Summary
A command injection vulnerability in the H3C NX15 V100R017 API allows attacker-controlled input to influence commands processed by the reload.reload_config function. Because the affected interface is remotely reachable, an attacker who can access the endpoint may execute unintended operating-system commands on the device.
Affected context
The issue occurs in the H3C NX15 V100R017 management interface, specifically the reload.reload_config functionality exposed through /api/esps. Risk is present when externally supplied request data reaches command construction or execution without sufficient separation, validation, or escaping.
Exploit preconditions
- Attack surface: Remotely accessible
/api/espsAPI functionality - Required access: Network reachability and any authentication or authorization required by the endpoint; the available details do not establish whether authentication is needed
- Trigger point: Processing a request through
reload.reload_config - Why exploitation is possible: Request-controlled data may be incorporated into an operating-system command without a sufficiently strict boundary between data and command syntax
Why this happens
The underlying bug is an OS command injection condition. The affected functionality appears to pass externally influenced input into command processing without reliably treating that input as data only. This maps to CWE-74, Improper Neutralization of Special Elements in Output Used by a Downstream Component, and is closely related to CWE-77, Command Injection. The insecure pattern is constructing shell or system commands from untrusted values rather than using structured APIs with fixed operations and separately validated arguments.
Potential impact
- An attacker may execute arbitrary commands with the privileges of the affected service
- Device configuration, availability, or operational integrity could be compromised
- Sensitive information may be accessed or altered
- The device could be used as a foothold for further network activity
- Attackers could disrupt management or network services
General mitigation guidance
Mitigation generally focuses on removing shell interpretation from application
paths and reducing trust in request parameters.
Common defensive patterns include:
- Prefer structured system APIs that accept fixed operations and argument arrays rather than shell command strings
- Use allowlists for actions, filenames, options, and other values that must be accepted
- Apply strict type, length, format, and range validation before command-related processing
- Avoid relying on escaping or blacklist filtering as the primary control
- Restrict the service account and management interface to the minimum required privileges and trusted networks
- Enforce authentication, authorization, rate limits, and secure administrative access policies
- Prevent user-controlled input from selecting executable programs or arbitrary command fragments
How teams detect issues like this
Detection approaches may include:
- Static analysis rules for shell invocation APIs, command-string concatenation, and subprocess calls that receive request-derived values
- Code review checks for API parameters flowing into reload, diagnostic, or administrative functions
- Taint analysis tracing HTTP inputs through parsers and helpers into process-execution interfaces
- Runtime monitoring for unexpected child processes, shell interpreters, command arguments, or administrative requests
- API gateway policies that restrict access to management endpoints and flag anomalous parameter values
- Neutral automated security review tools to identify command construction and injection patterns during development
