CVE-2026-56074 in PraisonAI
Summary
by MITRE • 06/19/2026
PraisonAI before 1.5.128 caches tool approval decisions by tool name only, not by invocation arguments, allowing subsequent execute_command calls to bypass approval prompts. Attackers can exploit this by obtaining initial approval for a benign command, then silently exfiltrate API keys and credentials via subsequent shell commands without user consent.
If you want to get best quality of vulnerability data, you may have to visit VulDB.
Analysis
by VulDB Data Team • 06/19/2026
The vulnerability in PraisonAI prior to version 1.5.128 represents a critical access control flaw that stems from inadequate caching mechanisms for tool approval decisions. This issue manifests as a failure to properly associate approval contexts with specific command invocations, creating a persistent security weakness that can be exploited across multiple execution sessions. The system's approval caching logic operates solely on tool name identification without incorporating invocation arguments, which fundamentally undermines the intended security controls designed to prevent unauthorized command execution. This design flaw creates a pathway for attackers to establish initial trust through legitimate command approval, then leverage that trust to execute malicious operations without further user consent or awareness.
The technical implementation of this vulnerability demonstrates a classic case of insufficient input validation and approval context management. When a user approves a command for execution, the system stores this approval decision in a cache keyed only by the tool name rather than by a combination of tool name and execution parameters. This approach fails to account for the principle of least privilege and proper access control enforcement, as the approval becomes universally applicable to all invocations of that tool regardless of the specific arguments or parameters provided. The caching mechanism essentially creates a permanent bypass for any command that has been previously approved, regardless of the security implications of subsequent invocations. This behavior directly violates security best practices for access control systems and represents a clear deviation from proper authorization protocols.
The operational impact of this vulnerability extends far beyond simple command execution bypasses, creating a significant risk for credential exposure and unauthorized data exfiltration. An attacker who successfully obtains approval for a benign command can subsequently execute additional shell commands that silently extract sensitive information such as API keys, database credentials, or other confidential data without triggering any additional approval prompts. The stealth nature of this exploitation means that users remain unaware of the malicious activities occurring in the background, as the system continues to operate under the assumption that all commands are properly authorized. This vulnerability essentially enables a form of privilege escalation through approval cache manipulation, allowing attackers to expand their access beyond the initial scope of their approved activities. The implications for organizations using PraisonAI include potential data breaches, unauthorized system access, and compromised security postures that could persist across multiple execution sessions.
Mitigation strategies for this vulnerability must address both the immediate caching mechanism flaw and implement proper context-aware approval systems. Organizations should immediately upgrade to PraisonAI version 1.5.128 or later, which contains the necessary fixes to properly associate approval decisions with specific command invocations rather than generic tool names. Additionally, security teams should implement monitoring solutions that track approval cache usage patterns and flag anomalous command execution sequences that may indicate exploitation attempts. The fix should incorporate proper argument validation and parameter checking within the approval system, ensuring that each command invocation is evaluated independently based on its complete context rather than relying solely on tool name identification. This approach aligns with the security principle of defense in depth and helps prevent similar issues from occurring in other components of the system. Organizations should also consider implementing additional access controls such as command whitelisting, execution time limits, and comprehensive logging of all command execution activities to provide better visibility into potential exploitation attempts. The vulnerability demonstrates the importance of proper context management in security systems and reinforces the need for comprehensive testing of authorization mechanisms to prevent such bypass scenarios from occurring in production environments.