CVE-2026-22792
5Ire ≤ 0.15.3
Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:HSummary
CVE-2026-22792 is a critical-severity Improper Encoding or Escaping of Output (CWE-116) vulnerability in 5Ire 5Ire. Its CVSS base score is 9.6 (Critical).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Content Injection (T1659); ranked in the top 50% of CVEs by exploit likelihood; it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog; a public proof-of-concept is referenced.
This vulnerability is AI-related — categorised as LLM Application Platforms; in the LLM/Generative AI Risks risk domain.
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-2026-22792 is a high-severity vulnerability (CVSS v3.1 score of 9.6, AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H) affecting 5ire, a cross-platform desktop artificial intelligence assistant and model context protocol client, in versions prior to 0.15.3. The issue arises from unsafe HTML rendering that permits untrusted HTML, including on* event attributes, to execute arbitrary JavaScript directly in the renderer context (CWE-116).
A remote attacker can exploit this by injecting a payload such as an <img onerror=...> tag, which triggers JavaScript execution in the renderer. This allows the attacker to call exposed bridge APIs, for example window.bridge.mcpServersManager.createServer, enabling unauthorized creation of MCP servers and ultimately leading to remote command execution on the victim's machine. Exploitation requires user interaction, such as rendering malicious content, but needs no privileges.
The vulnerability is fixed in version 0.15.3 of 5ire. Security practitioners should update to this version immediately. Additional details are available in the GitHub security advisory (https://github.com/nanbingxyz/5ire/security/advisories/GHSA-p5fm-wm8g-rffx) and release notes (https://github.com/nanbingxyz/5ire/releases/tag/v0.15.3).
As an AI assistant handling model context protocols, 5ire's exposure underscores risks in desktop AI applications where renderer-process interactions can escalate to system compromise. No public evidence of real-world exploitation is noted as of the CVE publication on 2026-01-21.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2026-3778
Vulnerability Data
5ire is a cross-platform desktop artificial intelligence assistant and model context protocol client. Prior to version 0.15.3, an unsafe HTML rendering permits untrusted HTML (including on* event attributes) to execute in the renderer context. An attacker can inject an `<img…
more
onerror=...>` payload to run arbitrary JavaScript in the renderer, which can call exposed bridge APIs such as `window.bridge.mcpServersManager.createServer`. This enables unauthorized creation of MCP servers and lead to remote command execution. Version 0.15.3 fixes the issue.
- CWE(s)
AI Security AnalysisAI
- AI Category
- LLM Application Platforms
- Risk Domain
- LLM/Generative AI Risks
- OWASP Top 10 for LLMs 2025
- None mapped
- Classification Reason
- Matched keywords: artificial intelligence, mcp, model context protocol
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
—
V1.1.2V1.2.1V1.2.3
Likely Mitigating Controls AI
Per-CVE control mapping for this CVE has not run yet; the list below is derived from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry.
Validating that output matches expected content directly mitigates failures to properly encode or escape data for its destination context.
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 proper output encoding to prevent injection and message malformation.
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 coding standards explicitly require correct output encoding and escaping to preserve message structure.
Security testing can detect missing or incorrect encoding but does not itself implement the control.
Secure development life cycle mandates output encoding/escaping practices that directly prevent improper encoding.
Application security requirements include explicit rules for safe output handling and encoding.
Secure architecture principles reduce the likelihood of missing encoding but do not prescribe the actual technique.