Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:HCVSS and EPSS are reproduced from their sources (NVD, FIRST EPSS). Risk Priority is our own derived reading, not an NVD score.
Summary
CVE-2025-57771 is a high-severity OS Command Injection (CWE-78) vulnerability. Its CVSS base score is 8.1 (High).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Command and Scripting Interpreter (T1059); ranked in the top 48% of CVEs by exploit likelihood; it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog.
This vulnerability is AI-related — categorised as AI Agent Protocols and Integrations; in the LLM/Generative AI Risks 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-2025-57771 is an OS command injection vulnerability (CWE-78) in Roo Code, an AI-powered autonomous coding agent that integrates into users' editors. Affecting versions prior to 3.25.5, the flaw arises from improper handling of process substitution and single ampersand characters in the command parsing logic for auto-execute commands. This allows crafted inputs to inject arbitrary commands when auto-approved execution is enabled for specific commands, such as ls. The vulnerability has a CVSS v3.1 base score of 8.1 (AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H) and was published on 2025-08-22.
An attacker with the ability to submit prompts to the Roo Code agent can exploit this vulnerability by crafting inputs that leverage the parsing flaw to execute arbitrary commands alongside the intended one. Exploitation requires the user to have explicitly enabled auto-approved command execution, which is disabled by default, and does not necessitate privileges beyond prompt submission access. Successful exploitation enables arbitrary code execution on the user's system, potentially leading to high confidentiality, integrity, and availability impacts.
The Roo Code security advisory (GHSA-wrh9-463x-7wvv) and associated commit (de359a465c67aefc67553aa2b464591b602c4bdc) confirm the issue is fixed in version 3.25.5 through improvements to command parsing logic. Users should update to 3.25.5 or later and ensure auto-approved execution remains disabled unless necessary.
This vulnerability highlights security risks in AI-powered coding agents, where prompt injection can lead to command execution in development environments, underscoring the need for robust input sanitization in AI/ML-assisted tools. No real-world exploitation has been reported.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2025-25612
Vulnerability Data
Roo Code is an AI-powered autonomous coding agent that lives in users' editors. In versions prior to 3.25.5, Roo-Code fails to properly handle process substitution and single ampersand characters in the command parsing logic for auto-execute commands. If a user…
more
has enabled auto-approved execution for a command such as ls, an attacker who can submit crafted prompts to the agent may inject arbitrary commands to be executed alongside the intended command. Exploitation requires attacker access to submit prompts and for the user to have enabled auto-approved command execution, which is disabled by default. This vulnerability could allow an attacker to execute arbitrary code. The issue is fixed in version 3.25.5.
- CWE(s)
AI Security AnalysisAI
- AI Category
- AI Agent Protocols and Integrations
- Risk Domain
- LLM/Generative AI Risks
- OWASP Top 10 for LLMs 2025
- None mapped
- Classification Reason
- Matched keywords: ai
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.