dbcve.org
OS Command InjectionWeakness · CWE-78

CVE-2025-35028

CRITICAL · 9.1 CVSS v3.1 Published 2025-11-30
Mitigation only
No fix yet — a mitigation exists. There is no fixed release. A documented workaround reduces exposure in the meantime.
See remediation →
100/100
Remediation priority · Urgent
Remotely reachable No privileges Zero-click

Official description Straight from the sourceThe vendor's or NVD's own wording, published unedited. Authoritative, but often terse — it says what broke, rarely what to do.

NVD · unedited
By providing a command-line argument starting with a semi-colon ; to an API endpoint created by the EnhancedCommandExecutor class of the HexStrike AI MCP server, the resultant composed command is executed directly in the context of the MCP server’s normal privilege; typically, this is root. There is no attempt to sanitize these arguments in the default configuration of this MCP server at the affected version (as of commit 2f3a5512 in September of 2025).

Technical summary Written by usOur analysis, written from the advisory, the CVSS vector and the affected-version data. It adds context the advisory leaves out, and never invents facts that are not in the source.

dbcve analysis · high confidence

Command injection vulnerability in the EnhancedCommandExecutor class of HexStrike AI MCP server allows attackers to inject arbitrary shell commands by providing arguments starting with a semi-colon (;). The unsanitized input is directly appended to the composed command and executed with root privileges.

MitigationImplement strict input sanitization to strip or reject shell metacharacters (including ;, &, |, $, etc.) from all command-line arguments before execution, and run the MCP server under a least-privilege service account rather than root.

Verify against the referenced sources before acting — the references below are authoritative for this CVE, this summary is not.

CVSS breakdown How the score is builtThe industry scoring standard. It rates how the flaw is reached, what it takes to exploit, and what an attacker gains — the score is derived from those, not the other way round.

From the vector
Attack vector
Network
Complexity
Low
Privileges
None
User interaction
None
Scope
Unchanged
Confidentiality
High
Integrity
High
Availability
None

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

Am I affected? How to checkSteps we derive from the advisory and the affected-version data, so you can decide whether this CVE reaches your setup. They are a guide, not a scan — your own configuration is the authority.

dbcve checks

Work through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.

  1. Verify HexStrike AI MCP server installation
    Locate the MCP server installation directory and identify the installed version by checking version files, package metadata, or running 'pip show hexstrike-ai-mcp' or equivalent package manager command
    Affected if HexStrike AI MCP server is installed and version is unknown or falls within any version range that includes the vulnerability
  2. Identify EnhancedCommandExecutor class usage
    Search for files containing 'EnhancedCommandExecutor' in the MCP server installation, typically in Python source files within the server package
    Affected if The EnhancedCommandExecutor class is present and actively used for command execution
  3. Check if command injection is possible via semi-colon
    Review the source code of EnhancedCommandExecutor to confirm that user-supplied arguments are concatenated directly to shell commands without sanitization, specifically looking for patterns where arguments are appended without filtering
    Affected if The code shows direct string concatenation of arguments to commands without shell metacharacter filtering
  4. Verify service account privileges
    Check the user account running the MCP server process using 'ps aux | grep mcp' or similar process inspection tools, and review service configuration files
    Affected if The MCP server process runs with root or administrator privileges
  5. Inspect command execution configuration
    Examine configuration files or environment variables that control which command executor class is loaded and whether user input can reach command execution paths
    Affected if Configuration enables command execution features and allows external input to reach EnhancedCommandExecutor

A user is affected if HexStrike AI MCP server with the vulnerable EnhancedCommandExecutor class is installed, accepts external input, and runs with root privileges, allowing command injection via semi-colon characters in arguments.

Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.

Check your environment

Paste your version and any relevant configuration and it will be compared against the affected criteria above. Do not include secrets or credentials.

AI-assisted, checked against the advisory. Informational, not a guarantee.

Remediation Closing itWhat it takes to close this. Where a vendor fix exists we point at it; where none exists we say so plainly, and can build one. Effort estimates are scoped from the advisory, not from your codebase.

From vendor data
Mitigation available No clean upgrade yet — mitigate in the meantime
Mitigation

Implement strict input sanitization to strip or reject shell metacharacters (including ;, &, |, $, etc.) from all command-line arguments before execution, and run the MCP server under a least-privilege service account rather than root.

Have this fixed Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation3.0 h
  • Implementation4.0 h
  • Testing3.0 h
  • Review / QA2.0 h
12.0 hours of engineering $2,130
Get help mitigating

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $3,408.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-35028 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.

Get it on GitHub Scan in the browser

References Go to the primary sourcePrimary sources — vendor advisories, patches and trackers. Where our summary and a reference disagree, the reference wins.

Primary sources

Practitioner notes

Contributed

Peer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2025-35028 in production — separate from our analysis above.

No notes yet

Be the first to add a field note for this CVE — a mitigation you’ve verified, a version caveat, or a link to a working fix. Sign in above to contribute.

What this is

A place for practitioners to share what actually worked: a mitigation you’ve tested, a configuration change, a version- or environment-specific caveat, or a link to a verified patch. The most useful notes rise to the top as peers upvote them, so the signal stays high.

What belongs here
  • Verified mitigations, workarounds, and config changes
  • Version or environment caveats, and links to real fixes
  • No weaponised exploit code, or anything meant to cause harm
  • No spam, self-promotion, credentials, or personal data