CVE-2026-5007
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 · uneditedA vulnerability was identified in kazuph mcp-docs-rag up to 0.5.0. Affected is the function cloneRepository of the file src/index.ts of the component add_git_repository/add_text_file. The manipulation leads to os command injection. The attack needs to be performed locally. The exploit is publicly available and might be used. The project was informed of the problem early through an issue report but has not responded yet.
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 confidenceOS command injection vulnerability in the cloneRepository function within src/index.ts of mcp-docs-rag up to v0.5.0. The function accepts user-supplied input (likely a repository URL) and passes it to shell command execution without sanitization, allowing local attackers to inject arbitrary OS commands.
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
- Low
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- Low
- Integrity
- Low
- Availability
- Low
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/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 checksWork through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.
-
Check if mcp-docs-rag is installedRun 'npm list mcp-docs-rag' or check your package.json dependencies for the mcp-docs-rag packageAffected if The package is installed and version is v0.5.0 or earlier
-
Verify the installed versionCompare the installed version against the affected range: v0.5.0 and earlier. Run 'npm list mcp-docs-rag' to see the exact version numberAffected if Version is v0.5.0 or any version prior to v0.5.0
-
Locate the cloneRepository function in src/index.tsCheck the node_modules/mcp-docs-rag/src/index.ts file or the source code of the application for a function named cloneRepository that uses shell execution (exec, system, or shelljs.exec)Affected if The cloneRepository function exists and uses shell command execution (exec, system, or similar) instead of execFile or Git library APIs
-
Check if repository URLs are passed without validationInspect the cloneRepository function to determine if user-supplied repository URLs are used directly in shell commands without sanitization or validationAffected if Repository URL parameters are passed directly to shell execution functions without input validation or use of argument arrays
-
Determine if untrusted input can reach cloneRepositoryReview your application code or API endpoints that call cloneRepository to see if repository URLs come from user input without sanitizationAffected if Repository URLs from untrusted sources (user input, API parameters, etc.) can reach the cloneRepository function
You are affected if mcp-docs-rag v0.5.0 or earlier is installed AND the cloneRepository function uses shell execution with unsanitized user input for repository URLs.
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.
From vendor dataReplace shell command execution (exec/system) with safer alternatives such as execFile with argument arrays or Git library APIs, and implement strict input validation for repository URL parameters before execution.
- 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-2026-5007 — 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-2026-5007 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