Evidence used
- No CISA KEV confirmation is currently recorded.
- EPSS is 0.25% for the current model date.
BlackTreeCVE IntelligenceFull vulnerability report · 2026
CVE-2026-0242High confidence
Trust Protection Foundation: SQL Injection Vulnerability
Palo Alto Networks · Trust Protection Foundation
6.1MediumCVSS 4.0
Scheduled
Patch availableMedium technical severity with no CISA KEV confirmation; remediate through the normal risk-based patch cycle unless local exposure raises the priority.
R
Open reassessment dashboard →Operational reassessment
Published severity in operational context
Published severityMedium→Operational priority:Medium, unchanged from published severity.unchanged
Compensating controls
- Validate the affected product branch and deploy the verified fixed release.
- Restrict local access and enforce least privilege on affected hosts.
- Monitor vendor guidance and exploitation sources for a material change.
Verification
- Confirm that the asset runs Palo Alto Networks Trust Protection Foundation and falls inside the recorded affected range.
- Verify the installed build against the product-specific fixed version after deployment.
- Validate exposure, authentication requirements and compensating controls in the actual environment.
- Reopen this reassessment when CVSS, KEV, EPSS, exploit evidence or remediation changes.
Medium technical severity with no CISA KEV confirmation; remediate through the normal risk-based patch cycle unless local exposure raises the priority.
Patch available01
What, why and how
A SQL injection vulnerability in Trust Protection Foundation allows an authenticated attacker to execute arbitrary SQL commands against the product database. Successful exploitation could allow an attacker to read sensitive data, modify database contents, and escalate privileges to gain full administrative control of the platform.
What
A SQL injection vulnerability in Trust Protection Foundation allows an authenticated attacker to execute arbitrary SQL commands against the product database. Successful exploitation could allow an attacker to read sensitive data, modify database contents, and escalate privileges to gain full administrative control of the platform.
Why
Attacker-controlled data is not kept separate from SQL query syntax, allowing the intended database operation to be changed.
How
An attacker operating through an adjacent network may attempt exploitation with low privileges. If successful, the issue may cause the confidentiality, integrity or availability impact described by the vendor.
What
A SQL injection vulnerability in Trust Protection Foundation allows an authenticated attacker to execute arbitrary SQL commands against the product database. Successful exploitation could allow an attacker to read sensitive data, modify database contents, and escalate privileges to gain full administrative control of the platform.
Why
Attacker-controlled data is not kept separate from SQL query syntax, allowing the intended database operation to be changed.
How
An attacker operating through an adjacent network may attempt exploitation with low privileges. If successful, the issue may cause the confidentiality, integrity or availability impact described by the vendor.
02
Exploit reality and attack path
CVSS severity, EPSS forecast probability, public exploit material and CISA-confirmed exploitation are separate signals.
Observed exploitation No confirmed evidence
?
Confirmed exploitation and public exploit material are separate signals. Attacks can occur without public proof-of-concept or exploit code.No CISA KEV match was present at the last successful refresh. This means no confirmation from that source, not proof of no exploitation.
Public PoC / exploit material None recorded
?
Confirmed exploitation and public exploit material are separate signals. Attacks can occur without public proof-of-concept or exploit code.No exploit-tagged reference or CISA SSVC proof-of-concept state is currently recorded. Research may still exist outside the structured feeds.
- Likely attack path
- an adjacent network → Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in an SQL Command ('SQL Injection') → cause the confidentiality, integrity or availability impact described by the vendor
- Attack surface
- Adjacent
- Privileges required
- Low: a basic authenticated account is required
- User interaction
- None
- Attack complexity
- Low: no specialised conditions are recorded
- Security boundary
- Not a CVSS 4.0 base metric
- Weakness
?
CWE means Common Weakness Enumeration: a standard category for the underlying weakness. - CWE-89 ↗
CWE-89: Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in an SQL Command ('SQL Injection'). The product constructs all or part of an SQL command using externally-influenced input from an upstream component, but it does not neutralize or incorrectly neutralizes special elements that could modify the intended SQL command when it is sent to a downstream component. Without sufficient removal or quoting of SQL syntax in user-controllable inputs, the generated SQL query can cause those inputs to be interpreted as SQL instead of ordinary user data.
- CVSS vector
?
CVSS means Common Vulnerability Scoring System. The vector records the metric values used to calculate technical severity. CVSS:4.0/AV:A/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/SC:L/SI:L/SA:N/E:U/AU:Y/R:U/V:C/RE:M/U:AmberCommon Vulnerability Scoring System 4.0: the compact vector below is decoded into plain language.
AVAdjacentAttack vector: The attacker must be on an adjacent or logically close network.ACLowAttack complexity: No specialised conditions are required beyond attacker-controlled input.ATNoneAttack requirements: No additional deployment or execution condition is required.PRLowPrivileges required: The attacker needs basic user-level privileges.UINoneUser interaction: No action by another user is required.VCHighVulnerable-system confidentiality: A successful attack can cause a major loss.VIHighVulnerable-system integrity: A successful attack can cause a major loss.VAHighVulnerable-system availability: A successful attack can cause a major loss.SCLowSubsequent-system confidentiality: A successful attack can cause a limited loss.SILowSubsequent-system integrity: A successful attack can cause a limited loss.SANoneSubsequent-system availability: No direct loss is represented by this metric.- Post-exploitation / living off the land
- No specific living-off-the-land technique is confirmed in the structured sources. Monitor normal administration tools for activity inconsistent with the affected service's baseline.
03
Patch and workaround
Operational remediation based on structured source evidence.
- Status
?
Patch availability is based on structured fixed-version fields and authoritative update references. If no fix is verified, check the vendor advisory before making a change. - Patch available
- Affected
- Trust Protection Foundation: 25.3.0 < 25.3.3, 25.1.0 < 25.1.8, 24.3.0 < 24.3.6, 24.1.0 < 24.1.13
- Fixed
- Version Minor Version Suggested Solution
- Trust Protection Foundation 25.3 25.3.0 through 25.3.2 Upgrade to 25.3.3 or later.
- Trust Protection Foundation 25.1 25.1.0 through 25.1.7 Upgrade to 25.1.8 or later.
- Trust Protection Foundation 24.3 24.3.0 through 24.3.5 Upgrade to 24.3.6 or later.
- Trust Protection Foundation 24.1 24.1.0 through 24.1.12 Upgrade to 24.1.13 or later.
- All older versions Upgrade to a supported fixed version.
- Action
- Review the linked authoritative reference and apply the recorded fixed release appropriate to the affected product branch.
- Workaround
- No verified workaround is recorded. Limit untrusted access and use least privilege until authoritative guidance is available.
04
Evidence and provenance
Published 13 May 2026 · Last source change 15 May 2026, 03:56 UTC · CWE-89 · Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in an SQL Command ('SQL Injection')
CVE recordCVE.org · 5.2
CVSS sourceCNA
EPSS source FIRST · tracked since 2026-08-14
?
The date BlackTree first stored a score for this CVE from the daily FIRST EPSS feed.European sourceENISA EUVD · EUVD-2026-30094
Product sourceCNA
Remediation sourceCVE/CNA references
CWE sourceCNA
NVD statusNVD enrichment underway
Core structured fields are present and their contributing authorities are shown above.
Material change intelligence
View recent updates ↗What changed after publication
No material field changes have been recorded since change tracking began. Routine source refreshes and cosmetic edits are intentionally excluded.
Technical terms and abbreviations used in this report
- CVE
- Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures: the public identifier for one disclosed vulnerability.
- CVSS
- Common Vulnerability Scoring System: a technical severity framework; it is not patching priority by itself.
- EPSS
- Exploit Prediction Scoring System: FIRST's estimate of the probability that exploitation activity will be observed in the next 30 days; it is a forecast, not confirmation.
- CWE
- Common Weakness Enumeration: the standard category describing the underlying software or hardware weakness.
- CNA
- CVE Numbering Authority: an organisation authorised to assign and publish CVE records.
- CISA ADP
- Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency Authorized Data Publisher: structured enrichment added to a CVE record.
- NVD
- National Vulnerability Database: NIST's enrichment service for CVE records.
- CERT / CSIRT
- A computer security incident response team that publishes warnings or coordinates incident response.
- PoC
- Proof of concept: public material that demonstrates or helps reproduce exploitation.
- CSAF
- Common Security Advisory Framework: a machine-readable format for security advisories.
- LoTL
- Living off the land: abuse of legitimate tools or system functions during an attack.