VulnerabilityPublished 30 Jan 2026Updated 2 Feb 2026

CVE-2026-25130: aliasrobotics cai · OS Command Injection

Affects aliasrobotics caiSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 9.7 Critical.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 17:16 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

9.7Critical

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

EPSS: 0.9% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 59% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: None
User Interaction: Required
Scope: Changed
Confidentiality: High
Integrity: High
Availability: High

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

Attack Vector: Network: The vulnerable component is bound to the network stack and the set of possible attackers extends beyond the other options listed, 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: Specialized access conditions or extenuating circumstances do not exist. An attacker can expect repeatable success against the vulnerable component.
Privileges Required: None: The attacker is unauthorized prior to attack, and therefore does not require any access to settings or files to carry out an attack.
User Interaction: Required: Successful exploitation of this vulnerability requires a user to take some action before the vulnerability can be exploited.
Scope: Changed: An exploited vulnerability can affect resources beyond the security scope managed by the security authority of the vulnerable component. In this case, the vulnerable component and the impacted component are different and managed by different security authorities.
Confidentiality: High: There is total loss of confidentiality, resulting in all resources within the impacted component being divulged to the attacker. Alternatively, access to only some restricted information is obtained, but the disclosed information presents a direct, serious impact.
Integrity: High: There is a total loss of integrity, or a complete loss of protection. For example, the attacker is able to modify any/all files protected by the impacted component. Alternatively, only some files can be modified, but malicious modification would present a direct, serious consequence to the impacted component.
Availability: High: There is total loss of availability, resulting in the attacker being able to fully deny access to resources in the impacted component; this loss is either sustained (while the attacker continues to deliver the attack) or persistent (the condition persists even after the attack has completed). Alternatively, the attacker has the ability to deny some availability, but the loss of availability presents a direct, serious consequence to the impacted component (e.g., the attacker cannot disrupt existing connections, but can prevent new connections; the attacker can repeatedly exploit a vulnerability that, in each instance of a successful attack, leaks a only small amount of memory, but after repeated exploitation causes a service to become completely unavailable).

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v3.1 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 30 Jan 2026
Detectable: no evidence on record.
No public nuclei template indexed
Weaponised: no evidence on record.
No public exploit code indexed in Metasploit or Exploit-DB
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), 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
aliasroboticscai	Affected <=0.5.10	Fixed in–
GitHubaliasrobotics/cai`pkg:github/aliasrobotics/cai`Other threats	Affected <=0.5.10	Fixed in–

Check your own hosts for these packages with threat-finder (opens in a new tab), our free open-source scanner.

AI-suggested

European organizations using aliasrobotics CAI framework versions up to 0.5.10 should immediately upgrade to the patched version containing commit e22a1220f764e2d7cf9da6d6144926f53ca01cde or later. Until patching is possible, restrict network access to CAI management interfaces and tools to trusted administrators only. Implement strict input validation and sanitization on any user-supplied parameters passed to shell commands within custom scripts or integrations involving CAI. Employ application-level allowlisting to prevent execution of unexpected commands or parameters. Monitor logs for unusual subprocess invocations or command-line arguments, especially those involving the find_file() tool or similar utilities. Use endpoint detection and response (EDR) solutions to detect anomalous process creations indicative of command injection. Conduct a thorough audit of all CAI deployments and dependent systems to identify vulnerable instances. Educate security teams about the risk of command injection in AI frameworks and the importance of human-in-the-loop controls. Consider isolating CAI components in hardened containers or virtual machines with minimal privileges to limit potential damage from exploitation.

Description

Cybersecurity AI (CAI) is a framework for AI Security. In versions up to and including 0.5.10, the CAI (Cybersecurity AI) framework contains multiple argument injection vulnerabilities in its function tools. User-controlled input is passed directly to shell commands via `subprocess.Popen()` with `shell=True`, allowing attackers to execute arbitrary commands on the host system. The `find_file()` tool executes without requiring user approval because find is considered a "safe" pre-approved command. This means an attacker can achieve Remote Code Execution (RCE) by injecting malicious arguments (like -exec) into the args parameter, completely bypassing any human-in-the-loop safety mechanisms. Commit e22a1220f764e2d7cf9da6d6144926f53ca01cde contains a fix.

Impact

For European organizations, the impact of CVE-2026-25130 is significant due to the potential for remote code execution on systems running vulnerable versions of the CAI framework. Successful exploitation could lead to full system compromise, data theft, unauthorized access to sensitive information, disruption of security monitoring and AI-driven defense mechanisms, and potential lateral movement within networks. Given that CAI is a cybersecurity AI framework, compromise could undermine the security posture of organizations relying on it, leading to cascading effects on incident detection and response capabilities. The vulnerability’s ability to bypass human-in-the-loop safety controls increases risk, as attackers can execute commands without triggering manual intervention. This is especially critical for sectors with high security requirements such as finance, critical infrastructure, government, and technology companies prevalent in Europe. The lack of required privileges and the network attack vector mean that attackers can exploit this remotely, increasing the threat surface. Organizations that have integrated CAI into their security operations or development pipelines are at risk of targeted attacks aiming to disable or manipulate AI-driven security tools.

CWE-78Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in an OS Command ('OS Command Injection') (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessLikelihood of exploit: HighCWE Top 25 (2025): #9OWASP Top 10 A05:2025: Injection (opens in a new tab)
The product constructs all or part of an OS command using externally-influenced input from an upstream component, but it does not neutralize or incorrectly neutralizes special elements that could modify the intended OS command when it is sent to a downstream component.
Architecture and Design
If at all possible, use library calls rather than external processes to recreate the desired functionality.
Architecture and Design · Operation · Sandbox or Jail
Run the code in a "jail" or similar sandbox environment that enforces strict boundaries between the process and the operating system. This may effectively restrict which files can be accessed in a particular directory or which commands can be executed by the software.
Architecture and Design · Attack Surface Reduction
For any data that will be used to generate a command to be executed, keep as much of that data out of external control as possible. For example, in web applications, this may require storing the data locally in the session's state instead of sending it out to the client in a hidden form field.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Injection Prevention (opens in a new tab)
Injection Prevention in Java (opens in a new tab)
OS Command Injection Defense (opens in a new tab)
Abuse Case (opens in a new tab)
Deserialization (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V12.3.5 (opens in a new tab)
V5.3.8 (opens in a new tab)
V1.5.1 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Command Line Execution through SQL Injection (opens in a new tab)
Command Delimiters (opens in a new tab)
Exploiting Multiple Input Interpretation Layers (opens in a new tab)
Argument Injection (opens in a new tab)
OS Command Injection (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 7 Feb 2026, 08:31 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-78

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats