CVE-2026-0756
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 · uneditedgithub-kanban-mcp-server execAsync Command Injection Remote Code Execution Vulnerability. This vulnerability allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code on affected installations of github-kanban-mcp-server. Authentication is not required to exploit this vulnerability. The specific flaw exists within the handling of the create_issue parameter. 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-27784.
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 · moderate confidenceCommand injection vulnerability in github-kanban-mcp-server where the create_issue parameter is not validated before being used in a system call, allowing unauthenticated remote attackers to execute arbitrary code in the context of the service account.
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 checksWork through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.
-
Identify if github-kanban-mcp-server is installedSearch for the package in your system using 'npm list -g github-kanban-mcp-server' for Node.js installations, or check for the executable in common paths like /usr/local/bin/, ~/.npm-global/bin/, or via 'which github-kanban-mcp-server'Affected if The package or executable is found on the system
-
Determine the installed versionRun 'npm list -g github-kanban-mcp-server --depth=0' or check the package.json if running from source, then compare the version number to any publicly disclosed affected versionsAffected if The version matches or falls within an affected range if publicly disclosed, or is unknown/older than published versions
-
Verify the create_issue endpoint is accessibleReview your MCP server configuration or routing rules to confirm the create_issue method is exposed as an API endpoint or callable function accessible over the networkAffected if The create_issue functionality is exposed without proper network isolation or authentication barriers
-
Check if the service runs with elevated privilegesInspect the process owner and permissions using 'ps aux | grep github-kanban-mcp-server' and review the service account privilegesAffected if The service runs as root, a privileged user, or has broader file/system access than minimally required
You are affected if github-kanban-mcp-server is running and the create_issue function is network-accessible without authentication, regardless of version, due to the command injection flaw in parameter handling.
Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.
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 dataImplement strict input validation and sanitization on the create_issue parameter, using allowlists or parameterized APIs instead of passing unsanitized user input to system calls.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation4.0 h
- Testing3.0 h
- Review / QA2.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $3,088.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-0756 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.
References Go to the primary sourcePrimary sources — vendor advisories, patches and trackers. Where our summary and a reference disagree, the reference wins.
Primary sourcesPractitioner notes
ContributedPeer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2026-0756 in production — separate from our analysis above.
The advisory tells you what broke. It rarely tells you what actually worked. If you’ve dealt with this one, that detail is what the next engineer is searching for.
- The version that genuinely resolved it — not the one the vendor claimed
- A config change or rule that shut the vector down
- A gotcha in the upgrade path that cost you an afternoon
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.
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.
- 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