GHSA-5PGV-4JF4-9R43
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-04-18 06:30 – Updated: 2026-04-18 06:30
VLAI?
Details
In iTerm2 through 3.6.9, displaying a .txt file can cause code execution via DCS 2000p and OSC 135 data, if the working directory contains a malicious file whose name is valid output from the conductor encoding path, such as a pathname with an initial ace/c+ substring, aka "hypothetical in-band signaling abuse." This occurs because iTerm2 accepts the SSH conductor protocol from terminal output that does not originate from a legitimate conductor session.
Severity ?
6.9 (Medium)
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2026-41253"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-829"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2026-04-18T06:16:17Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "In iTerm2 through 3.6.9, displaying a .txt file can cause code execution via DCS 2000p and OSC 135 data, if the working directory contains a malicious file whose name is valid output from the conductor encoding path, such as a pathname with an initial ace/c+ substring, aka \"hypothetical in-band signaling abuse.\" This occurs because iTerm2 accepts the SSH conductor protocol from terminal output that does not originate from a legitimate conductor session.",
"id": "GHSA-5pgv-4jf4-9r43",
"modified": "2026-04-18T06:30:14Z",
"published": "2026-04-18T06:30:14Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-41253"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/gnachman/iTerm2/commit/a9e745993c2e2cbb30b884a16617cd5495899f86"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://blog.calif.io/p/mad-bugs-even-cat-readmetxt-is-not"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://iterm2.com/downloads.html"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47809190"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:L",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
Loading…
Loading…
Sightings
| Author | Source | Type | Date |
|---|
Nomenclature
- Seen: The vulnerability was mentioned, discussed, or observed by the user.
- Confirmed: The vulnerability has been validated from an analyst's perspective.
- Published Proof of Concept: A public proof of concept is available for this vulnerability.
- Exploited: The vulnerability was observed as exploited by the user who reported the sighting.
- Patched: The vulnerability was observed as successfully patched by the user who reported the sighting.
- Not exploited: The vulnerability was not observed as exploited by the user who reported the sighting.
- Not confirmed: The user expressed doubt about the validity of the vulnerability.
- Not patched: The vulnerability was not observed as successfully patched by the user who reported the sighting.
Loading…
Loading…