-level code execution beyond the privileges the network grants them.3hCVE-2026-129469.9 CRI—
——0IBM Langflow OSS 1.0.0 through 1.10.0 could allow a remote attacker to inject arbitrary code on the system, due to the improper control of user input code.16hCVE-2026-615367.5 HIG—
——0Banks generates meaningful LLM prompts using a simple template language. In versions prior to 2.4.3, banks parses Tool JSON objects from the rendered body of {% completion %} blocks and later resolves their import_path field through importlib.import_module(...) + getattr(...) to obtain the callable that handles a tool call. There is no allowlist or sanitization on import_path, so any importable Python attribute (e.g. os.system, subprocess.getoutput) can be selected. When the LLM emits a tool_calls entry whose function.name matches the attacker-supplied tool name, the resolved callable is invoked with kwargs decoded from tool_call.function.arguments, yielding arbitrary code execution in the banks-hosting process. This is distinct from GHSA-gphh-9q3h-jgpp / CVE-2026-44209. That advisory was fixed in 2.4.2 by switching src/banks/env.py from Environment to SandboxedEnvironment. The fix does not touch src/banks/extensions/completion.py, and the unsafe import + getattr chain still executes on 2.4.2. The malicious Tool JSON is plain text in the rendered template body — it requires no Jinja attribute access, so the sandbox is irrelevant. This issue has been fixed in version 2.4.3.1dCVE-2026-182459.0 CRI—
——0Improper control of code generation in Amazon @aws-amplify/codegen-ui-react before 2.20.6 might allow a remote authenticated user to execute arbitrary code in end-user browsers, developer machines, CI/CD environments, and server-side rendering contexts via crafted Studio component or theme schema values due to insufficient coverage and effectiveness of the input validation introduced for CVE-2025-4318.
To remediate this issue, users should upgrade to version 2.20.61dCVE-2026-134359.9 CRI—
——0IBM Langflow OSS 1.0.0 through 1.10.1 contains an improper input validation vulnerability in the PythonREPL sandbox implementation.16hCVE-2026-146029.0 CRI16.7%
——5The Remote API WordPress plugin through 0.2 does not authenticate a request before deserializing user-supplied input, allowing unauthenticated attackers to inject arbitrary PHP objects, which can lead to remote code execution when a suitable gadget chain is present through another installed Remote API WordPress plugin through 0.2.1d