dbcve.org
OS Command InjectionWeakness · CWE-78

CVE-2026-0755

CRITICAL · 9.8 CVSS v3.0 Published 2026-01-23
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
gemini-mcp-tool execAsync Command Injection Remote Code Execution Vulnerability. This vulnerability allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code on affected installations of gemini-mcp-tool. Authentication is not required to exploit this vulnerability. The specific flaw exists within the implementation of the execAsync method. The issue results from the lack of proper validation of a user-supplied string before using it to execute a system call. An attacker can leverage this vulnerability to execute code in the context of the service account. Was ZDI-CAN-27783.

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

The gemini-mcp-tool contains a command injection vulnerability in the execAsync method where user-supplied input is directly incorporated into a system call without validation. An unauthenticated remote attacker can exploit this to execute arbitrary code in the context of the service account. The flaw stems from missing input sanitization on the user-supplied string before it reaches the system execution function.

MitigationImplement strict input validation and parameterized execution for the execAsync method, ensuring all user-supplied strings are validated against a whitelist or sanitized to prevent command injection before being used in system calls.

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
High

CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H

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. Identify gemini-mcp-tool installation and version
    Run 'npm list gemini-mcp-tool' or check your package.json dependencies to find the installed version of gemini-mcp-tool
    Affected if The installed version falls within the affected range (any version where the execAsync method processes unsanitized user input)
  2. Locate the execAsync method implementation
    Search your codebase for the execAsync function definition - look in node_modules/gemmni-mcp-tool or your project's source files for the method that executes system calls
    Affected if The execAsync method exists and directly passes input to system call functions without visible input validation
  3. Check how execAsync handles user-supplied input
    Review the execAsync code - look for direct interpolation of parameters into shell commands (e.g., using template literals, string concatenation, or exec() with user variables) rather than parameterized APIs
    Affected if User-provided arguments are concatenated directly into shell commands without sanitization or use of parameterized execution methods
  4. Determine if execAsync is exposed to unauthenticated users
    Review your API endpoints, routes, or service configurations to see if execAsync can be invoked without authentication - check middleware, authentication guards, and public endpoint definitions
    Affected if The execAsync method is accessible via an unauthenticated API endpoint or service interface
  5. Verify the service account context
    Check the user or service account under which the gemini-mcp-tool process runs - examine process ownership, container/service configuration, or deployment manifests
    Affected if The service runs with elevated privileges, enabling arbitrary command execution to have broader system impact

You are affected if gemini-mcp-tool with a vulnerable execAsync method is installed, that method processes user input without validation, and it is accessible to unauthenticated users.

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 validation and parameterized execution for the execAsync method, ensuring all user-supplied strings are validated against a whitelist or sanitized to prevent command injection before being used in system calls.

Have this fixed Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation4.0 h
  • Implementation8.0 h
  • Testing4.0 h
  • Review / QA3.0 h
19.0 hours of engineering $3,380
Get help mitigating

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $5,408.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-0755 — 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-2026-0755 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