CVE-2026-35002
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 · uneditedAgno versions prior to 2.3.24 contain an arbitrary code execution vulnerability in the model execution component that allows attackers to execute arbitrary Python code by manipulating the field_type parameter passed to eval(). Attackers can influence the field_type value in a FunctionCall to achieve remote code 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 · high confidenceAgno versions before 2.3.24 have an arbitrary code execution vulnerability where the field_type parameter from a FunctionCall is passed directly to eval() without sanitization, allowing attackers to inject arbitrary Python code by manipulating this parameter.
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< 2.3.24CVSS 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.
-
Check installed Agno versionRun 'pip show agno' or 'python -c "import agno; print(agno.__version__)"' to retrieve the installed version numberAffected if The version displayed is less than 2.3.24 (e.g., 2.3.23, 2.3.0, etc.)
-
Identify Agno model execution component usageReview application code for imports and usage of Agno's model execution functionality, particularly any FunctionCall or function invocation patternsAffected if The application uses Agno's model execution component to process FunctionCall requests from external sources
-
Locate field_type parameter handlingSearch codebase for 'eval(' calls that process field_type or similar parameters from FunctionCall requests, typically in the model execution or function call handling logicAffected if Code passes the field_type parameter directly to eval() without sanitization or validation
You are affected if Agno version is below 2.3.24 AND your environment processes FunctionCall requests through the model execution component where field_type reaches eval() unsanitized.
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 · scoped2.3.24
Upgrade to Agno version 2.3.24 or later which contains the fix for the eval() injection. If immediate upgrade is not feasible, restrict or disable the model execution component until patching is possible.
Agno 2.3.24
- Check current installed version of Agno (e.g., pip show agno or pip list | grep agno)
- Upgrade to version 2.3.24 or later using: pip install agno>=2.3.24
- If using Poetry: poetry add agno@^2.3.24
- If using pipenv: pipenv install agno>=2.3.24
- Verify the upgrade was successful by checking the installed version
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation4.0 h
- Testing4.0 h
- Review / QA3.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $3,936.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-35002 — 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-2026-35002 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