CVE-2026-7653
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 security flaw has been discovered in r-huijts mcp-server-rijksmuseum up to 1.0.4. Affected is the function open_image_in_browser of the file src/index.ts of the component MCP Interface. Performing a manipulation of the argument imageUrl results in os command injection. The attack is possible to be carried out remotely. The exploit has been released to the public and may 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 · high confidenceOS command injection vulnerability in the open_image_in_browser function in src/index.ts of mcp-server-rijksmuseum. The imageUrl parameter is passed to shell execution without sanitization, allowing arbitrary command injection via crafted URLs.
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
- Low
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- Low
- Integrity
- Low
- Availability
- Low
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/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.
-
Identify if mcp-server-rijksmuseum is installedRun 'npm list mcp-server-rijksmuseum' or check package.json dependencies for this packageAffected if The package is installed and the installed version falls within affected ranges (if any are published)
-
Locate the vulnerable source fileFind src/index.ts in the mcp-server-rijksmuseum installation directory or projectAffected if The file exists and contains the open_image_in_browser function
-
Verify the vulnerable code patternInspect the open_image_in_browser function for shell execution using the imageUrl parameter without sanitization (e.g., look for exec(), execSync(), or shell string interpolation with imageUrl)Affected if The function passes imageUrl directly to shell execution (e.g., exec("open " + imageUrl)) without using spawn with array args or input sanitization
-
Determine if the vulnerable function is invokedCheck configuration files, logs, or runtime usage to see if open_image_in_browser is actually called during operationAffected if The function is actively used or enabled in the server configuration, making the injection point reachable
You are affected if mcp-server-rijksmuseum is installed, the vulnerable open_image_in_browser function exists with unsanitized shell execution, and that function is reachable through normal server operation.
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 dataSanitize the imageUrl input and use safe APIs (e.g., child_process.spawn with array arguments, or a safe URL opening library) instead of shell command execution. Limit exposure until patch is available.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation4.0 h
- Testing3.0 h
- Review / QA1.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $2,800.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-7653 — 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-2026-7653 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