CVE-2026-60087

mediumPriorität · verfolgen · 0OT-Risiko · erhöhtEPSS 0.003 · 27. PerzentilEUUS
grimoire priorityP3 · Track
Exploitable?
—
no known exploitation
Likely / severe?
0.34% (27th) EPSS
CVSS 6.1 · medium
Is it mine?
2 products
Prüfe deine Angriffsfläche
Who says so?
3 sources
cnnvd · enisa_euvd · osv

EPSS · bewertet 2026-10-27

PraisonAI before 1.6.78 caches tool approval decisions by tool name only, allowing attackers to reuse initial approvals for subsequent calls with arbitrary arguments. Attackers can exploit this by obtaining approval for a benign operation and then executing dangerous file write operations with unreviewed parameters in the same session.

01

cvss

Technischer Schweregrad, 0–10. Eine Zeile je Quelle.

6.9
010

Basiswert 0–10 · höher = schwerwiegender · Vektor überfahren zum Auflösen

v3.16.1mediumCVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:Lsecondary · disclosure@vulncheck.comAusnutzbarkeit 1.8 · Auswirkung 4.2
v3.16.1mediumCVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:Lsecondary · OSV
v4.06.9mediumCVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:P/VC:N/VI:H/VA:L/SC:N/SI:N/SA:Nsecondary · ENISA EU
v4.06.9mediumCVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:P/VC:N/VI:H/VA:L/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:X/CR:X/IR:X/AR:X/MAV:X/MAC:X/MAT:X/MPR:X/MUI:X/MVC:X/MVI:X/MVA:X/MSC:X/MSI:X/MSA:X/S:X/AU:X/R:X/V:X/RE:X/U:Xsecondary · disclosure@vulncheck.com
v4.04.4mediumCVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:P/VC:N/VI:H/VA:L/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:U/CR:X/IR:X/AR:X/MAV:X/MAC:X/MAT:X/MPR:X/MUI:X/MVC:X/MVI:X/MVA:X/MSC:X/MSI:X/MSA:X/S:X/AU:X/R:X/V:X/RE:X/U:Xsecondary · CVSS-BT (t0sche)
02

SSVC

Eine Handlungsentscheidung — aus Ausnutzung und Auswirkung.

Exploitation: poc · Automatable: no · Technical Impact: partialcoordinatorcisa_ssvcUS
03

schwächen

Die CWE-Schwächeklassen, zu denen dies gehört.

04

betroffene Produkte (2)

Betroffene Produkte und Versionsbereiche.

05

Advisories (2)

Hersteller- und Ökosystem-Meldungen dazu.

  • GHSA-29r9-67vg-qj56PraisonAI: Human-in-the-loop tool approval is cached by tool name and silently reused for all subsequent calls with arbitrary arguments2026-10-08ghsa · osvUS

    ## Summary PraisonAI gates dangerous tools (file writes, deletes, shell/code execution) behind an interactive approval prompt. The first approval of a tool is cached for the remainder of the run and silently reused for all later invocations of that tool with arbitrary, unreviewed arguments. ## Root cause `ApprovalRegistry.is_already_approved` (`src/praisonai-agents/praisonaiagents/approval/registry.py`, around line 181) returns `True` whenever the tool name is present in a per-run context set. The cache is keyed on tool name only — arguments are not part of the key. `approve_sync` / `approve_async` (around lines 224-226 / 278-279) short-circuit on that cache before the approval backend is consulted. `clear_approved` (around lines 186-187) is the only routine that clears the cache, but it is never invoked in the shipped library (only in tests). The cache persists for the entire agent run and is inherited by child tasks via `contextvars`. Critical-tier tools (`execute_command`, `execute_code`) are exempt from the cache. But high-risk tools like `write_file` are not. ## Proof of concept ```python from praisonaiagents.approval.registry import ApprovalRegistry from praisonaiagents.approval.protocols import ApprovalDecision, ApprovalRequest class CountingBackend: def __init__(self): self.prompts = [] def request_approval_sync(self, request): self.prompts.append((request.tool_name, dict(request.arguments))) return ApprovalDecision(approved=True, reason="human approved") backend = CountingBackend() reg = ApprovalRegistry() reg.set_backend(backend) reg.add_requirement("write_file", "high") d1 = reg.approve_sync("agent", "write_file", {"path": "/tmp/safe.txt", "content": "hi"}) # Human prompted — approves a benign write d2 = reg.approve_sync("agent", "write_file", {"path": "/etc/crontab", "content": "* * * * * root evil"}) # NO prompt — auto-approved from cache assert len(backend.prompts) == 1 assert d2.reason == "Already approved in context" ``` Negative control: `execute_command` (critical) re-prompts on every call — 2 prompts for 2 calls. ## Impact A `write_file` approval for a benign path authorizes every later `write_file` call in the session with arbitrary arguments. A model steered by malicious input can write to sensitive locations with no further human prompt. ## Suggested fix - Include arguments in the approval cache key, or re-prompt on argument change. - Expire the cache per-call or per-turn. - Do not inherit the cache into child tasks.

  • PYSEC-2026-4265PraisonAI: Human-in-the-loop tool approval is cached by tool name and silently reused for all subsequent calls with arbitrary arguments2026-10-15vendor · osvUS

    ## Summary PraisonAI gates dangerous tools (file writes, deletes, shell/code execution) behind an interactive approval prompt. The first approval of a tool is cached for the remainder of the run and silently reused for all later invocations of that tool with arbitrary, unreviewed arguments. ## Root cause `ApprovalRegistry.is_already_approved` (`src/praisonai-agents/praisonaiagents/approval/registry.py`, around line 181) returns `True` whenever the tool name is present in a per-run context set. The cache is keyed on tool name only — arguments are not part of the key. `approve_sync` / `approve_async` (around lines 224-226 / 278-279) short-circuit on that cache before the approval backend is consulted. `clear_approved` (around lines 186-187) is the only routine that clears the cache, but it is never invoked in the shipped library (only in tests). The cache persists for the entire agent run and is inherited by child tasks via `contextvars`. Critical-tier tools (`execute_command`, `execute_code`) are exempt from the cache. But high-risk tools like `write_file` are not. ## Proof of concept ```python from praisonaiagents.approval.registry import ApprovalRegistry from praisonaiagents.approval.protocols import ApprovalDecision, ApprovalRequest class CountingBackend: def __init__(self): self.prompts = [] def request_approval_sync(self, request): self.prompts.append((request.tool_name, dict(request.arguments))) return ApprovalDecision(approved=True, reason="human approved") backend = CountingBackend() reg = ApprovalRegistry() reg.set_backend(backend) reg.add_requirement("write_file", "high") d1 = reg.approve_sync("agent", "write_file", {"path": "/tmp/safe.txt", "content": "hi"}) # Human prompted — approves a benign write d2 = reg.approve_sync("agent", "write_file", {"path": "/etc/crontab", "content": "* * * * * root evil"}) # NO prompt — auto-approved from cache assert len(backend.prompts) == 1 assert d2.reason == "Already approved in context" ``` Negative control: `execute_command` (critical) re-prompts on every call — 2 prompts for 2 calls. ## Impact A `write_file` approval for a benign path authorizes every later `write_file` call in the session with arbitrary arguments. A model steered by malicious input can write to sensitive locations with no further human prompt. ## Suggested fix - Include arguments in the approval cache key, or re-prompt on argument change. - Expire the cache per-call or per-turn. - Do not inherit the cache into child tasks.

06

auch bekannt als (5)

Weitere Namen und Kennungen dieser Entität.

07

quellen

Welche Quellen diesen Datensatz belegen und wann.

veröffentlicht 2026-07-15geändert 2026-10-24
08

Referenzen (6)

Externe Belege — Patches, Meldungen, Analysen.

scry

Angreifer nutzen Schwachstellen wie diese gegen im Internet exponierte Dienste aus. Sehen Sie mit einem kostenlosen Passiv-Scan, was exponiert ist.

Kostenloser Scan