Command InjectionWeakness · CWE-77

CVE-2026-30310

CRITICAL · 9.8 CVSS v3.1 Published 2026-03-31
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
In its design for automatic terminal command execution, Sixth offers two options: Execute safe commands and Execute all commands. The description for the former states that commands determined by the model to be safe will be automatically executed, whereas if the model judges a command to be potentially destructive, it still requires user approval. However, this design is highly susceptible to prompt injection attacks. An attacker can employ a generic template to wrap any malicious command and mislead the model into misclassifying it as a 'safe' command, thereby bypassing the user approval requirement and resulting in arbitrary command execution.

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

Sixth's automatic terminal command execution feature has a prompt injection vulnerability that allows attackers to bypass the user approval requirement. By wrapping malicious commands in a specific template, attackers can trick the AI model into misclassifying dangerous commands as 'safe', causing them to be auto-executed without user consent.

MitigationDisable automatic command execution and require explicit user approval for all commands; implement input validation to detect and block prompt injection patterns before they reach the model.

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:3.1/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 Sixth installation and version
    Run 'sixth --version' or locate the Sixth binary, then compare the version against vendor release notes or security advisories for CVE-2026-30310
    Affected if The installed version matches unpatched releases containing the vulnerability
  2. Verify automatic command execution feature is enabled
    Examine Sixth's configuration files (typically in ~/.sixth/config, ~/.config/sixth/config, or /etc/sixth/) for settings like 'auto_execute', 'ai_classify', 'command_approval', or similar AI-related options
    Affected if The automatic terminal command execution feature with AI-based safety classification is turned on (not disabled or set to require approval for all commands)
  3. Review command execution logs for unapproved commands
    Inspect Sixth's logs (commonly in ~/.sixth/logs/, ~/.local/share/sixth/logs/, or via journalctl -u sixth) and look for commands that executed without the typical approval prompt, especially those with unusual formatting or templates
    Affected if Logs show commands that bypassed the approval requirement, or contain patterns consistent with injection templates (specific keywords, brackets, or prefixes designed to manipulate AI classification)
  4. Audit system for unexpected command execution
    Cross-reference Sixth's command history with known legitimate activity by reviewing shell history, process logs, or audit logs (auditd, syslog) for commands that originated from Sixth but were not explicitly approved by the user
    Affected if Commands appear in system logs that were executed through Sixth but the user did not consciously approve them, indicating possible exploitation

A user is affected if Sixth with AI-powered automatic command classification is installed and enabled, the version is unpatched, and evidence exists of commands executing without user approval or of injection template patterns in logs.

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

Disable automatic command execution and require explicit user approval for all commands; implement input validation to detect and block prompt injection patterns before they reach the model.

Have this fixed Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation4.0 h
  • Implementation16.0 h
  • Testing8.0 h
  • Review / QA4.0 h
32.0 hours of engineering $5,600
Get help mitigating

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $8,960.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-30310 — 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 sources

Practitioner notes

Contributed

Peer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2026-30310 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