dbcve.org
Command InjectionWeakness · CWE-77

CVE-2026-2544

HIGH · 7.3 CVSS v3.1 Published 2026-02-16
Mitigation only
No fix yet — a mitigation exists. There is no fixed release. A documented workaround reduces exposure in the meantime.
See remediation →
82/100
Remediation priority · High
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
A security flaw has been discovered in yued-fe LuLu UI up to 3.0.0. This issue affects the function child_process.exec of the file run.js. The manipulation results in os command injection. The attack can be launched remotely. The vendor was contacted early about this disclosure but did not respond in any way.

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 confidence

A command injection vulnerability exists in yued-fe LuLu UI (versions up to 3.0.0) within the run.js file. The child_process.exec function improperly handles user-controlled input, allowing attackers to inject arbitrary OS commands. The vulnerability is remotely exploitable without authentication.

MitigationReplace child_process.exec with safer alternatives like child_process.execFile or child_process.spawn with proper argument arrays, and implement strict input validation before executing any commands. Consider upgrading to any vendor patch if released, or implement compensating controls until the vendor provides an official fix.

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
Low
Integrity
Low
Availability
Low

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

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 if LuLu UI is installed
    Search for the yued-fe or lulu-ui package in your project's node_modules, or check package.json dependencies for 'lulu-ui', 'yued-fe', or '@yued-fe/lulu-ui'
    Affected if The package is present in node_modules or declared in package.json dependencies
  2. Check the installed version
    Run 'npm list lulu-ui' or 'npm list @yued-fe/lulu-ui' to see the installed version, or inspect the version field in node_modules/lulu-ui/package.json
    Affected if The installed version is 3.0.0 or lower, or no version is specified (implying latest which may be <=3.0.0)
  3. Locate the run.js file
    Search for run.js in the project's node_modules/lulu-ui directory: find node_modules -path '*/lulu-ui/*/run.js' or manually navigate to node_modules/yued-fe/lulu-ui/lib/run.js
    Affected if The run.js file exists in the LuLu UI package directory
  4. Inspect run.js for vulnerable child_process.exec usage
    Open the run.js file and search for 'child_process.exec' - examine whether user-supplied input (query parameters, request body, config values) is passed directly to exec without sanitization
    Affected if The file contains child_process.exec being called with unsanitized input from user-controlled sources
  5. Verify the vulnerable code path is reachable
    Check if your application imports or calls the run.js module, and whether the command execution flow can be triggered via HTTP requests or user input
    Affected if Your application actively uses the vulnerable run.js functionality and accepts user input that could reach the exec call

You are affected if LuLu UI version 3.0.0 or lower is installed, the run.js file with child_process.exec exists in your node_modules, and your application uses this module with user-controlled input reaching the vulnerable execution path.

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

Replace child_process.exec with safer alternatives like child_process.execFile or child_process.spawn with proper argument arrays, and implement strict input validation before executing any commands. Consider upgrading to any vendor patch if released, or implement compensating controls until the vendor provides an official fix.

Have this fixed Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation4.0 h
  • Implementation8.0 h
  • Testing6.0 h
  • Review / QA4.0 h
22.0 hours of engineering $3,860
Get help mitigating

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $6,176.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-2544 — 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-2026-2544 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