CVE-2026-34935
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 · uneditedPraisonAI is a multi-agent teams system. From version 4.5.15 to before version 4.5.69, the --mcp CLI argument is passed directly to shlex.split() and forwarded through the call chain to anyio.open_process() with no validation, allowlist check, or sanitization at any hop, allowing arbitrary OS command execution as the process user. This issue has been patched in version 4.5.69.
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 confidenceCommand injection vulnerability in PraisonAI's CLI argument handling. The --mcp argument is passed directly to shlex.split() and forwarded to anyio.open_process() without any validation, allowlist check, or sanitization, allowing arbitrary OS command execution as the process user.
Verify against the referenced sources before acting — the references below are authoritative for this CVE, this summary is not.
Affected products & versions What the vendor confirmedThe version ranges the vendor confirmed as vulnerable. If your version sits inside a range here, treat yourself as exposed until you have upgraded.
NVD · CPE data>= 4.5.15, < 4.5.69CVSS 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 checksWork through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.
-
Identify installed PraisonAI versionRun 'pip show praisonai' or 'pip show praison' and locate the Version fieldAffected if Version is >= 4.5.15 and < 4.5.69
-
Verify the CLI entry point existsRun 'which praisonai' or 'pip show -f praisonai | grep -i bin' to locate the CLI executableAffected if The praisonai CLI binary/script exists on the system
-
Check for --mcp argument usage in command history or logsReview shell history, audit logs, or application logs for commands containing '--mcp' passed to praisonaiAffected if The --mcp argument has been used with untrusted or user-controlled input
-
Inspect running processes for praisonai with mcp argumentsRun 'ps aux | grep praisonai' or 'ps aux | grep -i mcp' to check for active processesAffected if A praisonai process is running with --mcp argument present
User is affected if PraisonAI version is >= 4.5.15 and < 4.5.69 AND the --mcp CLI argument has been used with potentially untrusted input.
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.
dbcve · scoped4.5.69
Upgrade to version 4.5.69 or later. If immediate patching is not possible, avoid using the --mcp CLI argument with untrusted input.
4.5.69
- Check current installed version of PraisonAI using: pip show praisonai or pip list | grep praisonai
- Upgrade to version 4.5.69 or later using: pip install --upgrade praisonai==4.5.69 or pip install --upgrade praisonai>=4.5.69
- Verify the upgrade was successful by checking the installed version again
- If using the --mcp CLI argument, ensure it is properly validated before use (the vulnerability has been patched in 4.5.69 but exercise caution with any custom arguments)
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- 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-2026-34935 — 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-2026-34935 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