CVE-2026-72878: Dokploy: OS Command Injection in backup/restore pipeline via unescaped user-controlled shell arguments
Dokploy is a free, self-hostable Platform as a Service (PaaS). Prior to 0.29.13, Dokploy's backup and restore pipeline constructs shell commands by directly interpolating user-controlled database fields into bash -c "..." and sh -c "..." strings, then executes them via child_process.exec(). An authenticated admin/owner can inject arbitrary OS commands that execute on the host machine running Dokploy (not just inside a container). This vulnerability is fixed in 0.29.13.
Security readout for executives and security teams
Plain-English summary
Dokploy versions before 0.29.13 allow an authenticated administrator or owner to turn manipulated database settings into operating-system commands. Those commands run on the Dokploy host, potentially exposing sensitive data or altering the host and managed services. The supplied sources state that version 0.29.13 fixes the flaw.
Executive priority
Treat this as an urgent patching and access-review issue. Host-level command execution can expand impact beyond Dokploy-managed containers. Prioritize externally reachable or shared-administration deployments, upgrade promptly, and investigate if privileged credentials or backup and restore activity appear suspicious.
Technical view
The backup and restore pipeline directly interpolates user-controlled database fields into shell command strings executed through child_process.exec(). This CWE-78 command-injection flaw crosses the container boundary because injected commands execute on the Dokploy host. CVSS 3.1 rates it 9.6, requiring low privileges, low complexity, network access, and no user interaction.
Likely exposure
Dokploy deployments below 0.29.13 are affected. Practical risk is greatest where untrusted or compromised users hold admin or owner access, or those credentials are broadly shared. The supplied evidence does not identify specific exposed deployments, default configurations, or whether ordinary non-administrative users can reach the vulnerable workflow.
Exploitation context
Exploitation requires authenticated admin or owner privileges and interaction with the vulnerable backup or restore pipeline. Successful injection can execute arbitrary commands on the host. The CVE is not listed as KEV in the supplied bundle, and no supplied source establishes active exploitation in the wild.
Researcher notes
The root cause is unsafe shell-string construction across bash and sh execution paths, followed by child_process.exec(). The published fix is 0.29.13, with a pull request and commit supplied for review. Evidence supports authenticated host command execution but does not establish public exploit availability, observed attacks, affected deployment counts, or additional vulnerable versions.
Mitigation direction
Upgrade Dokploy to version 0.29.13 or later.
Restrict admin and owner access until the upgrade is complete.
Rotate shared or potentially compromised privileged credentials.
Review vendor guidance and release notes before returning backup and restore operations to normal.
Validation and detection
Confirm every Dokploy instance reports version 0.29.13 or later.
Inventory accounts holding admin or owner roles and remove unnecessary access.
Review host and Dokploy logs for unexpected activity around backup or restore operations.
Verify backup and restore operations function normally after upgrading.
Investigate suspicious privileged account changes or host modifications using established incident-response procedures.
Generated from the cited source records. This long-tail analysis has not been individually reviewed by a named human.
Potential ATT&CK relevance
Conservative CVE-to-ATT&CK context
These mappings and lookup hints may be relevant to the vulnerability behavior, CWE, affected product, or exposure path. Glexia-inferred context is not an official MITRE, ATT&CK, CWE, or CVE Program mapping.
ATT&CK lookup starting points
Use these exact CWE pages and searches to review the Glexia ATT&CK library from this CVE's weakness and description context.
cwe · medium confidence lookup
CWE-78: Command execution behavior lookup
Command injection weaknesses can lead defenders to review execution techniques and command interpreter telemetry. Open the exact CWE lookup page first, then review the ATT&CK searches from that MITRE weakness context. This is a Glexia lookup hint, not an official ATT&CK mapping.
The CVE wording references code or command execution, so execution technique review may help defensive triage. This is a Glexia inferred lookup path, not an official MITRE, ATT&CK, or CVE Program mapping.
The CVE wording references database injection or access, so collection and exfiltration review may help. This is a Glexia inferred lookup path, not an official MITRE, ATT&CK, or CVE Program mapping.
The affected technology mentions containers, so container-specific ATT&CK technique review may help. This is a Glexia inferred lookup path, not an official MITRE, ATT&CK, or CVE Program mapping.
These fields come from the CVE record and ADP containers, not from Glexia's Take. They preserve time-varying source decisions such as CISA SSVC, KEV status, CVSS metrics, and provider references.
1CVSS vectors
3Timeline events
1ADP providers
5Source links
SSVC decision data
CISA-ADPCISA Coordinator
Timestamp
Version
2.0.3
Exploitation: noneAutomatable: noTechnical Impact: total
CVSS vector scores
1 official score
We collect every scored CVSS vector available in the official CNA and ADP containers. When more than one version is present, the table keeps the source vectors side by side instead of collapsing them into the highest score.
CWE links open Glexia weakness intelligence pages with official CWE context, developer remediation guidance, and related CVE mappings.
CWE-78 · source CWE mapping
Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in an OS Command ('OS Command Injection')
Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in an OS Command ('OS Command Injection') represents a recurring weakness pattern that can create exploitable paths when design, validation, or implementation controls are missing.