Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:HSummary
CVE-2025-54136 is a high-severity OS Command Injection (CWE-78) vulnerability in Anysphere Cursor. Its CVSS base score is 7.2 (High).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Command and Scripting Interpreter (T1059); ranked in the top 2% of CVEs by exploit likelihood; it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog.
This vulnerability is AI-related — categorised as Enterprise AI Assistants; in the Supply Chain and Deployment risk domain.
The strongest mitigations our analysis identified map to SA-11 (Developer Testing and Evaluation) and SI-10 (Information Input Validation) — see the control section below for these in your framework.
Deeper analysis AI-assisted summary
Synthesised by an AI model from the NVD description and linked references — a reading aid, not an authoritative source.
CVE-2025-54136 affects Cursor, a code editor built for programming with AI, in versions 1.2.4 and below. The vulnerability enables remote and persistent code execution by modifying an already trusted MCP configuration file within a shared GitHub repository or by editing the file locally on the target's machine. Classified under CWE-78 (OS Command Injection) with a CVSS v3.1 base score of 7.2 (AV:N/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H), it was published on 2025-08-02.
Attackers can exploit this if they have write permissions on a user's active branches in a source repository containing existing MCP servers the user has previously approved, or if they have arbitrary local file-write access on the target machine. In such scenarios, after a collaborator accepts a harmless MCP, the attacker can silently swap it for a malicious command (e.g., calc.exe) without triggering any warning or re-prompt, achieving arbitrary code execution.
The vulnerability is fixed in Cursor version 1.3. Additional details are available in the security advisory at https://github.com/cursor/cursor/security/advisories/GHSA-24mc-g4xr-4395.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2025-23405
Vulnerability Data
Cursor is a code editor built for programming with AI. In versions 1.2.4 and below, attackers can achieve remote and persistent code execution by modifying an already trusted MCP configuration file inside a shared GitHub repository or editing the file…
more
locally on the target's machine. Once a collaborator accepts a harmless MCP, the attacker can silently swap it for a malicious command (e.g., calc.exe) without triggering any warning or re-prompt. If an attacker has write permissions on a user's active branches of a source repository that contains existing MCP servers the user has previously approved, or allows an attacker has arbitrary file-write locally, the attacker can achieve arbitrary code execution. This is fixed in version 1.3.
- CWE(s)
AI Security AnalysisAI
- AI Category
- Enterprise AI Assistants
- Risk Domain
- Supply Chain and Deployment
- OWASP Top 10 for LLMs 2025
- None mapped
- Classification Reason
- Matched keywords: ai, mcp
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
—
V1.2.5V1.2.8V15.2.5
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Developer testing and evaluation can discover missing or incorrect command sanitization during development.
Input validation directly neutralizes or rejects special characters that would otherwise alter OS command structure.
Least privilege reduces the permissions available to any process that could be subverted by injected commands.
Least functionality restricts available OS commands and interpreters, limiting the blast radius of injection.
Secure engineering principles require proper neutralization of untrusted input before command construction.
Mitigating Controls (NIST CSF 2.0) AI
Derived directly from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry via our AI-authored CWE→CSF cross-walk (authority under review) — links open the control.
PR.PS-06's SDLC practices directly require secure coding and input handling that blocks command-injection defects, yet the single broad outcome leaves many specific neutralization vectors and verification gaps unaddressed.
Routine patching/maintenance can remediate known command-injection CVEs in dependencies (partial forward) but does nothing to stop developers from introducing improper neutralization in custom code (none reverse).
Mitigating Controls (ISO/IEC 27001:2022 Annex A) AI
Derived directly from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry via our AI-authored CWE→ISO cross-walk (authority under review) — links open the control.
Security testing and code review target insecure use of operating-system command interfaces, catching command-injection flaws introduced during development.