CVE-2026-7211
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 weakness has been identified in dvladimirov MCP up to 0.1.0. The impacted element is the function GitSearchRequest of the file mcp_server.py of the component Git Search API. Executing a manipulation of the argument repo_url/pattern can lead to command injection. The attack can be executed remotely. The exploit has been made available to the public and could be used for attacks. 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 confidenceCommand injection vulnerability in dvladimirov MCP's GitSearchRequest function in mcp_server.py. The repo_url and pattern arguments are not properly sanitized before being used in shell command execution, allowing an attacker to inject arbitrary shell 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
- 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 dvladimirov MCP is installedRun 'pip list' or check your Python environment for package named 'dvladimirov' or 'mcp' related packagesAffected if The package is installed in your environment
-
Check the installed versionRun 'pip show dvladimirov' or inspect the package metadata to determine the version numberAffected if The version is v0.1.0 or earlier (the vulnerability affects up to v0.1.0)
-
Locate mcp_server.py in the installationFind the mcp_server.py file in the package directory (typically in site-packages or the source repository)Affected if The file exists and contains the GitSearchRequest function
-
Verify the vulnerable code patternInspect mcp_server.py and search for the GitSearchRequest function; examine how repo_url and pattern arguments are processedAffected if The function uses shell command execution (e.g., subprocess with shell=True, os.system, or similar) without sanitizing repo_url and pattern arguments
-
Determine if the service is exposedCheck if the MCP server is running and accessible over network or if it accepts remote connectionsAffected if The service is running and accessible to untrusted inputs (network-exposed or accepts user-supplied repo_url/pattern values)
You are affected if dvladimirov MCP v0.1.0 or earlier is installed, the GitSearchRequest function uses unsanitized input in shell commands, and the service accepts untrusted repo_url or pattern arguments.
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 and use parameterized command execution or shell-escaping functions (e.g., shlex.quote) for the repo_url and pattern arguments before passing them to any shell commands.
- Consultation3.0 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 $3,408.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-7211 — 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-2026-7211 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