CVE-2026-44641
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 · uneditedMicrosoft APM is an open-source, community-driven dependency manager for AI agents. Prior to 0.8.12, Microsoft APM normalizes marketplace plugins by copying plugin components referenced in plugin.json into .apm/. The manifest fields agents, skills, commands, and hooks are attacker-controlled, but the implementation does not enforce that those paths remain inside the plugin directory. A malicious plugin can therefore use absolute paths or ../ traversal paths to copy arbitrary readable host files or directories from the installer's machine during apm install. This vulnerability is fixed in 0.8.12.
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 confidenceMicrosoft APM versions before 0.8.12 contain a path traversal vulnerability during plugin installation. The plugin.json manifest fields (agents, skills, commands, hooks) are attacker-controlled but not validated, allowing malicious plugins to use absolute paths or ../ traversal to copy arbitrary readable files from the host system during apm install.
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
- Local
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- Required
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N
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 Microsoft APM installed versionRun 'apm --version' or check the package.json/version file in the APM installation directoryAffected if Version is lower than 0.8.12
-
Identify plugins directory locationLocate the plugin installation directory (commonly .apm/plugins or similar in user home/config)Affected if Plugins directory exists and contains any installed plugins
-
Inspect installed plugin manifestsFor each installed plugin, read the plugin.json file and examine the agents, skills, commands, and hooks fields for absolute paths (starting with / or C:\) or ../ sequencesAffected if Any plugin.json contains absolute paths or path traversal sequences in the manifest fields
-
Audit custom or third-party pluginsReview any non-default plugins, especially those installed from external sources, for suspicious path specifications in their manifestsAffected if Third-party plugins with unsigned or unverified manifests are present
You are affected if Microsoft APM version is below 0.8.12 and any plugin (especially third-party) has been installed with a manifest containing absolute paths or ../ traversal sequences.
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 · scopedUpgrade Microsoft APM to version 0.8.12 or later, which implements path validation to ensure plugin component paths remain within the plugin directory.
0.8.12
- Upgrade Microsoft APM to version 0.8.12 or later using your package manager or installation method
- Verify the upgrade was successful by checking the installed version
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing6.0 h
- Review / QA4.0 h
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 locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-44641 — 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-2026-44641 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