CVE-2026-61427
Raw vector
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/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-2026-61427 is a medium-severity Improper Input Validation (CWE-20) vulnerability. Its CVSS base score is 6.9 (Medium).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Exploit Public-Facing Application (T1190); ranked at the 26th percentile by exploit likelihood (below the median); 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 AC-3 (Access Enforcement) and IA-2 (Identification and Authentication (Organizational Users)) — see the control section below for these in your framework.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2026-44638
Vulnerability Data
PraisonAI before 4.6.78 exposes the MCP HTTP-stream transport without authentication by default: the CLI --api-key option defaults to None, and the server only enforces Authorization/Bearer checks when an API key is configured. When an operator runs 'praisonai mcp serve --transport…
more
http-stream' without an API key, an unauthenticated client (no Authorization header, and no Origin header, which is also permitted) can initialize a session, enumerate the available tools (tools/list), and invoke tools (tools/call). Additionally, the dispatcher forwards tool-call arguments to handlers without validating them against the advertised inputSchema. The server binds to 127.0.0.1 by default, so remote exploitation requires the operator to bind to a network-accessible address (e.g., --host 0.0.0.0).
- 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, mcp
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise TechniquesAI
Why these techniques?
Missing authentication on the HTTP-stream MCP server (defaults to no API key enforcement) directly enables remote tool enumeration and invocation when bound to a network interface, matching exploitation of a public-facing application.
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Directly enforces authentication and authorization checks before allowing session initialization, tools/list, or tools/call operations on the MCP HTTP-stream endpoint.
Requires identification and authentication of clients before granting access to the unauthenticated-by-default MCP server.
Mandates validation of tool-call arguments against the advertised inputSchema, mitigating the dispatcher forwarding unvalidated inputs.
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 and enforce input validation during development.
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.
Testing against a defined set of requirements and using code review plus vulnerability scanning forces validation of inputs and handling of unanticipated conditions, reducing the chance that malformed data will be accepted.
Secure-coding guidelines and mandatory security testing (including code scans) compel developers to validate and sanitize inputs at design and implementation time, lowering the incidence of malformed or malicious data reaching downstream components.
Mandating input controls that include integrity checks and input validation ensures that untrusted data is examined before use, blocking the root cause of many injection and malformed-data weaknesses.
Security-by-design principles explicitly call for data validation and sanitization at every layer, reducing the chance that malformed or malicious input will be processed without scrutiny.
Requiring language-specific secure coding standards, peer review, SAST and documented mitigation of common programming errors forces validation of all inputs before they are trusted.
Regular automated validation of system software and data content, combined with scanning of all inbound files, enforces input validation at the boundary before untrusted content is processed.