Skip to main content
VulnerabilityPublished Updated

CVE-2026-36044: apex · OS Command Injection

Affects apexSource CVE Database V5

0

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 8.8 High.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 13:47 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score
8.8High
How severe the flaw is on the 0–10 CVSS scale.
EPSS
1.8% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 78% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.
CVSS:3.1/AC:L/AV:N/A:H/C:H/I:H/PR:N/S:U/UI:R

Exploitation evidence

  1. Disclosed: evidence found.

    CVE published 27 May 2026

  2. Detectable: no evidence on record.

    No public nuclei template indexed

  3. Weaponised: no evidence on record.

    No public exploit code indexed in Metasploit or Exploit-DB

  4. Exploited in the wild: no evidence on record.

    Not in CISA KEV and no source reports exploitation

  5. Observed by OffSeq 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.

What to do

Affected software

ProductAffectedFixed in
npm@pensar/apexpkg:npm/@pensar/apexOther threatsAffected
  • <=0.0.58
Fixed in–

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

AI-suggested

Avoid running the affected versions in high-risk environments until further guidance or patches are available.

Description

@pensar/apex <= 0.0.58 is vulnerable to OS command injection via the smart_enumerate tool. The createSmartEnumerateTool() function in src/core/agent/tools.ts constructs a shell command by concatenating unsanitized values from the extensions array and url parameter into a string passed to Node.js child_process.exec(). Because exec() spawns a shell, shell metacharacters in those values are interpreted by the host shell, resulting in arbitrary OS command execution with the privileges of the running process. NOTE: this is disputed by the Supplier because the report is about intended behavior, as explained in the Security Policy of the pensarai/apex GitHub repo.

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…