Raw vector
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:P/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/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-2026-31854 is a high-severity OS Command Injection (CWE-78) vulnerability in Anysphere Cursor. Its CVSS base score is 8.7 (High).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Command and Scripting Interpreter (T1059); ranked at the 20th percentile by exploit likelihood (below the median); it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog.
This vulnerability is AI-related — categorised as Enterprise AI Assistants; 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-2026-31854 is an indirect prompt injection vulnerability (CWE-78: OS Command Injection) in Cursor, an AI-powered code editor designed for programming with AI assistance. Versions prior to 2.0 are affected, where a visited website with maliciously crafted instructions can trick the AI model into following them under the guise of "assisting" the user. When combined with a bypass of the command whitelist mechanism, this results in automatic execution of commands without the user's explicit intent. The issue carries a CVSS v3.1 base score of 8.8 (AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H).
Remote attackers can exploit this vulnerability by luring users to visit a malicious website, requiring low attack complexity and no privileges, though user interaction is necessary. Successful exploitation enables arbitrary command execution on the victim's system, potentially leading to high-impact confidentiality, integrity, and availability compromises, such as data theft, system modification, or disruption.
The vulnerability is addressed in Cursor version 2.0. Practitioners should ensure deployments are updated to this version or later. Additional details are available in the GitHub security advisory at https://github.com/cursor/cursor/security/advisories/GHSA-hf2x-r83r-qw5q.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2026-11245
Vulnerability Data
Cursor is a code editor built for programming with AI. Prior to 2.0 ,if a visited website contains maliciously crafted instructions, the model may attempt to follow them in order to “assist” the user. When combined with a bypass of…
more
the command whitelist mechanism, such indirect prompt injections could result in commands being executed automatically, without the user’s explicit intent, thereby posing a significant security risk. This vulnerability is fixed in 2.0.
- CWE(s)
AI Security AnalysisAI
- AI Category
- Enterprise AI Assistants
- Risk Domain
- LLM/Generative AI Risks
- OWASP Top 10 for LLMs 2025
- None mapped
- AI-specific weaknesses CR
- CWE-1427 — Indirect prompt injection (untrusted web input) + model output reaches command sink.
Mapped by Cyber Resilience · not in NVD. Poisoning and extraction cases are routed to MITRE ATLAS instead of a synthetic CWE.- 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.