CVE-2026-5802
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 idachev mcp-javadc up to 1.2.4. Impacted is an unknown function of the component HTTP Interface. Such manipulation of the argument jarFilePath leads to os command injection. It is possible to launch the attack remotely. 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 idachev mcp-javadc up to version 1.2.4. The jarFilePath argument in the HTTP interface component is not properly sanitized, allowing an attacker to inject malicious OS commands via this parameter. The exploit is publicly available and can be launched remotely.
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
- Network
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- Low
- Integrity
- Low
- Availability
- Low
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/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.
-
Identify if idachev mcp-javadc is installedLocate the mcp-javadc application on the system - check common installation directories, services, or running processes. Look for executable files, JAR files, or service entries named 'mcp-javadc' or similar.Affected if The product is present on the system
-
Determine the installed versionCheck the version of mcp-javadc by examining the application JAR file, service metadata, or running 'java -jar mcp-javadc.jar --version' if applicable. Compare the version number to the affected range (1.2.4 and earlier).Affected if The installed version is 1.2.4 or any earlier version
-
Verify if HTTP Interface component is enabledInspect the configuration files for mcp-javadc (typically XML or properties files) to determine if the HTTP interface/network service is activated. Look for settings such as 'http.enabled', 'server.port', or 'interface.http' set to true or a valid port number.Affected if HTTP Interface is enabled and accessible on a network port
-
Confirm jarFilePath parameter is exposedTest or review the HTTP interface endpoints to verify the jarFilePath parameter is accepted as user input. This parameter is used to specify JAR file paths and can typically be submitted via GET or POST requests to the application's HTTP endpoints.Affected if The jarFilePath parameter is accepted as user-controllable input through the HTTP interface
The environment is affected if mcp-javadc version 1.2.4 or earlier is installed with the HTTP Interface component enabled and the jarFilePath parameter exposed to user 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.
From vendor dataImplement strict input validation for the jarFilePath parameter—use allowlist validation or ensure path values are treated as literal strings and never passed to shell execution functions. Replace unsafe command construction with parameterized alternatives.
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation6.0 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 $3,984.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-5802 — 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-2026-5802 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