Common Weakness Enumeration
CWE-78
AllowedImproper Neutralization of Special Elements used in an OS Command ('OS Command Injection')
Abstraction: Base · Status: Stable
The product constructs all or part of an OS command using externally-influenced input from an upstream component, but it does not neutralize or incorrectly neutralizes special elements that could modify the intended OS command when it is sent to a downstream component.
8320 vulnerabilities reference this CWE, most recent first.
CVE-2025-54403 (GCVE-0-2025-54403)
Vulnerability from cvelistv5 – Published: 2025-10-07 13:55 – Updated: 2025-11-03 17:45 Unsupported When Assigned
VLAI
EPSS
VEX
Summary
Multiple OS command injection vulnerabilities exist in the swctrl functionality of Planet WGR-500 v1.3411b190912. A specially crafted network request can lead to arbitrary command execution. An attacker can send a network request to trigger these vulnerabilities.This command injection is related to the `new_password` request parameter.
Severity
8.8 (High)
SSVC
Exploitation: none
Automatable: no
Technical Impact: total
CISA Coordinator (v2.0.3)
CWE
- CWE-78 - Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in an OS Command ('OS Command Injection')
Assigner
References
Credits
{
"containers": {
"adp": [
{
"metrics": [
{
"other": {
"content": {
"id": "CVE-2025-54403",
"options": [
{
"Exploitation": "none"
},
{
"Automatable": "no"
},
{
"Technical Impact": "total"
}
],
"role": "CISA Coordinator",
"timestamp": "2025-10-07T14:39:26.143738Z",
"version": "2.0.3"
},
"type": "ssvc"
}
}
],
"providerMetadata": {
"dateUpdated": "2025-10-07T14:39:34.137Z",
"orgId": "134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0",
"shortName": "CISA-ADP"
},
"title": "CISA ADP Vulnrichment"
},
{
"providerMetadata": {
"dateUpdated": "2025-11-03T17:45:07.266Z",
"orgId": "af854a3a-2127-422b-91ae-364da2661108",
"shortName": "CVE"
},
"references": [
{
"url": "https://www.talosintelligence.com/vulnerability_reports/TALOS-2025-2227"
}
],
"title": "CVE Program Container"
}
],
"cna": {
"affected": [
{
"defaultStatus": "unaffected",
"product": "WGR-500",
"vendor": "Planet",
"versions": [
{
"status": "affected",
"version": "v1.3411b190912"
}
]
}
],
"credits": [
{
"lang": "en",
"type": "finder",
"value": "Discovered by Francesco Benvenuto of Cisco Talos."
}
],
"descriptions": [
{
"lang": "en",
"supportingMedia": [
{
"base64": false,
"type": "text/html",
"value": "\u003cp\u003eMultiple OS command injection vulnerabilities exist in the swctrl functionality of Planet WGR-500 v1.3411b190912. A specially crafted network request can lead to arbitrary command execution. An attacker can send a network request to trigger these vulnerabilities.This command injection is related to the `new_password` request parameter.\u003c/p\u003e"
}
],
"value": "Multiple OS command injection vulnerabilities exist in the swctrl functionality of Planet WGR-500 v1.3411b190912. A specially crafted network request can lead to arbitrary command execution. An attacker can send a network request to trigger these vulnerabilities.This command injection is related to the `new_password` request parameter."
}
],
"metrics": [
{
"cvssV3_1": {
"attackComplexity": "LOW",
"attackVector": "NETWORK",
"availabilityImpact": "HIGH",
"baseScore": 8.8,
"baseSeverity": "HIGH",
"confidentialityImpact": "HIGH",
"integrityImpact": "HIGH",
"privilegesRequired": "LOW",
"scope": "UNCHANGED",
"userInteraction": "NONE",
"vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
"version": "3.1"
},
"format": "CVSS",
"scenarios": [
{
"lang": "en",
"value": "GENERAL"
}
]
}
],
"problemTypes": [
{
"descriptions": [
{
"cweId": "CWE-78",
"description": "CWE-78: Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in an OS Command (\u0027OS Command Injection\u0027)",
"lang": "en",
"type": "CWE"
}
]
}
],
"providerMetadata": {
"dateUpdated": "2025-10-08T20:38:24.859Z",
"orgId": "b86d76f8-0f8a-4a96-a78d-d8abfc7fc29b",
"shortName": "talos"
},
"references": [
{
"name": "https://talosintelligence.com/vulnerability_reports/TALOS-2025-2227",
"url": "https://talosintelligence.com/vulnerability_reports/TALOS-2025-2227"
}
],
"source": {
"discovery": "UNKNOWN"
},
"tags": [
"unsupported-when-assigned"
],
"x_generator": {
"engine": "Vulnogram 0.2.0"
}
}
},
"cveMetadata": {
"assignerOrgId": "b86d76f8-0f8a-4a96-a78d-d8abfc7fc29b",
"assignerShortName": "talos",
"cveId": "CVE-2025-54403",
"datePublished": "2025-10-07T13:55:07.948Z",
"dateReserved": "2025-07-21T21:20:00.389Z",
"dateUpdated": "2025-11-03T17:45:07.266Z",
"state": "PUBLISHED"
},
"dataType": "CVE_RECORD",
"dataVersion": "5.2"
}
CVE-2025-54382 (GCVE-0-2025-54382)
Vulnerability from cvelistv5 – Published: 2025-08-13 13:31 – Updated: 2025-08-13 14:10
VLAI
EPSS
VEX
Title
Cherry Studio RCE Vulnerability Disclosure
Summary
Cherry Studio is a desktop client that supports for multiple LLM providers. In version 1.5.1, a remote code execution (RCE) vulnerability exists in the Cherry Studio platform when connecting to streamableHttp MCP servers. The issue arises from the server’s implicit trust in the oauth auth redirection endpoints and failure to properly sanitize the URL. This issue has been patched in version 1.5.2.
Severity
9.7 (Critical)
SSVC
Exploitation: poc
Automatable: no
Technical Impact: total
CISA Coordinator (v2.0.3)
CWE
- CWE-78 - Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in an OS Command ('OS Command Injection')
Assigner
References
1 reference
| URL | Tags |
|---|---|
| https://github.com/CherryHQ/cherry-studio/securit… | x_refsource_CONFIRM |
Impacted products
1 product
| Vendor | Product | Version | |
|---|---|---|---|
| CherryHQ | cherry-studio |
Affected:
= 1.5.1
|
{
"containers": {
"adp": [
{
"metrics": [
{
"other": {
"content": {
"id": "CVE-2025-54382",
"options": [
{
"Exploitation": "poc"
},
{
"Automatable": "no"
},
{
"Technical Impact": "total"
}
],
"role": "CISA Coordinator",
"timestamp": "2025-08-13T14:08:20.033580Z",
"version": "2.0.3"
},
"type": "ssvc"
}
}
],
"providerMetadata": {
"dateUpdated": "2025-08-13T14:10:43.740Z",
"orgId": "134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0",
"shortName": "CISA-ADP"
},
"title": "CISA ADP Vulnrichment"
}
],
"cna": {
"affected": [
{
"product": "cherry-studio",
"vendor": "CherryHQ",
"versions": [
{
"status": "affected",
"version": "= 1.5.1"
}
]
}
],
"descriptions": [
{
"lang": "en",
"value": "Cherry Studio is a desktop client that supports for multiple LLM providers. In version 1.5.1, a remote code execution (RCE) vulnerability exists in the Cherry Studio platform when connecting to streamableHttp MCP servers. The issue arises from the server\u2019s implicit trust in the oauth auth redirection endpoints and failure to properly sanitize the URL. This issue has been patched in version 1.5.2."
}
],
"metrics": [
{
"cvssV3_1": {
"attackComplexity": "LOW",
"attackVector": "NETWORK",
"availabilityImpact": "HIGH",
"baseScore": 9.7,
"baseSeverity": "CRITICAL",
"confidentialityImpact": "HIGH",
"integrityImpact": "HIGH",
"privilegesRequired": "NONE",
"scope": "CHANGED",
"userInteraction": "REQUIRED",
"vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H",
"version": "3.1"
}
}
],
"problemTypes": [
{
"descriptions": [
{
"cweId": "CWE-78",
"description": "CWE-78: Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in an OS Command (\u0027OS Command Injection\u0027)",
"lang": "en",
"type": "CWE"
}
]
}
],
"providerMetadata": {
"dateUpdated": "2025-08-13T13:31:13.532Z",
"orgId": "a0819718-46f1-4df5-94e2-005712e83aaa",
"shortName": "GitHub_M"
},
"references": [
{
"name": "https://github.com/CherryHQ/cherry-studio/security/advisories/GHSA-gjp6-9cvg-8w93",
"tags": [
"x_refsource_CONFIRM"
],
"url": "https://github.com/CherryHQ/cherry-studio/security/advisories/GHSA-gjp6-9cvg-8w93"
}
],
"source": {
"advisory": "GHSA-gjp6-9cvg-8w93",
"discovery": "UNKNOWN"
},
"title": "Cherry Studio RCE Vulnerability Disclosure"
}
},
"cveMetadata": {
"assignerOrgId": "a0819718-46f1-4df5-94e2-005712e83aaa",
"assignerShortName": "GitHub_M",
"cveId": "CVE-2025-54382",
"datePublished": "2025-08-13T13:31:13.532Z",
"dateReserved": "2025-07-21T16:12:20.734Z",
"dateUpdated": "2025-08-13T14:10:43.740Z",
"state": "PUBLISHED"
},
"dataType": "CVE_RECORD",
"dataVersion": "5.1"
}
CVE-2025-54314 (GCVE-0-2025-54314)
Vulnerability from cvelistv5 – Published: 2025-07-20 00:00 – Updated: 2025-08-10 00:19 Disputed
VLAI
EPSS
VEX
Summary
Thor before 1.4.0 can construct an unsafe shell command from library input. NOTE: this is disputed by the Supplier because "the method that was fixed can only be used with arguments that are controlled by Thor, and there is no way an attacker can take control of those arguments."
Severity
SSVC
Exploitation: none
Automatable: no
Technical Impact: partial
CISA Coordinator (v2.0.3)
CWE
- CWE-78 - Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in an OS Command ('OS Command Injection')
Assigner
References
Impacted products
1 product
| Vendor | Product | Version | |
|---|---|---|---|
| rubyonrails | Thor |
Affected:
0 , < 1.4.0
(semver)
|
{
"containers": {
"adp": [
{
"metrics": [
{
"other": {
"content": {
"id": "CVE-2025-54314",
"options": [
{
"Exploitation": "none"
},
{
"Automatable": "no"
},
{
"Technical Impact": "partial"
}
],
"role": "CISA Coordinator",
"timestamp": "2025-07-21T18:31:26.798255Z",
"version": "2.0.3"
},
"type": "ssvc"
}
}
],
"providerMetadata": {
"dateUpdated": "2025-07-21T20:37:14.593Z",
"orgId": "134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0",
"shortName": "CISA-ADP"
},
"title": "CISA ADP Vulnrichment"
}
],
"cna": {
"affected": [
{
"defaultStatus": "unaffected",
"product": "Thor",
"vendor": "rubyonrails",
"versions": [
{
"lessThan": "1.4.0",
"status": "affected",
"version": "0",
"versionType": "semver"
}
]
}
],
"descriptions": [
{
"lang": "en",
"value": "Thor before 1.4.0 can construct an unsafe shell command from library input. NOTE: this is disputed by the Supplier because \"the method that was fixed can only be used with arguments that are controlled by Thor, and there is no way an attacker can take control of those arguments.\""
}
],
"metrics": [
{
"cvssV3_1": {
"baseScore": 2.8,
"baseSeverity": "LOW",
"vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:N/I:L/A:N",
"version": "3.1"
}
}
],
"problemTypes": [
{
"descriptions": [
{
"cweId": "CWE-78",
"description": "CWE-78 Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in an OS Command (\u0027OS Command Injection\u0027)",
"lang": "en",
"type": "CWE"
}
]
}
],
"providerMetadata": {
"dateUpdated": "2025-08-10T00:19:19.943Z",
"orgId": "8254265b-2729-46b6-b9e3-3dfca2d5bfca",
"shortName": "mitre"
},
"references": [
{
"url": "https://github.com/rails/thor/commit/536b79036a0efb765c1899233412e7b1ca94abfa"
},
{
"url": "https://hackerone.com/reports/3260153"
},
{
"url": "https://github.com/rails/thor/pull/897"
},
{
"url": "https://github.com/rails/thor/releases/tag/v1.4.0"
},
{
"url": "https://github.com/github/advisory-database/pull/5912#issuecomment-3169255309"
}
],
"tags": [
"disputed"
],
"x_generator": {
"engine": "enrichogram 0.0.1"
}
}
},
"cveMetadata": {
"assignerOrgId": "8254265b-2729-46b6-b9e3-3dfca2d5bfca",
"assignerShortName": "mitre",
"cveId": "CVE-2025-54314",
"datePublished": "2025-07-20T00:00:00.000Z",
"dateReserved": "2025-07-20T00:00:00.000Z",
"dateUpdated": "2025-08-10T00:19:19.943Z",
"state": "PUBLISHED"
},
"dataType": "CVE_RECORD",
"dataVersion": "5.1"
}
CVE-2025-54136 (GCVE-0-2025-54136)
Vulnerability from cvelistv5 – Published: 2025-08-01 23:08 – Updated: 2025-08-04 17:16
VLAI
EPSS
VEX
Title
Cursor's Modification of MCP Server Definitions Bypasses Manual Re-approvals
Summary
Cursor is a code editor built for programming with AI. In versions 1.2.4 and below, attackers can achieve remote and persistent code execution by modifying an already trusted MCP configuration file inside a shared GitHub repository or editing the file locally on the target's machine. Once a collaborator accepts a harmless MCP, the attacker can silently swap it for a malicious command (e.g., calc.exe) without triggering any warning or re-prompt. If an attacker has write permissions on a user's active branches of a source repository that contains existing MCP servers the user has previously approved, or allows an attacker has arbitrary file-write locally, the attacker can achieve arbitrary code execution. This is fixed in version 1.3.
Severity
7.2 (High)
SSVC
Exploitation: none
Automatable: no
Technical Impact: total
CISA Coordinator (v2.0.3)
CWE
- CWE-78 - Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in an OS Command ('OS Command Injection')
Assigner
References
1 reference
| URL | Tags |
|---|---|
| https://github.com/cursor/cursor/security/advisor… | x_refsource_CONFIRM |
{
"containers": {
"adp": [
{
"metrics": [
{
"other": {
"content": {
"id": "CVE-2025-54136",
"options": [
{
"Exploitation": "none"
},
{
"Automatable": "no"
},
{
"Technical Impact": "total"
}
],
"role": "CISA Coordinator",
"timestamp": "2025-08-04T17:16:34.453679Z",
"version": "2.0.3"
},
"type": "ssvc"
}
}
],
"providerMetadata": {
"dateUpdated": "2025-08-04T17:16:42.841Z",
"orgId": "134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0",
"shortName": "CISA-ADP"
},
"title": "CISA ADP Vulnrichment"
}
],
"cna": {
"affected": [
{
"product": "cursor",
"vendor": "cursor",
"versions": [
{
"status": "affected",
"version": "\u003c 1.3"
}
]
}
],
"descriptions": [
{
"lang": "en",
"value": "Cursor is a code editor built for programming with AI. In versions 1.2.4 and below, attackers can achieve remote and persistent code execution by modifying an already trusted MCP configuration file inside a shared GitHub repository or editing the file locally on the target\u0027s machine. Once a collaborator accepts a harmless MCP, the attacker can silently swap it for a malicious command (e.g., calc.exe) without triggering any warning or re-prompt. If an attacker has write permissions on a user\u0027s active branches of a source repository that contains existing MCP servers the user has previously approved, or allows an attacker has arbitrary file-write locally, the attacker can achieve arbitrary code execution. This is fixed in version 1.3."
}
],
"metrics": [
{
"cvssV3_1": {
"attackComplexity": "LOW",
"attackVector": "NETWORK",
"availabilityImpact": "HIGH",
"baseScore": 7.2,
"baseSeverity": "HIGH",
"confidentialityImpact": "HIGH",
"integrityImpact": "HIGH",
"privilegesRequired": "HIGH",
"scope": "UNCHANGED",
"userInteraction": "NONE",
"vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
"version": "3.1"
}
}
],
"problemTypes": [
{
"descriptions": [
{
"cweId": "CWE-78",
"description": "CWE-78: Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in an OS Command (\u0027OS Command Injection\u0027)",
"lang": "en",
"type": "CWE"
}
]
}
],
"providerMetadata": {
"dateUpdated": "2025-08-01T23:08:21.817Z",
"orgId": "a0819718-46f1-4df5-94e2-005712e83aaa",
"shortName": "GitHub_M"
},
"references": [
{
"name": "https://github.com/cursor/cursor/security/advisories/GHSA-24mc-g4xr-4395",
"tags": [
"x_refsource_CONFIRM"
],
"url": "https://github.com/cursor/cursor/security/advisories/GHSA-24mc-g4xr-4395"
}
],
"source": {
"advisory": "GHSA-24mc-g4xr-4395",
"discovery": "UNKNOWN"
},
"title": "Cursor\u0027s Modification of MCP Server Definitions Bypasses Manual Re-approvals"
}
},
"cveMetadata": {
"assignerOrgId": "a0819718-46f1-4df5-94e2-005712e83aaa",
"assignerShortName": "GitHub_M",
"cveId": "CVE-2025-54136",
"datePublished": "2025-08-01T23:08:21.817Z",
"dateReserved": "2025-07-16T23:53:40.510Z",
"dateUpdated": "2025-08-04T17:16:42.841Z",
"state": "PUBLISHED"
},
"dataType": "CVE_RECORD",
"dataVersion": "5.1"
}
CVE-2025-54135 (GCVE-0-2025-54135)
Vulnerability from cvelistv5 – Published: 2025-08-05 00:11 – Updated: 2025-08-05 13:58
VLAI
EPSS
VEX
Title
Cursor Agent is vulnerable to prompt injection via MCP Special Files
Summary
Cursor is a code editor built for programming with AI. Cursor allows writing in-workspace files with no user approval in versions below 1.3.9, If the file is a dotfile, editing it requires approval but creating a new one doesn't. Hence, if sensitive MCP files, such as the .cursor/mcp.json file don't already exist in the workspace, an attacker can chain a indirect prompt injection vulnerability to hijack the context to write to the settings file and trigger RCE on the victim without user approval. This is fixed in version 1.3.9.
Severity
8.6 (High)
SSVC
Exploitation: none
Automatable: no
Technical Impact: total
CISA Coordinator (v2.0.3)
CWE
Assigner
References
1 reference
| URL | Tags |
|---|---|
| https://github.com/cursor/cursor/security/advisor… | x_refsource_CONFIRM |
{
"containers": {
"adp": [
{
"metrics": [
{
"other": {
"content": {
"id": "CVE-2025-54135",
"options": [
{
"Exploitation": "none"
},
{
"Automatable": "no"
},
{
"Technical Impact": "total"
}
],
"role": "CISA Coordinator",
"timestamp": "2025-08-05T13:58:32.369007Z",
"version": "2.0.3"
},
"type": "ssvc"
}
}
],
"providerMetadata": {
"dateUpdated": "2025-08-05T13:58:39.517Z",
"orgId": "134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0",
"shortName": "CISA-ADP"
},
"title": "CISA ADP Vulnrichment"
}
],
"cna": {
"affected": [
{
"product": "cursor",
"vendor": "cursor",
"versions": [
{
"status": "affected",
"version": "\u003c 1.3.9"
}
]
}
],
"descriptions": [
{
"lang": "en",
"value": "Cursor is a code editor built for programming with AI. Cursor allows writing in-workspace files with no user approval in versions below 1.3.9, If the file is a dotfile, editing it requires approval but creating a new one doesn\u0027t. Hence, if sensitive MCP files, such as the .cursor/mcp.json file don\u0027t already exist in the workspace, an attacker can chain a indirect prompt injection vulnerability to hijack the context to write to the settings file and trigger RCE on the victim without user approval. This is fixed in version 1.3.9."
}
],
"metrics": [
{
"cvssV3_1": {
"attackComplexity": "HIGH",
"attackVector": "NETWORK",
"availabilityImpact": "HIGH",
"baseScore": 8.6,
"baseSeverity": "HIGH",
"confidentialityImpact": "HIGH",
"integrityImpact": "HIGH",
"privilegesRequired": "LOW",
"scope": "CHANGED",
"userInteraction": "NONE",
"vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H",
"version": "3.1"
}
}
],
"problemTypes": [
{
"descriptions": [
{
"cweId": "CWE-78",
"description": "CWE-78: Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in an OS Command (\u0027OS Command Injection\u0027)",
"lang": "en",
"type": "CWE"
}
]
},
{
"descriptions": [
{
"cweId": "CWE-829",
"description": "CWE-829: Inclusion of Functionality from Untrusted Control Sphere",
"lang": "en",
"type": "CWE"
}
]
}
],
"providerMetadata": {
"dateUpdated": "2025-08-05T00:11:07.363Z",
"orgId": "a0819718-46f1-4df5-94e2-005712e83aaa",
"shortName": "GitHub_M"
},
"references": [
{
"name": "https://github.com/cursor/cursor/security/advisories/GHSA-4cxx-hrm3-49rm",
"tags": [
"x_refsource_CONFIRM"
],
"url": "https://github.com/cursor/cursor/security/advisories/GHSA-4cxx-hrm3-49rm"
}
],
"source": {
"advisory": "GHSA-4cxx-hrm3-49rm",
"discovery": "UNKNOWN"
},
"title": "Cursor Agent is vulnerable to prompt injection via MCP Special Files"
}
},
"cveMetadata": {
"assignerOrgId": "a0819718-46f1-4df5-94e2-005712e83aaa",
"assignerShortName": "GitHub_M",
"cveId": "CVE-2025-54135",
"datePublished": "2025-08-05T00:11:07.363Z",
"dateReserved": "2025-07-16T23:53:40.510Z",
"dateUpdated": "2025-08-05T13:58:39.517Z",
"state": "PUBLISHED"
},
"dataType": "CVE_RECORD",
"dataVersion": "5.1"
}
CVE-2025-54133 (GCVE-0-2025-54133)
Vulnerability from cvelistv5 – Published: 2025-08-01 23:07 – Updated: 2025-08-04 17:17
VLAI
EPSS
VEX
Title
Cursor's MCP Install Deeplink Does Not Show Arguments in its User-Dialog
Summary
Cursor is a code editor built for programming with AI. In versions 1.17 through 1.2, there is a UI information disclosure vulnerability in Cursor's MCP (Model Context Protocol) deeplink handler, allowing attackers to execute 2-click arbitrary system commands through social engineering attacks. When users click malicious `cursor://anysphere.cursor-deeplink/mcp/install` links, the installation dialog does not show the arguments being passed to the command being run. If a user clicks a malicious deeplink, then examines the installation dialog and clicks through, the full command including the arguments will be executed on the machine. This is fixed in version 1.3.
Severity
SSVC
Exploitation: none
Automatable: no
Technical Impact: partial
CISA Coordinator (v2.0.3)
CWE
Assigner
References
1 reference
| URL | Tags |
|---|---|
| https://github.com/cursor/cursor/security/advisor… | x_refsource_CONFIRM |
{
"containers": {
"adp": [
{
"metrics": [
{
"other": {
"content": {
"id": "CVE-2025-54133",
"options": [
{
"Exploitation": "none"
},
{
"Automatable": "no"
},
{
"Technical Impact": "partial"
}
],
"role": "CISA Coordinator",
"timestamp": "2025-08-04T17:16:58.224335Z",
"version": "2.0.3"
},
"type": "ssvc"
}
}
],
"providerMetadata": {
"dateUpdated": "2025-08-04T17:17:06.179Z",
"orgId": "134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0",
"shortName": "CISA-ADP"
},
"title": "CISA ADP Vulnrichment"
}
],
"cna": {
"affected": [
{
"product": "cursor",
"vendor": "cursor",
"versions": [
{
"status": "affected",
"version": "\u003e= 1.17, \u003c 1.3"
}
]
}
],
"descriptions": [
{
"lang": "en",
"value": "Cursor is a code editor built for programming with AI. In versions 1.17 through 1.2, there is a UI information disclosure vulnerability in Cursor\u0027s MCP (Model Context Protocol) deeplink handler, allowing attackers to execute 2-click arbitrary system commands through social engineering attacks. When users click malicious `cursor://anysphere.cursor-deeplink/mcp/install` links, the installation dialog does not show the arguments being passed to the command being run. If a user clicks a malicious deeplink, then examines the installation dialog and clicks through, the full command including the arguments will be executed on the machine. This is fixed in version 1.3."
}
],
"metrics": [
{
"cvssV4_0": {
"attackComplexity": "LOW",
"attackRequirements": "NONE",
"attackVector": "NETWORK",
"baseScore": 5.3,
"baseSeverity": "MEDIUM",
"privilegesRequired": "NONE",
"subAvailabilityImpact": "NONE",
"subConfidentialityImpact": "NONE",
"subIntegrityImpact": "NONE",
"userInteraction": "PASSIVE",
"vectorString": "CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:P/VC:L/VI:N/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N",
"version": "4.0",
"vulnAvailabilityImpact": "NONE",
"vulnConfidentialityImpact": "LOW",
"vulnIntegrityImpact": "NONE"
}
}
],
"problemTypes": [
{
"descriptions": [
{
"cweId": "CWE-78",
"description": "CWE-78: Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in an OS Command (\u0027OS Command Injection\u0027)",
"lang": "en",
"type": "CWE"
}
]
},
{
"descriptions": [
{
"cweId": "CWE-200",
"description": "CWE-200: Exposure of Sensitive Information to an Unauthorized Actor",
"lang": "en",
"type": "CWE"
}
]
}
],
"providerMetadata": {
"dateUpdated": "2025-08-01T23:07:00.592Z",
"orgId": "a0819718-46f1-4df5-94e2-005712e83aaa",
"shortName": "GitHub_M"
},
"references": [
{
"name": "https://github.com/cursor/cursor/security/advisories/GHSA-r22h-5wp2-2wfv",
"tags": [
"x_refsource_CONFIRM"
],
"url": "https://github.com/cursor/cursor/security/advisories/GHSA-r22h-5wp2-2wfv"
}
],
"source": {
"advisory": "GHSA-r22h-5wp2-2wfv",
"discovery": "UNKNOWN"
},
"title": "Cursor\u0027s MCP Install Deeplink Does Not Show Arguments in its User-Dialog"
}
},
"cveMetadata": {
"assignerOrgId": "a0819718-46f1-4df5-94e2-005712e83aaa",
"assignerShortName": "GitHub_M",
"cveId": "CVE-2025-54133",
"datePublished": "2025-08-01T23:07:00.592Z",
"dateReserved": "2025-07-16T23:53:40.510Z",
"dateUpdated": "2025-08-04T17:17:06.179Z",
"state": "PUBLISHED"
},
"dataType": "CVE_RECORD",
"dataVersion": "5.1"
}
CVE-2025-54123 (GCVE-0-2025-54123)
Vulnerability from cvelistv5 – Published: 2025-09-10 18:41 – Updated: 2025-09-10 19:48
VLAI
EPSS
VEX
Title
Hoverfly vulnerable to remote code execution at `/api/v2/hoverfly/middleware` endpoint due to insecure middleware implementation
Summary
Hoverfly is an open source API simulation tool. In versions 1.11.3 and prior, the middleware functionality in Hoverfly is vulnerable to command injection vulnerability at `/api/v2/hoverfly/middleware` endpoint due to insufficient validation and sanitization in user input. The vulnerability exists in the middleware management API endpoint `/api/v2/hoverfly/middleware`. This issue is born due to combination of three code level flaws: Insufficient Input Validation in middleware.go line 94-96; Unsafe Command Execution in local_middleware.go line 14-19; and Immediate Execution During Testing in hoverfly_service.go line 173. This allows an attacker to gain remote code execution (RCE) on any system running the vulnerable Hoverfly service. Since the input is directly passed to system commands without proper checks, an attacker can upload a malicious payload or directly execute arbitrary commands (including reverse shells) on the host server with the privileges of the Hoverfly process. Commit 17e60a9bc78826deb4b782dca1c1abd3dbe60d40 in version 1.12.0 disables the set middleware API by default, and subsequent changes to documentation make users aware of the security changes of exposing the set middleware API.
Severity
9.8 (Critical)
SSVC
Exploitation: poc
Automatable: yes
Technical Impact: total
CISA Coordinator (v2.0.3)
CWE
Assigner
References
6 references
| URL | Tags |
|---|---|
| https://github.com/SpectoLabs/hoverfly/security/a… | x_refsource_CONFIRM |
| https://github.com/SpectoLabs/hoverfly/commit/17e… | x_refsource_MISC |
| https://github.com/SpectoLabs/hoverfly/commit/a9d… | x_refsource_MISC |
| https://github.com/SpectoLabs/hoverfly/blob/maste… | x_refsource_MISC |
| https://github.com/SpectoLabs/hoverfly/blob/maste… | x_refsource_MISC |
| https://github.com/SpectoLabs/hoverfly/blob/maste… | x_refsource_MISC |
Impacted products
1 product
| Vendor | Product | Version | |
|---|---|---|---|
| SpectoLabs | hoverfly |
Affected:
<= 1.11.3
|
{
"containers": {
"adp": [
{
"metrics": [
{
"other": {
"content": {
"id": "CVE-2025-54123",
"options": [
{
"Exploitation": "poc"
},
{
"Automatable": "yes"
},
{
"Technical Impact": "total"
}
],
"role": "CISA Coordinator",
"timestamp": "2025-09-10T18:47:39.102101Z",
"version": "2.0.3"
},
"type": "ssvc"
}
}
],
"providerMetadata": {
"dateUpdated": "2025-09-10T18:47:41.647Z",
"orgId": "134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0",
"shortName": "CISA-ADP"
},
"references": [
{
"tags": [
"exploit"
],
"url": "https://github.com/SpectoLabs/hoverfly/security/advisories/GHSA-r4h8-hfp2-ggmf"
}
],
"title": "CISA ADP Vulnrichment"
}
],
"cna": {
"affected": [
{
"product": "hoverfly",
"vendor": "SpectoLabs",
"versions": [
{
"status": "affected",
"version": "\u003c= 1.11.3"
}
]
}
],
"descriptions": [
{
"lang": "en",
"value": "Hoverfly is an open source API simulation tool. In versions 1.11.3 and prior, the middleware functionality in Hoverfly is vulnerable to command injection vulnerability at `/api/v2/hoverfly/middleware` endpoint due to insufficient validation and sanitization in user input. The vulnerability exists in the middleware management API endpoint `/api/v2/hoverfly/middleware`. This issue is born due to combination of three code level flaws: Insufficient Input Validation in middleware.go line 94-96; Unsafe Command Execution in local_middleware.go line 14-19; and Immediate Execution During Testing in hoverfly_service.go line 173. This allows an attacker to gain remote code execution (RCE) on any system running the vulnerable Hoverfly service. Since the input is directly passed to system commands without proper checks, an attacker can upload a malicious payload or directly execute arbitrary commands (including reverse shells) on the host server with the privileges of the Hoverfly process. Commit 17e60a9bc78826deb4b782dca1c1abd3dbe60d40 in version 1.12.0 disables the set middleware API by default, and subsequent changes to documentation make users aware of the security changes of exposing the set middleware API."
}
],
"metrics": [
{
"cvssV3_1": {
"attackComplexity": "LOW",
"attackVector": "NETWORK",
"availabilityImpact": "HIGH",
"baseScore": 9.8,
"baseSeverity": "CRITICAL",
"confidentialityImpact": "HIGH",
"integrityImpact": "HIGH",
"privilegesRequired": "NONE",
"scope": "UNCHANGED",
"userInteraction": "NONE",
"vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
"version": "3.1"
}
}
],
"problemTypes": [
{
"descriptions": [
{
"cweId": "CWE-20",
"description": "CWE-20: Improper Input Validation",
"lang": "en",
"type": "CWE"
}
]
},
{
"descriptions": [
{
"cweId": "CWE-78",
"description": "CWE-78: Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in an OS Command (\u0027OS Command Injection\u0027)",
"lang": "en",
"type": "CWE"
}
]
}
],
"providerMetadata": {
"dateUpdated": "2025-09-10T19:48:59.256Z",
"orgId": "a0819718-46f1-4df5-94e2-005712e83aaa",
"shortName": "GitHub_M"
},
"references": [
{
"name": "https://github.com/SpectoLabs/hoverfly/security/advisories/GHSA-r4h8-hfp2-ggmf",
"tags": [
"x_refsource_CONFIRM"
],
"url": "https://github.com/SpectoLabs/hoverfly/security/advisories/GHSA-r4h8-hfp2-ggmf"
},
{
"name": "https://github.com/SpectoLabs/hoverfly/commit/17e60a9bc78826deb4b782dca1c1abd3dbe60d40",
"tags": [
"x_refsource_MISC"
],
"url": "https://github.com/SpectoLabs/hoverfly/commit/17e60a9bc78826deb4b782dca1c1abd3dbe60d40"
},
{
"name": "https://github.com/SpectoLabs/hoverfly/commit/a9d4da7bd7269651f54542ab790d0c613d568d3e",
"tags": [
"x_refsource_MISC"
],
"url": "https://github.com/SpectoLabs/hoverfly/commit/a9d4da7bd7269651f54542ab790d0c613d568d3e"
},
{
"name": "https://github.com/SpectoLabs/hoverfly/blob/master/core/hoverfly_service.go#L173",
"tags": [
"x_refsource_MISC"
],
"url": "https://github.com/SpectoLabs/hoverfly/blob/master/core/hoverfly_service.go#L173"
},
{
"name": "https://github.com/SpectoLabs/hoverfly/blob/master/core/middleware/local_middleware.go#L13",
"tags": [
"x_refsource_MISC"
],
"url": "https://github.com/SpectoLabs/hoverfly/blob/master/core/middleware/local_middleware.go#L13"
},
{
"name": "https://github.com/SpectoLabs/hoverfly/blob/master/core/middleware/middleware.go#L93",
"tags": [
"x_refsource_MISC"
],
"url": "https://github.com/SpectoLabs/hoverfly/blob/master/core/middleware/middleware.go#L93"
}
],
"source": {
"advisory": "GHSA-r4h8-hfp2-ggmf",
"discovery": "UNKNOWN"
},
"title": "Hoverfly vulnerable to remote code execution at `/api/v2/hoverfly/middleware` endpoint due to insecure middleware implementation"
}
},
"cveMetadata": {
"assignerOrgId": "a0819718-46f1-4df5-94e2-005712e83aaa",
"assignerShortName": "GitHub_M",
"cveId": "CVE-2025-54123",
"datePublished": "2025-09-10T18:41:46.370Z",
"dateReserved": "2025-07-16T23:53:40.509Z",
"dateUpdated": "2025-09-10T19:48:59.256Z",
"state": "PUBLISHED"
},
"dataType": "CVE_RECORD",
"dataVersion": "5.1"
}
CVE-2025-54084 (GCVE-0-2025-54084)
Vulnerability from cvelistv5 – Published: 2025-09-09 20:37 – Updated: 2025-09-12 13:59
VLAI
EPSS
VEX
Title
Calix Gigacenter ONT - Command Injection
Summary
OS Command ('OS Command Injection') vulnerability in Calix GigaCenter ONT (Quantenna SoC modules) allows authenticated attackers with 'super' user credentials to execute arbitrary OS commands through improper input validation, potentially leading to full system compromise.This issue affects GigaCenter ONT: 844E, 844G, 844GE, 854GE.
Severity
SSVC
Exploitation: poc
Automatable: no
Technical Impact: total
CISA Coordinator (v2.0.3)
CWE
- CWE-78 - Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in an OS Command ('OS Command Injection')
Assigner
References
3 references
| URL | Tags |
|---|---|
| https://fluidattacks.com/advisories/bacalao | third-party-advisory |
| https://www.calix.com | productrelated |
| https://revers3everything.com/calix-case-five-0-d… | third-party-advisory |
Impacted products
1 product
| Vendor | Product | Version | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Calix | GigaCenter ONT |
Affected:
844E
(custom)
Affected: 844G (custom) Affected: 844GE (custom) Affected: 854GE (custom) |
{
"containers": {
"adp": [
{
"metrics": [
{
"other": {
"content": {
"id": "CVE-2025-54084",
"options": [
{
"Exploitation": "poc"
},
{
"Automatable": "no"
},
{
"Technical Impact": "total"
}
],
"role": "CISA Coordinator",
"timestamp": "2025-09-10T15:55:26.837997Z",
"version": "2.0.3"
},
"type": "ssvc"
}
}
],
"providerMetadata": {
"dateUpdated": "2025-09-10T15:55:56.704Z",
"orgId": "134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0",
"shortName": "CISA-ADP"
},
"references": [
{
"tags": [
"exploit"
],
"url": "https://fluidattacks.com/advisories/bacalao"
}
],
"title": "CISA ADP Vulnrichment"
}
],
"cna": {
"affected": [
{
"defaultStatus": "unaffected",
"modules": [
"Quantenna SoC"
],
"product": "GigaCenter ONT",
"vendor": "Calix",
"versions": [
{
"status": "affected",
"version": "844E",
"versionType": "custom"
},
{
"status": "affected",
"version": "844G",
"versionType": "custom"
},
{
"status": "affected",
"version": "844GE",
"versionType": "custom"
},
{
"status": "affected",
"version": "854GE",
"versionType": "custom"
}
]
}
],
"cpeApplicability": [
{
"nodes": [
{
"cpeMatch": [
{
"criteria": "cpe:2.3:a:calix:gigacenter_ont:844e:*:*:*:*:*:*:*",
"vulnerable": true
},
{
"criteria": "cpe:2.3:a:calix:gigacenter_ont:844g:*:*:*:*:*:*:*",
"vulnerable": true
},
{
"criteria": "cpe:2.3:a:calix:gigacenter_ont:844ge:*:*:*:*:*:*:*",
"vulnerable": true
},
{
"criteria": "cpe:2.3:a:calix:gigacenter_ont:854ge:*:*:*:*:*:*:*",
"vulnerable": true
}
],
"negate": false,
"operator": "OR"
}
],
"operator": "OR"
}
],
"descriptions": [
{
"lang": "en",
"supportingMedia": [
{
"base64": false,
"type": "text/html",
"value": "OS Command (\u0027OS Command Injection\u0027) vulnerability in Calix GigaCenter ONT (Quantenna SoC modules)\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan style=\"background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);\"\u003eallows authenticated attackers with \u0027super\u0027 user credentials to execute arbitrary OS commands through improper input validation, potentially leading to full system compromise.\u003c/span\u003e\u003cp\u003eThis issue affects GigaCenter ONT: 844E, 844G, 844GE, 854GE.\u003c/p\u003e"
}
],
"value": "OS Command (\u0027OS Command Injection\u0027) vulnerability in Calix GigaCenter ONT (Quantenna SoC modules)\u00a0allows authenticated attackers with \u0027super\u0027 user credentials to execute arbitrary OS commands through improper input validation, potentially leading to full system compromise.This issue affects GigaCenter ONT: 844E, 844G, 844GE, 854GE."
}
],
"impacts": [
{
"capecId": "CAPEC-88",
"descriptions": [
{
"lang": "en",
"value": "CAPEC-88 OS Command Injection"
}
]
}
],
"metrics": [
{
"cvssV4_0": {
"Automatable": "NOT_DEFINED",
"Recovery": "NOT_DEFINED",
"Safety": "NOT_DEFINED",
"attackComplexity": "LOW",
"attackRequirements": "NONE",
"attackVector": "ADJACENT",
"baseScore": 8.5,
"baseSeverity": "HIGH",
"privilegesRequired": "HIGH",
"providerUrgency": "NOT_DEFINED",
"subAvailabilityImpact": "NONE",
"subConfidentialityImpact": "NONE",
"subIntegrityImpact": "NONE",
"userInteraction": "NONE",
"valueDensity": "NOT_DEFINED",
"vectorString": "CVSS:4.0/AV:A/AC:L/AT:N/PR:H/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N",
"version": "4.0",
"vulnAvailabilityImpact": "HIGH",
"vulnConfidentialityImpact": "HIGH",
"vulnIntegrityImpact": "HIGH",
"vulnerabilityResponseEffort": "NOT_DEFINED"
},
"format": "CVSS",
"scenarios": [
{
"lang": "en",
"value": "GENERAL"
}
]
}
],
"problemTypes": [
{
"descriptions": [
{
"cweId": "CWE-78",
"description": "CWE-78 Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in an OS Command (\u0027OS Command Injection\u0027)",
"lang": "en",
"type": "CWE"
}
]
}
],
"providerMetadata": {
"dateUpdated": "2025-09-12T13:59:00.965Z",
"orgId": "84fe0718-d6bb-4716-a7e8-81a6d1daa869",
"shortName": "Fluid Attacks"
},
"references": [
{
"tags": [
"third-party-advisory"
],
"url": "https://fluidattacks.com/advisories/bacalao"
},
{
"tags": [
"product",
"related"
],
"url": "https://www.calix.com"
},
{
"tags": [
"third-party-advisory"
],
"url": "https://revers3everything.com/calix-case-five-0-days-five-cves/"
}
],
"source": {
"discovery": "UNKNOWN"
},
"title": "Calix Gigacenter ONT - Command Injection",
"x_generator": {
"engine": "Vulnogram 0.2.0"
}
}
},
"cveMetadata": {
"assignerOrgId": "84fe0718-d6bb-4716-a7e8-81a6d1daa869",
"assignerShortName": "Fluid Attacks",
"cveId": "CVE-2025-54084",
"datePublished": "2025-09-09T20:37:28.023Z",
"dateReserved": "2025-07-16T15:11:01.685Z",
"dateUpdated": "2025-09-12T13:59:00.965Z",
"state": "PUBLISHED"
},
"dataType": "CVE_RECORD",
"dataVersion": "5.1"
}
CVE-2025-54074 (GCVE-0-2025-54074)
Vulnerability from cvelistv5 – Published: 2025-08-13 13:27 – Updated: 2025-08-13 14:15
VLAI
EPSS
VEX
Title
Cherry Studio is Vulnerable to OS Command Injection during Connection with a Malicious MCP Server
Summary
Cherry Studio is a desktop client that supports for multiple LLM providers. From versions 1.2.5 to 1.5.1, Cherry Studio is vulnerable to OS Command Injection during a connection with a malicious MCP server in HTTP Streamable mode. Attackers can setup a malicious MCP server with compatible OAuth authorization server endpoints and trick victims into connecting it, leading to OS command injection in vulnerable clients. This issue has been patched in version 1.5.2.
Severity
SSVC
Exploitation: poc
Automatable: no
Technical Impact: total
CISA Coordinator (v2.0.3)
CWE
- CWE-78 - Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in an OS Command ('OS Command Injection')
Assigner
References
2 references
| URL | Tags |
|---|---|
| https://github.com/CherryHQ/cherry-studio/securit… | x_refsource_CONFIRM |
| https://github.com/CherryHQ/cherry-studio/commit/… | x_refsource_MISC |
Impacted products
1 product
| Vendor | Product | Version | |
|---|---|---|---|
| CherryHQ | cherry-studio |
Affected:
>= 1.2.5, < 1.5.2
|
{
"containers": {
"adp": [
{
"metrics": [
{
"other": {
"content": {
"id": "CVE-2025-54074",
"options": [
{
"Exploitation": "poc"
},
{
"Automatable": "no"
},
{
"Technical Impact": "total"
}
],
"role": "CISA Coordinator",
"timestamp": "2025-08-13T14:15:04.480739Z",
"version": "2.0.3"
},
"type": "ssvc"
}
}
],
"providerMetadata": {
"dateUpdated": "2025-08-13T14:15:16.261Z",
"orgId": "134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0",
"shortName": "CISA-ADP"
},
"title": "CISA ADP Vulnrichment"
}
],
"cna": {
"affected": [
{
"product": "cherry-studio",
"vendor": "CherryHQ",
"versions": [
{
"status": "affected",
"version": "\u003e= 1.2.5, \u003c 1.5.2"
}
]
}
],
"descriptions": [
{
"lang": "en",
"value": "Cherry Studio is a desktop client that supports for multiple LLM providers. From versions 1.2.5 to 1.5.1, Cherry Studio is vulnerable to OS Command Injection during a connection with a malicious MCP server in HTTP Streamable mode. Attackers can setup a malicious MCP server with compatible OAuth authorization server endpoints and trick victims into connecting it, leading to OS command injection in vulnerable clients. This issue has been patched in version 1.5.2."
}
],
"metrics": [
{
"cvssV4_0": {
"attackComplexity": "LOW",
"attackRequirements": "PRESENT",
"attackVector": "NETWORK",
"baseScore": 7.7,
"baseSeverity": "HIGH",
"privilegesRequired": "NONE",
"subAvailabilityImpact": "NONE",
"subConfidentialityImpact": "NONE",
"subIntegrityImpact": "NONE",
"userInteraction": "PASSIVE",
"vectorString": "CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:N/UI:P/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N",
"version": "4.0",
"vulnAvailabilityImpact": "HIGH",
"vulnConfidentialityImpact": "HIGH",
"vulnIntegrityImpact": "HIGH"
}
}
],
"problemTypes": [
{
"descriptions": [
{
"cweId": "CWE-78",
"description": "CWE-78: Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in an OS Command (\u0027OS Command Injection\u0027)",
"lang": "en",
"type": "CWE"
}
]
}
],
"providerMetadata": {
"dateUpdated": "2025-08-13T13:27:28.232Z",
"orgId": "a0819718-46f1-4df5-94e2-005712e83aaa",
"shortName": "GitHub_M"
},
"references": [
{
"name": "https://github.com/CherryHQ/cherry-studio/security/advisories/GHSA-8xr5-732g-84px",
"tags": [
"x_refsource_CONFIRM"
],
"url": "https://github.com/CherryHQ/cherry-studio/security/advisories/GHSA-8xr5-732g-84px"
},
{
"name": "https://github.com/CherryHQ/cherry-studio/commit/40f9601379150854826ff3572ef7372fb0acdc38",
"tags": [
"x_refsource_MISC"
],
"url": "https://github.com/CherryHQ/cherry-studio/commit/40f9601379150854826ff3572ef7372fb0acdc38"
}
],
"source": {
"advisory": "GHSA-8xr5-732g-84px",
"discovery": "UNKNOWN"
},
"title": "Cherry Studio is Vulnerable to OS Command Injection during Connection with a Malicious MCP Server"
}
},
"cveMetadata": {
"assignerOrgId": "a0819718-46f1-4df5-94e2-005712e83aaa",
"assignerShortName": "GitHub_M",
"cveId": "CVE-2025-54074",
"datePublished": "2025-08-13T13:27:28.232Z",
"dateReserved": "2025-07-16T13:22:18.205Z",
"dateUpdated": "2025-08-13T14:15:16.261Z",
"state": "PUBLISHED"
},
"dataType": "CVE_RECORD",
"dataVersion": "5.1"
}
CVE-2025-54072 (GCVE-0-2025-54072)
Vulnerability from cvelistv5 – Published: 2025-07-22 21:34 – Updated: 2025-07-23 18:30
VLAI
EPSS
VEX
Title
yt-dlp allows `--exec` command injection when using placeholder on Windows
Summary
yt-dlp is a feature-rich command-line audio/video downloader. In versions 2025.06.25 and below, when the --exec option is used on Windows with the default placeholder (or {}), insufficient sanitization is applied to the expanded filepath, allowing for remote code execution. This is a bypass of the mitigation for CVE-2024-22423 where the default placeholder and {} were not covered by the new escaping rules. Windows users who are unable to upgrade should avoid using --exec altogether. Instead, the --write-info-json or --dump-json options could be used, with an external script or command line consuming the JSON output. This is fixed in version 2025.07.21.
Severity
7.5 (High)
SSVC
Exploitation: poc
Automatable: no
Technical Impact: total
CISA Coordinator (v2.0.3)
CWE
- CWE-78 - Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in an OS Command ('OS Command Injection')
Assigner
References
3 references
| URL | Tags |
|---|---|
| https://github.com/yt-dlp/yt-dlp/security/advisor… | x_refsource_CONFIRM |
| https://github.com/yt-dlp/yt-dlp/commit/959ac99e9… | x_refsource_MISC |
| https://github.com/yt-dlp/yt-dlp/releases/tag/202… | x_refsource_MISC |
{
"containers": {
"adp": [
{
"metrics": [
{
"other": {
"content": {
"id": "CVE-2025-54072",
"options": [
{
"Exploitation": "poc"
},
{
"Automatable": "no"
},
{
"Technical Impact": "total"
}
],
"role": "CISA Coordinator",
"timestamp": "2025-07-23T18:29:54.467763Z",
"version": "2.0.3"
},
"type": "ssvc"
}
}
],
"providerMetadata": {
"dateUpdated": "2025-07-23T18:30:06.761Z",
"orgId": "134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0",
"shortName": "CISA-ADP"
},
"title": "CISA ADP Vulnrichment"
}
],
"cna": {
"affected": [
{
"product": "yt-dlp",
"vendor": "yt-dlp",
"versions": [
{
"status": "affected",
"version": "\u003c 2025.07.21"
}
]
}
],
"descriptions": [
{
"lang": "en",
"value": "yt-dlp is a feature-rich command-line audio/video downloader. In versions 2025.06.25 and below, when the --exec option is used on Windows with the default placeholder (or {}), insufficient sanitization is applied to the expanded filepath, allowing for remote code execution. This is a bypass of the mitigation for CVE-2024-22423 where the default placeholder and {} were not covered by the new escaping rules. Windows users who are unable to upgrade should avoid using --exec altogether. Instead, the --write-info-json or --dump-json options could be used, with an external script or command line consuming the JSON output. This is fixed in version 2025.07.21."
}
],
"metrics": [
{
"cvssV3_1": {
"attackComplexity": "HIGH",
"attackVector": "NETWORK",
"availabilityImpact": "HIGH",
"baseScore": 7.5,
"baseSeverity": "HIGH",
"confidentialityImpact": "HIGH",
"integrityImpact": "HIGH",
"privilegesRequired": "NONE",
"scope": "UNCHANGED",
"userInteraction": "REQUIRED",
"vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
"version": "3.1"
}
}
],
"problemTypes": [
{
"descriptions": [
{
"cweId": "CWE-78",
"description": "CWE-78: Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in an OS Command (\u0027OS Command Injection\u0027)",
"lang": "en",
"type": "CWE"
}
]
}
],
"providerMetadata": {
"dateUpdated": "2025-07-22T21:34:43.408Z",
"orgId": "a0819718-46f1-4df5-94e2-005712e83aaa",
"shortName": "GitHub_M"
},
"references": [
{
"name": "https://github.com/yt-dlp/yt-dlp/security/advisories/GHSA-45hg-7f49-5h56",
"tags": [
"x_refsource_CONFIRM"
],
"url": "https://github.com/yt-dlp/yt-dlp/security/advisories/GHSA-45hg-7f49-5h56"
},
{
"name": "https://github.com/yt-dlp/yt-dlp/commit/959ac99e98c3215437e573c22d64be42d361e863",
"tags": [
"x_refsource_MISC"
],
"url": "https://github.com/yt-dlp/yt-dlp/commit/959ac99e98c3215437e573c22d64be42d361e863"
},
{
"name": "https://github.com/yt-dlp/yt-dlp/releases/tag/2025.07.21",
"tags": [
"x_refsource_MISC"
],
"url": "https://github.com/yt-dlp/yt-dlp/releases/tag/2025.07.21"
}
],
"source": {
"advisory": "GHSA-45hg-7f49-5h56",
"discovery": "UNKNOWN"
},
"title": "yt-dlp allows `--exec` command injection when using placeholder on Windows"
}
},
"cveMetadata": {
"assignerOrgId": "a0819718-46f1-4df5-94e2-005712e83aaa",
"assignerShortName": "GitHub_M",
"cveId": "CVE-2025-54072",
"datePublished": "2025-07-22T21:34:43.408Z",
"dateReserved": "2025-07-16T13:22:18.205Z",
"dateUpdated": "2025-07-23T18:30:06.761Z",
"state": "PUBLISHED"
},
"dataType": "CVE_RECORD",
"dataVersion": "5.1"
}
Mitigation
Architecture and Design
If at all possible, use library calls rather than external processes to recreate the desired functionality.
Mitigation MIT-22
Architecture and Design
Operation
Strategy: Sandbox or Jail
- Run the code in a "jail" or similar sandbox environment that enforces strict boundaries between the process and the operating system. This may effectively restrict which files can be accessed in a particular directory or which commands can be executed by the software.
- OS-level examples include the Unix chroot jail, AppArmor, and SELinux. In general, managed code may provide some protection. For example, java.io.FilePermission in the Java SecurityManager allows the software to specify restrictions on file operations.
- This may not be a feasible solution, and it only limits the impact to the operating system; the rest of the application may still be subject to compromise.
- Be careful to avoid CWE-243 and other weaknesses related to jails.
Mitigation
Architecture and Design
Strategy: Attack Surface Reduction
For any data that will be used to generate a command to be executed, keep as much of that data out of external control as possible. For example, in web applications, this may require storing the data locally in the session's state instead of sending it out to the client in a hidden form field.
Mitigation MIT-15
Architecture and Design
For any security checks that are performed on the client side, ensure that these checks are duplicated on the server side, in order to avoid CWE-602. Attackers can bypass the client-side checks by modifying values after the checks have been performed, or by changing the client to remove the client-side checks entirely. Then, these modified values would be submitted to the server.
Mitigation MIT-4.3
Architecture and Design
Strategy: Libraries or Frameworks
- Use a vetted library or framework that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid.
- For example, consider using the ESAPI Encoding control [REF-45] or a similar tool, library, or framework. These will help the programmer encode outputs in a manner less prone to error.
Mitigation MIT-28
Implementation
Strategy: Output Encoding
While it is risky to use dynamically-generated query strings, code, or commands that mix control and data together, sometimes it may be unavoidable. Properly quote arguments and escape any special characters within those arguments. The most conservative approach is to escape or filter all characters that do not pass an extremely strict allowlist (such as everything that is not alphanumeric or white space). If some special characters are still needed, such as white space, wrap each argument in quotes after the escaping/filtering step. Be careful of argument injection (CWE-88).
Mitigation
Implementation
If the program to be executed allows arguments to be specified within an input file or from standard input, then consider using that mode to pass arguments instead of the command line.
Mitigation MIT-27
Architecture and Design
Strategy: Parameterization
- If available, use structured mechanisms that automatically enforce the separation between data and code. These mechanisms may be able to provide the relevant quoting, encoding, and validation automatically, instead of relying on the developer to provide this capability at every point where output is generated.
- Some languages offer multiple functions that can be used to invoke commands. Where possible, identify any function that invokes a command shell using a single string, and replace it with a function that requires individual arguments. These functions typically perform appropriate quoting and filtering of arguments. For example, in C, the system() function accepts a string that contains the entire command to be executed, whereas execl(), execve(), and others require an array of strings, one for each argument. In Windows, CreateProcess() only accepts one command at a time. In Perl, if system() is provided with an array of arguments, then it will quote each of the arguments.
Mitigation MIT-5
Implementation
Strategy: Input Validation
- Assume all input is malicious. Use an "accept known good" input validation strategy, i.e., use a list of acceptable inputs that strictly conform to specifications. Reject any input that does not strictly conform to specifications, or transform it into something that does.
- When performing input validation, consider all potentially relevant properties, including length, type of input, the full range of acceptable values, missing or extra inputs, syntax, consistency across related fields, and conformance to business rules. As an example of business rule logic, "boat" may be syntactically valid because it only contains alphanumeric characters, but it is not valid if the input is only expected to contain colors such as "red" or "blue."
- Do not rely exclusively on looking for malicious or malformed inputs. This is likely to miss at least one undesirable input, especially if the code's environment changes. This can give attackers enough room to bypass the intended validation. However, denylists can be useful for detecting potential attacks or determining which inputs are so malformed that they should be rejected outright.
- When constructing OS command strings, use stringent allowlists that limit the character set based on the expected value of the parameter in the request. This will indirectly limit the scope of an attack, but this technique is less important than proper output encoding and escaping.
- Note that proper output encoding, escaping, and quoting is the most effective solution for preventing OS command injection, although input validation may provide some defense-in-depth. This is because it effectively limits what will appear in output. Input validation will not always prevent OS command injection, especially if you are required to support free-form text fields that could contain arbitrary characters. For example, when invoking a mail program, you might need to allow the subject field to contain otherwise-dangerous inputs like ";" and ">" characters, which would need to be escaped or otherwise handled. In this case, stripping the character might reduce the risk of OS command injection, but it would produce incorrect behavior because the subject field would not be recorded as the user intended. This might seem to be a minor inconvenience, but it could be more important when the program relies on well-structured subject lines in order to pass messages to other components.
- Even if you make a mistake in your validation (such as forgetting one out of 100 input fields), appropriate encoding is still likely to protect you from injection-based attacks. As long as it is not done in isolation, input validation is still a useful technique, since it may significantly reduce your attack surface, allow you to detect some attacks, and provide other security benefits that proper encoding does not address.
Mitigation MIT-21
Architecture and Design
Strategy: Enforcement by Conversion
When the set of acceptable objects, such as filenames or URLs, is limited or known, create a mapping from a set of fixed input values (such as numeric IDs) to the actual filenames or URLs, and reject all other inputs.
Mitigation MIT-32
Operation
Strategy: Compilation or Build Hardening
Run the code in an environment that performs automatic taint propagation and prevents any command execution that uses tainted variables, such as Perl's "-T" switch. This will force the program to perform validation steps that remove the taint, although you must be careful to correctly validate your inputs so that you do not accidentally mark dangerous inputs as untainted (see CWE-183 and CWE-184).
Mitigation MIT-32
Operation
Strategy: Environment Hardening
Run the code in an environment that performs automatic taint propagation and prevents any command execution that uses tainted variables, such as Perl's "-T" switch. This will force the program to perform validation steps that remove the taint, although you must be careful to correctly validate your inputs so that you do not accidentally mark dangerous inputs as untainted (see CWE-183 and CWE-184).
Mitigation MIT-39
Implementation
- Ensure that error messages only contain minimal details that are useful to the intended audience and no one else. The messages need to strike the balance between being too cryptic (which can confuse users) or being too detailed (which may reveal more than intended). The messages should not reveal the methods that were used to determine the error. Attackers can use detailed information to refine or optimize their original attack, thereby increasing their chances of success.
- If errors must be captured in some detail, record them in log messages, but consider what could occur if the log messages can be viewed by attackers. Highly sensitive information such as passwords should never be saved to log files.
- Avoid inconsistent messaging that might accidentally tip off an attacker about internal state, such as whether a user account exists or not.
- In the context of OS Command Injection, error information passed back to the user might reveal whether an OS command is being executed and possibly which command is being used.
Mitigation
Operation
Strategy: Sandbox or Jail
Use runtime policy enforcement to create an allowlist of allowable commands, then prevent use of any command that does not appear in the allowlist. Technologies such as AppArmor are available to do this.
Mitigation MIT-29
Operation
Strategy: Firewall
Use an application firewall that can detect attacks against this weakness. It can be beneficial in cases in which the code cannot be fixed (because it is controlled by a third party), as an emergency prevention measure while more comprehensive software assurance measures are applied, or to provide defense in depth [REF-1481].
Mitigation MIT-17
Architecture and Design
Operation
Strategy: Environment Hardening
Run your code using the lowest privileges that are required to accomplish the necessary tasks [REF-76]. If possible, create isolated accounts with limited privileges that are only used for a single task. That way, a successful attack will not immediately give the attacker access to the rest of the software or its environment. For example, database applications rarely need to run as the database administrator, especially in day-to-day operations.
Mitigation MIT-16
Operation
Implementation
Strategy: Environment Hardening
When using PHP, configure the application so that it does not use register_globals. During implementation, develop the application so that it does not rely on this feature, but be wary of implementing a register_globals emulation that is subject to weaknesses such as CWE-95, CWE-621, and similar issues.
CAPEC-108: Command Line Execution through SQL Injection
An attacker uses standard SQL injection methods to inject data into the command line for execution. This could be done directly through misuse of directives such as MSSQL_xp_cmdshell or indirectly through injection of data into the database that would be interpreted as shell commands. Sometime later, an unscrupulous backend application (or could be part of the functionality of the same application) fetches the injected data stored in the database and uses this data as command line arguments without performing proper validation. The malicious data escapes that data plane by spawning new commands to be executed on the host.
CAPEC-15: Command Delimiters
An attack of this type exploits a programs' vulnerabilities that allows an attacker's commands to be concatenated onto a legitimate command with the intent of targeting other resources such as the file system or database. The system that uses a filter or denylist input validation, as opposed to allowlist validation is vulnerable to an attacker who predicts delimiters (or combinations of delimiters) not present in the filter or denylist. As with other injection attacks, the attacker uses the command delimiter payload as an entry point to tunnel through the application and activate additional attacks through SQL queries, shell commands, network scanning, and so on.
CAPEC-43: Exploiting Multiple Input Interpretation Layers
An attacker supplies the target software with input data that contains sequences of special characters designed to bypass input validation logic. This exploit relies on the target making multiples passes over the input data and processing a "layer" of special characters with each pass. In this manner, the attacker can disguise input that would otherwise be rejected as invalid by concealing it with layers of special/escape characters that are stripped off by subsequent processing steps. The goal is to first discover cases where the input validation layer executes before one or more parsing layers. That is, user input may go through the following logic in an application: <parser1> --> <input validator> --> <parser2>. In such cases, the attacker will need to provide input that will pass through the input validator, but after passing through parser2, will be converted into something that the input validator was supposed to stop.
CAPEC-6: Argument Injection
An attacker changes the behavior or state of a targeted application through injecting data or command syntax through the targets use of non-validated and non-filtered arguments of exposed services or methods.
CAPEC-88: OS Command Injection
In this type of an attack, an adversary injects operating system commands into existing application functions. An application that uses untrusted input to build command strings is vulnerable. An adversary can leverage OS command injection in an application to elevate privileges, execute arbitrary commands and compromise the underlying operating system.