CVE-2026-19591
Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/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-2026-19591 is a high-severity Improper Neutralization of Escape, Meta, or Control Sequences (CWE-150) vulnerability. Its CVSS base score is 8.8 (High).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Content Injection (T1659); ranked at the 23th percentile by exploit likelihood (below the median); it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog.
This vulnerability is AI-related — categorised as AI Agent Protocols and Integrations; in the Protocol-Specific Risks risk domain.
The strongest mitigations our analysis identified map to SI-10 (Information Input Validation) — see the control section below for these in your framework.
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2026-69394
Vulnerability Data
OpenAI Codex CLI for Windows, macOS, and Linux and Codex Desktop for Windows and macOS misclassified certain PowerShell commands as safe because their command-safety parser interpreted PowerShell's stop-parsing token (--%) differently than PowerShell itself. If a user opens an attacker-prepared…
more
repository and Codex follows its instructions, Codex can run a file-writing Git command without requesting user approval. On macOS and Linux, exploitation additionally requires separately installed PowerShell Core (pwsh) to be invoked. If filesystem protections permit the write, the command can modify Codex's configuration. If Codex later loads the modified configuration, it can launch an attacker-controlled MCP server and execute code with the user's privileges, allowing it to read, change, or delete files accessible to that account. The approval bypass does not disable filesystem sandboxing; the default filesystem sandbox on macOS and Linux can prevent writes outside permitted locations.
- CWE(s)
AI Security AnalysisAI
- AI Category
- AI Agent Protocols and Integrations
- Risk Domain
- Protocol-Specific Risks
- OWASP Top 10 for LLMs 2025
- None mapped
- Classification Reason
- Matched keywords: openai, mcp
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
—
V1.2.10V1.3.12
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
SI-10 requires validation/sanitization of inputs that directly stops escape/meta/control sequences from reaching downstream components.
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.
Secure SDLC practices directly require input neutralization and escaping to prevent this class of flaw.
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.
Secure development lifecycle mandates input validation and output encoding that directly neutralizes escape/meta sequences.
Application security requirements explicitly call for controls against injection and malformed input sequences.
Secure architecture principles reduce attack surface but do not prescribe specific neutralization techniques.
Secure coding standards require proper escaping and neutralization of control characters before downstream processing.
Security testing can detect the weakness but does not itself implement neutralization.