Cyber Resilience

CVE-2026-43991

Command Injection

Published
12 May 2026
Modified
17 June 2026
CVSS Score v3.1 8.4
Click a component to see what it means
Raw vectorCVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
EPSS Score 0.0017 7th percentile
Risk Priority 59 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-2026-43991 is a high-severity OS Command Injection (CWE-78) vulnerability. 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 7th percentile by exploit likelihood (below the median); it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog.

This vulnerability is AI-related — categorised as AI Agent Protocols and Integrations; in the Adversarial Attacks 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.

OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)

EU & UK References

Vulnerability Data

JunoClaw is an agentic AI platform built on Juno Network. Prior to 0.x.y-security-1, substring-based blocklist in plugin-shell's command-safety check could be bypassed by adversarial argument constructions, allowing unauthorized command execution on the host when combined with the companion advisory. Pre-patch,…

more

the check was applied to the raw command string rather than the parsed first token. This vulnerability is fixed in 0.x.y-security-1.

CWE(s)

AI Security AnalysisAI

AI Category
AI Agent Protocols and Integrations
Risk Domain
Adversarial Attacks
OWASP Top 10 for LLMs 2025
None mapped
Classification Reason
Matched keywords: ai

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.
T1059.003 Windows Command Shell Execution
Adversaries may abuse the Windows command shell for execution.
T1059.004 Unix Shell Execution
Adversaries may abuse Unix shell commands and scripts for execution.
T1190 Exploit Public-Facing Application Initial Access
Adversaries may attempt to exploit a weakness in an Internet-facing host or system to initially access a network.
Derived from this CVE’s CWE(s) via the direct CWE→ATT&CK cross-walk.

CVEs Like This One

CVE-2026-87911Shared CWE-184, CWE-78
CVE-2026-55743Shared CWE-184, CWE-78
CVE-2026-5059Shared CWE-78
CVE-2026-19136Shared CWE-78
CVE-2025-54074Shared CWE-78
CVE-2026-12940Shared CWE-78
CVE-2026-6942Shared CWE-78
CVE-2025-66401Shared CWE-78
CVE-2025-5277Shared CWE-78
CVE-2025-53818Shared CWE-78

Affected Assets

Mitigating Controls

Control response

Prevent
Stop it (NIST 800-53)

—

Detect
Catch it (NIST detect / respond)

—

Harden
Shrink the surface (DISA STIG)
  • 2 hardening rules · 1 OS baseline
Validate
Prove the fix (OWASP ASVS)
  • V3.5.2
  • V4.4.2
  • V16.2.5
  • V1.2.5

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 mostly match
prevents

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.

PR.PS-02 partial match
prevents

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.

prevents

Application security requirements can mandate complete input validation rules, but the control itself does not prescribe how to build those rules.

prevents

Secure architecture principles include robust input validation design, yet the control is broader than this single weakness.

prevents

Secure coding standards directly require exhaustive allow-lists or complete deny-lists for inputs, addressing the root cause of incomplete disallowed-input lists.

finds

Security testing and code review target insecure use of operating-system command interfaces, catching command-injection flaws introduced during development.

References