Cyber Resilience

CVE-2026-35002

RCE in Agno ≤ 2.3.24

Public PoCRCE
Published
02 April 2026
Modified
24 July 2026
Patch / advisory
CVSS Score v4 9.3
Click a component to see what it means
Raw vectorCVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/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:X
EPSS Score 0.0084 56th percentile
Risk Priority 47 floored blend · peak EPSS

CVSS and EPSS are reproduced from their sources (NVD, FIRST EPSS). Risk Priority is our own derived reading, not an NVD score.

Summary

CVE-2026-35002 is a critical-severity Eval Injection (CWE-95) vulnerability in Agno Agno. Its CVSS base score is 9.3 (Critical).

Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Command and Scripting Interpreter (T1059); ranked in the top 44% 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-2026-35002 is an arbitrary code execution vulnerability (CWE-95) in Agno versions prior to 2.3.24. The flaw exists in the model execution component, where the field_type parameter passed in a FunctionCall is directly evaluated using Python's eval() function, enabling attackers to inject and execute arbitrary Python code.

The vulnerability carries a CVSS v3.1 base score of 9.8 (AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H), indicating high severity with network accessibility, low attack complexity, and no requirements for privileges or user interaction. Unauthenticated remote attackers can exploit it by manipulating the field_type value in a FunctionCall, achieving full remote code execution on the target system with high impacts to confidentiality, integrity, and availability.

Mitigation is addressed in Agno version 2.3.24, as evidenced by the release tag and the associated fixing commit. Further technical details on the field_type eval injection and exploitation are available in the VulnCheck advisory.

OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)

EU & UK References

Vulnerability Data

Agno versions prior to 2.3.24 contain an arbitrary code execution vulnerability in the model execution component that allows attackers to execute arbitrary Python code by manipulating the field_type parameter passed to eval(). Attackers can influence the field_type value in a…

more

FunctionCall to achieve remote code execution.

CWE(s)

Related Threats

MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques

T1059 Command and Scripting Interpreter Execution
Adversaries may abuse command and script interpreters to execute commands, scripts, or binaries.
T1059.001 PowerShell Execution
Adversaries may abuse PowerShell commands and scripts for execution.
T1059.004 Unix Shell Execution
Adversaries may abuse Unix shell commands and scripts for execution.
T1059.005 Visual Basic Execution
Adversaries may abuse Visual Basic (VB) for execution.
T1059.006 Python Execution
Adversaries may abuse Python commands and scripts for execution.
T1059.007 JavaScript Execution
Adversaries may abuse various implementations of JavaScript for execution.
Derived from this CVE’s CWE(s) via the direct CWE→ATT&CK cross-walk.

CVEs Like This One

CVE-2023-29511Shared CWE-95
CVE-2026-45579Shared CWE-95
CVE-2025-68271Shared CWE-95
CVE-2026-80351Shared CWE-95
CVE-2025-4318Shared CWE-95
CVE-2026-73231Shared CWE-95
CVE-2025-61955Shared CWE-95
CVE-2026-73602Shared CWE-95
CVE-2025-40943Shared CWE-95
CVE-2025-43466Shared CWE-95

Affected Assets

agno
agno
≤ 2.3.24

Mitigating Controls

Control response

Prevent
Stop it (NIST 800-53)

—

Detect
Catch it (NIST detect / respond)

—

Harden
Shrink the surface (DISA STIG)

—

Validate
Prove the fix (OWASP ASVS)
  • V1.3.2

Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI

Developer testing and code analysis can discover eval-injection flaws but does not stop their introduction.

Input validation explicitly requires neutralizing untrusted data before it reaches dynamic evaluation constructs such as eval.

Secure-development standards and tools can mandate safe coding patterns that avoid unsafe dynamic evaluation.

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 partial match
prevents

Secure SDLC practices directly require input neutralization and avoidance of unsafe dynamic evaluation.

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.

prevents

Secure development life cycle mandates input validation and safe coding practices that directly prevent eval injection.

prevents

Application security requirements include rules against dynamic code execution of untrusted input.

prevents

Secure architecture principles discourage unsafe dynamic evaluation constructs.

prevents

Secure coding explicitly requires neutralization of input before dynamic evaluation, directly mitigating eval injection.

finds

Security testing in development can detect eval injection vulnerabilities before deployment.

References