Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:HSummary
CVE-2026-45036 is a high-severity OS Command Injection (CWE-78) vulnerability in Tabby Tabby. Its CVSS base score is 7.0 (High).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Command and Scripting Interpreter (T1059); ranked at the 3th percentile by exploit likelihood (below the median); it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog.
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
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2026-30567
Vulnerability Data
Tabby (formerly Terminus) is a highly configurable terminal emulator. Prior to 1.0.233, Tabby before 1.0.233 automatically confirms ZMODEM protocol detection on all terminal session output without user interaction, enabling shell command execution when a user displays attacker-controlled content. The ZModemMiddleware…
more
in tabby-terminal consumes all session output through a Zmodem.Sentry, and when a ZMODEM ZRQINIT header is detected, unconditionally calls detection.confirm() and writes a fixed ZRINIT response ( **\x18B0100000023be50\r\n\x11) back into the active PTY as input. When the process that triggered the detection (e.g., cat) exits, the injected bytes are consumed by the user's shell as a command line. Under fish (default configuration), the ** prefix triggers recursive glob expansion against the current directory, allowing an attacker-placed executable at a matching nested path (e.g., d/xB0100000023be50) to be executed by relative pathname without relying on PATH. Under bash and zsh, a secondary xterm.js terminal color-query feedback (OSC 10) can be combined in the same file to inject a slash-containing command word that similarly bypasses PATH resolution. An attacker can exploit this by providing a crafted file (e.g., in a cloned Git repository) that a user displays with cat, achieving code execution with no interaction beyond viewing the file. This vulnerability is fixed in 1.0.233.
- CWE(s)
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.