Incorrect AuthorizationWeakness · CWE-863

CVE-2026-56074

MEDIUM · 5.5 CVSS v3.1 Published 2026-06-18
Mitigation only
No fix yet — a mitigation exists. There is no fixed release. A documented workaround reduces exposure in the meantime.
See remediation →
58/100
Remediation priority · Elevated
No privileges

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
PraisonAI before 1.5.128 caches tool approval decisions by tool name only, not by invocation arguments, allowing subsequent execute_command calls to bypass approval prompts. Attackers can exploit this by obtaining initial approval for a benign command, then silently exfiltrate API keys and credentials via subsequent shell commands without user consent.

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 confidence

PraisonAI before version 1.5.128 implements a flawed tool approval caching mechanism that stores approval decisions keyed only by tool name, ignoring the actual invocation arguments. Once a user approves a benign command (e.g., 'ls'), any subsequent execute_command call using the same tool but different arguments (e.g., exfiltration commands with API keys) bypasses the approval prompt entirely.

MitigationUpgrade PraisonAI to version 1.5.128 or later, which implements argument-aware approval caching. Until upgraded, carefully review all execute_command invocations and consider implementing additional monitoring for credential-access patterns.

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
None
Availability
None

CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:N/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 checks

Work through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.

  1. Check installed PraisonAI version
    Run 'pip show praisonai' or check your package manager for the installed version of PraisonAI
    Affected if version is lower than 1.5.128
  2. Verify tool approval system is enabled
    Inspect your PraisonAI configuration or runtime settings for tool approval/enforcement settings
    Affected if tool approval or execute_command approval is enabled in the configuration
  3. Review tool caching implementation
    Examine the source code or configuration files for the approval caching logic; look for code that caches approval decisions based solely on tool name without including arguments
    Affected if the caching mechanism stores approvals keyed only by tool name, not by tool name plus arguments
  4. Audit execute_command usage patterns
    Review logs, code, or configuration where execute_command is invoked to see if different arguments reuse the same tool name
    Affected if multiple execute_command calls with varying arguments share a common tool name that was previously approved

You are affected if PraisonAI version is below 1.5.128 and the tool approval caching mechanism is enabled, allowing subsequent commands with the same tool name but different arguments to bypass approval prompts.

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.

dbcve · scoped
Mitigation available No clean upgrade yet — mitigate in the meantime
Mitigation

Upgrade PraisonAI to version 1.5.128 or later, which implements argument-aware approval caching. Until upgraded, carefully review all execute_command invocations and consider implementing additional monitoring for credential-access patterns.

Recommended fix High confidence

1.5.128

  1. Check the currently installed version of PraisonAI using: pip show praisonai or pip list | grep praisonai
  2. Upgrade PraisonAI to version 1.5.128 or later using: pip install --upgrade praisonai>=1.5.128
  3. Verify the upgrade was successful by running: pip show praisonai and confirming the version number is 1.5.128 or higher

Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.

Have this fixed Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation1.0 h
  • Implementation1.0 h
  • Testing2.0 h
  • Review / QA1.0 h
5.0 hours of engineering $860
Get help mitigating

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $1,376.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-56074 — 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-2026-56074 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