CVE-2026-40113
Praisonai ≤ 4.5.128
Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:NSummary
CVE-2026-40113 is a high-severity Argument Injection (CWE-88) vulnerability in Praison Praisonai. Its CVSS base score is 8.4 (High).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Command and Scripting Interpreter (T1059); ranked at the 14th percentile by exploit likelihood (below the median); 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-2026-40113 is an argument injection vulnerability (CWE-88) in PraisonAI, a multi-agent teams system, affecting versions prior to 4.5.128. The issue resides in the deploy.py script, which constructs a comma-delimited string for the gcloud run deploy --set-env-vars argument by directly interpolating the openai_model, openai_key, and openai_base values without validating for commas. Since gcloud interprets commas as separators between key-value pairs in --set-env-vars, a comma in any of these values causes the trailing text to be parsed as additional arbitrary KEY=VALUE definitions, enabling injection of unauthorized environment variables into the deployed Cloud Run service. The vulnerability has a CVSS v3.1 base score of 8.4 (AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:N).
An attacker requires local access to the system running deploy.py, with low privileges (PR:L) and low attack complexity, and no user interaction is needed. By supplying specially crafted values containing commas for openai_model, openai_key, or openai_base—such as during a deployment process—they can inject arbitrary environment variables into the resulting Cloud Run service. This achieves high confidentiality and integrity impacts across a changed scope, potentially allowing control over service behavior, exposure of sensitive data, or modification of runtime configurations.
The GitHub Security Advisory (GHSA-fvxx-ggmx-3cjg) confirms the vulnerability is fixed in PraisonAI version 4.5.128, recommending users upgrade to this or later versions to mitigate the issue.
PraisonAI's integration with OpenAI endpoints highlights relevance to AI/ML deployments on Google Cloud Run, where compromised environment variables could alter model inference or API behaviors. No real-world exploitation has been reported.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2026-21156
Vulnerability Data
PraisonAI is a multi-agent teams system. Prior to 4.5.128, deploy.py constructs a single comma-delimited string for the gcloud run deploy --set-env-vars argument by directly interpolating openai_model, openai_key, and openai_base without validating that these values do not contain commas. gcloud uses…
more
a comma as the key-value pair separator for --set-env-vars. A comma in any of the three values causes gcloud to parse the trailing text as additional KEY=VALUE definitions, injecting arbitrary environment variables into the deployed Cloud Run service. This vulnerability is fixed in 4.5.128.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
—
V1.2.5
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Developer testing can discover argument-injection flaws in command-construction code but does not stop their introduction.
Input validation directly stops construction of command strings containing unneutralized delimiters or injected arguments.
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 input validation and command construction to prevent argument injection.
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 can detect argument injection but does not prevent it at the source.
Secure development lifecycle mandates input validation and command construction practices that directly prevent argument injection.
Application security requirements include explicit rules for safe command-line argument handling and escaping.
Secure architecture principles discourage unsafe command invocation patterns and favor safer APIs.
Secure coding standards explicitly require proper neutralization of command arguments, directly eliminating CWE-88.
Change management can catch unsafe command patterns during reviews but is not a direct mitigation.