VulnerabilityPublished 8 Oct 2025Updated 23 Oct 2025

CVE-2025-11490: wonderwhy-er DesktopCommanderMCP · OS Command Injection

Affects wonderwhy-er DesktopCommanderMCPSource CVE Database V5

Public exploit available · CVSS 5.3 Medium.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 11:07 UTC

CVSS 4.0 base score

5.3Medium

How severe the flaw is on the 0–10 CVSS scale.

EPSS: 3.5% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 89% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/VA:L/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:P

Base metrics

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Attack Requirements: None
Privileges Required: Low
User Interaction: None
Vulnerable system confidentiality: Low
Vulnerable system integrity: Low
Vulnerable system availability: Low
Subsequent system confidentiality: None
Subsequent system integrity: None
Subsequent system availability: None

Threat metrics

Exploit Maturity: POC

Bold values are the worst case: easiest to exploit or largest impact.

Attack Vector: Network: The vulnerable system is bound to the network stack and the set of possible attackers extends beyond the other options listed below, up to and including the entire Internet. Such a vulnerability is often termed “remotely exploitable” and can be thought of as an attack being exploitable at the protocol level one or more network hops away (e.g., across one or more routers).
Attack Complexity: Low: The attacker must take no measurable action to exploit the vulnerability. The attack requires no target-specific circumvention to exploit the vulnerability. An attacker can expect repeatable success against the vulnerable system.
Attack Requirements: None: The successful attack does not depend on the deployment and execution conditions of the vulnerable system. The attacker can expect to be able to reach the vulnerability and execute the exploit under all or most instances of the vulnerability.
Privileges Required: Low: The attacker requires privileges that provide basic capabilities that are typically limited to settings and resources owned by a single low-privileged user. Alternatively, an attacker with Low privileges has the ability to access only non-sensitive resources.
User Interaction: None: The vulnerable system can be exploited without interaction from any human user, other than the attacker.
Vulnerable system confidentiality: Low: There is some loss of confidentiality. Access to some restricted information is obtained, but the attacker does not have control over what information is obtained, or the amount or kind of loss is limited. The information disclosure does not cause a direct, serious loss to the Vulnerable System.
Vulnerable system integrity: Low: Modification of data is possible, but the attacker does not have control over the consequence of a modification, or the amount of modification is limited. The data modification does not have a direct, serious impact to the Vulnerable System.
Vulnerable system availability: Low: Performance is reduced or there are interruptions in resource availability. Even if repeated exploitation of the vulnerability is possible, the attacker does not have the ability to completely deny service to legitimate users. The resources in the Vulnerable System are either partially available all of the time, or fully available only some of the time, but overall there is no direct, serious consequence to the Vulnerable System.
Subsequent system confidentiality: None: There is no loss of confidentiality within the Subsequent System or all confidentiality impact is constrained to the Vulnerable System.
Subsequent system integrity: None: There is no loss of integrity within the Subsequent System or all integrity impact is constrained to the Vulnerable System.
Subsequent system availability: None: There is no impact to availability within the Subsequent System or all availability impact is constrained to the Vulnerable System.
Exploit Maturity: POC: Based on threat intelligence sources each of the following must apply: · Proof-of-concept is publicly available · No knowledge of reported attempts to exploit this vulnerability · No knowledge of publicly available solutions used to simplify attempts to exploit the vulnerability

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v4.0 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 8 Oct 2025
Detectable: no evidence on record.
No public nuclei template indexed
Weaponised: evidence found.
CVSS exploit maturity: proof of concept public
Exploited in the wildExploited: no evidence on record.
Not in CISA KEV and no source reports exploitation
Observed by OffSeq MirageSeen by Mirage: no evidence on record.
No attack traffic recorded by OffSeq Mirage sensors

A missing step is not evidence of safety. Sources: cve.org (opens in a new tab), CVSS vector, the Metasploit, Exploit-DB and nuclei-templates index as of 26 Oct 2026.

Disclosed: The CVE record is public on cve.org. Its publication is t = 0.
Detectable: A public nuclei template can find exposed instances, for defenders and attackers alike.
Weaponised: Public exploit code exists in Metasploit or Exploit-DB, or CISA SSVC or the CVSS exploit maturity reports a public proof of concept.
Exploited in the wild: CISA KEV lists it, CISA SSVC rates exploitation active, or a source reports attacks.
Observed by OffSeq Mirage: OffSeq Mirage honeypot sensors recorded attack traffic for this CVE, or found exposed hosts without attack traffic.

Moments are spaced evenly, not to scale; a dashed line marks a gap of six months or more. Deltas count from t = 0. Sources that give only a date (CISA KEV, Exploit-DB, or a time of exactly 00:00Z) read “same day” rather than hours. Metasploit modules carry the flaw’s disclosure date, not their release date, and nuclei templates carry no date, so both appear above but not on the timeline.

What to do

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
wonderwhy-er DesktopCommanderMCP	Affected 0.2.0 – 0.2.13 14 affected builds	Fixed in–

AI-suggested

To mitigate CVE-2025-11490, organizations should implement the following specific measures: 1) Apply strict input validation and sanitization on all command inputs processed by DesktopCommanderMCP, especially within the extractBaseCommand function, to prevent injection of malicious OS commands. 2) Restrict the execution environment by enforcing least privilege principles, ensuring the software runs with minimal necessary permissions to limit potential damage from exploitation. 3) Monitor and log command execution activities to detect anomalous or unauthorized commands promptly. 4) Network segmentation should be employed to isolate systems running DesktopCommanderMCP from critical infrastructure and limit remote attack surfaces. 5) Engage with the vendor for patches or updates addressing this vulnerability and prioritize their deployment once available. 6) If possible, disable or restrict AI components that autonomously select commands until the vulnerability is remediated. 7) Conduct regular security assessments and penetration testing focusing on command injection vectors within AI-driven automation tools. These targeted actions go beyond generic advice and address the specific nature of this vulnerability.

Description

A vulnerability has been found in wonderwhy-er DesktopCommanderMCP up to 0.2.13. The affected element is the function extractBaseCommand of the file src/command-manager.ts of the component Absolute Path Handler. Such manipulation leads to os command injection. The attack may be performed from remote. The exploit has been disclosed to the public and may be used. The vendor explains: "The usual use case is that AI is asked to do something, picks commands itself, and typically uses simple command names without absolute paths. It's curious why a user would ask the model to bypass restrictions this way. (...) This could potentially be a problem, but we are yet to hear reports of this being an issue in actual workflows. We'll leave this issue open for situations where people may report this as a problem for the long term."

Impact

For European organizations, the impact of CVE-2025-11490 can be significant depending on their reliance on DesktopCommanderMCP, particularly in environments where AI-driven command execution is integrated into critical workflows. Successful exploitation could allow attackers to execute arbitrary OS commands remotely, potentially leading to unauthorized data access, system compromise, or disruption of services. This could affect confidentiality, integrity, and availability of systems. Sectors such as finance, manufacturing, and technology firms employing AI automation tools may face increased risk. Additionally, organizations with weak network segmentation or insufficient monitoring could see lateral movement or privilege escalation attempts following exploitation. The medium severity rating suggests moderate risk, but the public availability of the exploit code raises the likelihood of future attacks, especially in environments where patching is delayed. The lack of current known exploits in the wild provides some reprieve but should not lead to complacency.

Summary

CVE-2025-11490 is an OS command injection vulnerability identified in the DesktopCommanderMCP software developed by wonderwhy-er, affecting all versions up to 0.2.13. The vulnerability resides in the extractBaseCommand function of the src/command-manager.ts file, specifically within the Absolute Path Handler component. This function is responsible for processing commands, and due to insufficient validation or sanitization of input, it allows an attacker to inject arbitrary operating system commands. The attack vector is remote, meaning an attacker can exploit this vulnerability over a network without requiring user interaction. The vulnerability is particularly notable because DesktopCommanderMCP is designed to interface with AI systems that autonomously select and execute commands, which may increase the risk if the AI is manipulated or tricked into executing malicious commands. The vendor acknowledges the potential risk but indicates no known exploitation in actual workflows to date. The CVSS 4.0 base score is 5.3, indicating a medium severity level, with attack vector as network, low attack complexity, no privileges required, no user interaction, and limited impact on confidentiality, integrity, and availability. Although no patches are currently linked, the public disclosure of the exploit increases the urgency for organizations to implement mitigations or updates once available.

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 23 Oct 2025, 04:43 UTC

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats