Raw vector
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/SC:H/SI:H/SA:H/E:X/CR:X/IR:X/AR:X/MAV:X/MAC:X/MAT:X/MPR:X/MUI:X/MVC:X/MVI:X/MVA:X/MSC:X/MSI:X/MSA:X/S:X/AU:X/R:X/V:X/RE:X/U:XSummary
CVE-2026-26216 is a critical-severity Code Injection (CWE-94) vulnerability in Kidocode Crawl4Ai. Its CVSS base score is 10.0 (Critical).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Command and Scripting Interpreter (T1059); ranked in the top 27% of CVEs by exploit likelihood; it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog; a public proof-of-concept is referenced.
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-2026-26216 is a remote code execution vulnerability in Crawl4AI versions prior to 0.8.0, specifically within its Docker API deployment. The /crawl endpoint accepts a hooks parameter containing Python code that is executed using exec(), with the __import__ builtin included among the allowed builtins. This allows attackers to import arbitrary modules and execute system commands, as classified under CWE-94 (Code Injection).
Unauthenticated remote attackers can exploit the vulnerability over the network with low attack complexity and no user interaction or privileges required, earning a maximum CVSS v3.1 score of 10.0 (AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H). Successful exploitation results in full server compromise, including arbitrary command execution, file read and write access, sensitive data exfiltration, and lateral movement within internal networks.
The GitHub security advisory (GHSA-5882-5rx9-xgxp) and release notes for Crawl4AI v0.8.0 address the issue, with mitigation achieved by upgrading to version 0.8.0 or later. Further technical details on the vulnerability and remediation are provided in the VulnCheck advisory.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2026-6690
Vulnerability Data
Crawl4AI versions prior to 0.8.0 contain a remote code execution vulnerability in the Docker API deployment. The /crawl endpoint accepts a hooks parameter containing Python code that is executed using exec(). The __import__ builtin was included in the allowed builtins,…
more
allowing unauthenticated remote attackers to import arbitrary modules and execute system commands. Successful exploitation allows full server compromise, including arbitrary command execution, file read and write access, sensitive data exfiltration, and lateral movement within internal networks.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
—
V1.3.1
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Developer testing and evaluation finds code paths that accept and execute externally influenced strings.
Input validation directly stops untrusted data from being used to construct executable code without neutralization.
Least privilege limits the damage an injected code fragment can perform once executed.
Requiring documented secure development standards and tools enforces use of safe code-generation APIs and escaping.
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 target injection flaws via secure coding and testing (mostly), yet as a single broad outcome it leaves many code-generation specifics unaddressed (partial).
PR.DS-10 protects runtime data confidentiality/integrity but has no bearing on neutralizing externally influenced input during code generation, so neither direction shows any preventive effect.
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.
Banning unapproved code samples and unauthenticated web services, combined with secure-coding standards and SAST, prevents the dynamic generation or inclusion of attacker-supplied code.
Controls that restrict unauthorized or malicious code from being introduced via external networks or removable media limit opportunities for an attacker to inject and execute arbitrary code.