Evidence used
- No CISA KEV confirmation is currently recorded.
- EPSS is 0.45% for the current model date.
BlackTreeCVE IntelligenceFull vulnerability report · 2026
CVE-2026-32698High confidence
OpenProject has a SQL Injection via Custom Field Name that can be chained to Remote Code Execution
opf · openproject
Official source article: GitHub GHSA-JQHF-RF9X-9RHX ↗. Check the applicable product and release in the original source.
9.1CriticalCVSS 3.1
Within 7 days
Fix not verifiedCritical technical severity; prioritise exposed affected systems while verifying vendor guidance.
R
Open reassessment dashboard →Operational reassessment
Published severity in operational context
Published severityCritical→Operational priority:Critical, unchanged from published severity.unchanged
Compensating controls
- Restrict the affected network interface to trusted sources where business-safe.
- Monitor vendor guidance and exploitation sources for a material change.
Verification
- Confirm that the asset runs opf openproject and falls inside the recorded affected range.
- Recheck the vendor advisory before scheduling a change because no verified fixed version is currently retained.
- Validate exposure, authentication requirements and compensating controls in the actual environment.
- Reopen this reassessment when CVSS, KEV, EPSS, exploit evidence or remediation changes.
Critical technical severity; prioritise exposed affected systems while verifying vendor guidance.
Fix not verified01
What, why and how
OpenProject is an open-source, web-based project management software. Versions prior to 16.6.9, 17.0.6, 17.1.3, and 17.2.1 are vulnerable to an SQL injection attack via a custom field's name. When that custom field was used in a Cost Report, the custom field's name was injected into the SQL query without proper sanitation. This allowed an attacker to execute arbitrary SQL commands during the generation of a Cost Report. As custom fields can only be generated by users with full administrator privileges, the attack surface is somewhat reduced. Together with another bug in the Repositories_module, that used the project identifier without sanitation to generate the checkout path for a git repository in the filesystem, this allowed an attacker to checkout a git repository to an arbitrarily chosen path on the server. If the checkout is done within certain paths within the OpenProject application, upon the next restart of the application, this allows the attacker to inject ruby code into the application. As the project identifier cannot be manually edited to any string containing special characters like dots or slashes, this needs to be changed via the SQL injection described above. Versions 16.6.9, 17.0.6, 17.1.3, and 17.2.1 fix the issue.
What
OpenProject is an open-source, web-based project management software. Versions prior to 16.6.9, 17.0.6, 17.1.3, and 17.2.1 are vulnerable to an SQL injection attack via a custom field's name. When that custom field was used in a Cost Report, the custom field's name was injected into the SQL query without proper sanitation. This allowed an attacker to execute arbitrary SQL commands during the generation of a Cost Report. As custom fields can only be generated by users with full administrator privileges, the attack surface is somewhat reduced. Together with another bug in the Repositories_module, that used the project identifier without sanitation to generate the checkout path for a git repository in the filesystem, this allowed an attacker to checkout a git repository to an arbitrarily chosen path on the server. If the checkout is done within certain paths within the OpenProject application, upon the next restart of the application, this allows the attacker to inject ruby code into the application. As the project identifier cannot be manually edited to any string containing special characters like dots or slashes, this needs to be changed via the SQL injection described above. Versions 16.6.9, 17.0.6, 17.1.3, and 17.2.1 fix the issue.
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 a network path may attempt exploitation with elevated privileges. If successful, the issue may cause the confidentiality, integrity or availability impact described by the vendor.
What
OpenProject is an open-source, web-based project management software. Versions prior to 16.6.9, 17.0.6, 17.1.3, and 17.2.1 are vulnerable to an SQL injection attack via a custom field's name. When that custom field was used in a Cost Report, the custom field's name was injected into the SQL query without proper sanitation. This allowed an attacker to execute arbitrary SQL commands during the generation of a Cost Report. As custom fields can only be generated by users with full administrator privileges, the attack surface is somewhat reduced. Together with another bug in the Repositories_module, that used the project identifier without sanitation to generate the checkout path for a git repository in the filesystem, this allowed an attacker to checkout a git repository to an arbitrarily chosen path on the server. If the checkout is done within certain paths within the OpenProject application, upon the next restart of the application, this allows the attacker to inject ruby code into the application. As the project identifier cannot be manually edited to any string containing special characters like dots or slashes, this needs to be changed via the SQL injection described above. Versions 16.6.9, 17.0.6, 17.1.3, and 17.2.1 fix the issue.
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 a network path may attempt exploitation with elevated 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
- a network path → 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
- Network
- Privileges required
- High: elevated access is required
- User interaction
- None
- Attack complexity
- Low: no specialised conditions are recorded
- Security boundary
- Changed: exploitation can affect a different security authority
- 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:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:HCommon Vulnerability Scoring System 3.1: the compact vector below is decoded into plain language.
AVNetworkAttack vector: The vulnerable component can be reached over a network.ACLowAttack complexity: No specialised conditions are required beyond attacker-controlled input.PRHighPrivileges required: The attacker needs elevated or administrative privileges.UINoneUser interaction: No action by another user is required.SChangedScope: The attack can affect a component governed by a different security authority.CHighConfidentiality impact: A successful attack can cause a major loss.IHighIntegrity impact: A successful attack can cause a major loss.AHighAvailability impact: A successful attack can cause a major loss.- 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. - Fix not verified
- Affected
- openproject: < 16.6.9, >= 17.0.0, < 17.0.6, >= 17.1.0, < 17.1.3, >= 17.2.0, < 17.2.1
- Fixed
- No fixed version is explicitly recorded in the structured CVE data.
- Action
- No verified patch reference is present in the current structured sources. Check the vendor advisory before making a change.
- Workaround
- No verified workaround is recorded. If business-safe, reduce exposure to the affected interface and allow only trusted sources until authoritative guidance is available.
04
Evidence and provenance
Published 18 Mar 2026 · Last source change 19 Mar 2026, 14:22 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-2026-12966
Product sourceCNA
Remediation sourceCVE/CNA references
CWE sourceCNA
NVD statusNVD enriched
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.