CVE-2026-3484
Command Injection in Phialsbasement Mcp Nmap Server ≤ 1.0.1
Raw vector
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/VA:L/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-2026-3484 is a medium-severity Injection (CWE-74) vulnerability in Phialsbasement Mcp Nmap Server. Its CVSS base score is 5.3 (Medium).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Command and Scripting Interpreter (T1059); ranked in the top 15% 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 AI Agent Protocols and Integrations; in the Protocol-Specific 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-2026-3484 is a command injection vulnerability affecting PhialsBasement nmap-mcp-server up to commit bee6d23547d57ae02460022f7c78ac0893092e38. The issue resides in the child_process.exec function within the src/index.ts file of the Nmap CLI Command Handler component. This flaw, classified under CWE-74 and CWE-77, allows remote manipulation leading to arbitrary command execution. The product follows a rolling release model, so specific version details for affected or patched releases are not disclosed.
The vulnerability can be exploited remotely over the network with low complexity and no user interaction required, but it necessitates low privileges (PR:L) such as an authenticated user account. Successful exploitation grants limited impact across confidentiality, integrity, and availability (C:L/I:L/A:L), with an overall CVSS v3.1 base score of 6.3. An attacker could inject malicious commands via the Nmap CLI handler, potentially leading to unauthorized system access or execution of arbitrary code within the server's context.
Mitigation involves applying the patch commit 30a6b9e1c7fa6146f51e28d6ab83a2568d9a3488, as recommended in the project's advisories. Security practitioners should update their nmap-mcp-server installations to this commit or later, given the rolling release nature of the software. Relevant details are available in the GitHub repository, patch commit, and associated issue tracker.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2026-9317
Vulnerability Data
A vulnerability was detected in PhialsBasement nmap-mcp-server up to bee6d23547d57ae02460022f7c78ac0893092e38. Affected by this issue is the function child_process.exec of the file src/index.ts of the component Nmap CLI Command Handler. The manipulation results in command injection. The attack may be performed…
more
from remote. This product utilizes a rolling release system for continuous delivery, and as such, version information for affected or updated releases is not disclosed. The patch is identified as 30a6b9e1c7fa6146f51e28d6ab83a2568d9a3488. It is best practice to apply a patch to resolve this issue.
- 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: mcp
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
—
V1.2.1V1.2.3V1.2.5V1.2.8
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Developer testing and evaluation can discover command-construction flaws before deployment.
SI-10 directly requires validation of information inputs to reject malformed or special-element content before it reaches downstream parsers.
Secure engineering principles include proper neutralization and safe command construction practices.
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 validation and output encoding that prevent injection flaws.
Runtime monitoring of software and data can detect anomalous command execution resulting from injection.
Identifying recorded vulnerabilities enables remediation of command-injection flaws before exploitation.
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 require proper escaping and parameterization of commands, directly eliminating CWE-77.
Security testing in development catches injection vulnerabilities before release.
Logging supports detection of injection attempts but does not prevent the weakness.
Monitoring activities can identify active injection attacks after they occur.
Secure development life cycle mandates input validation and output encoding that directly prevent injection flaws.
Application security requirements explicitly call for controls against injection attacks in software design.