GHSA-xrmj-5g4g-8987

GHSA-xrmj-5g4g-8987 MEDIUM
Published July 31, 2026

### Summary A template injection vulnerability in the `create_workflow_for_notification` tool lets a caller embed Jinja2 expressions that the Dynatrace workflow engine evaluates at runtime, exfiltrating event data to attacker-controlled destinations through a workflow that persists in the tenant...

Full CISO analysis pending enrichment.

What systems are affected?

Package Ecosystem Vulnerable Range Patched
@dynatrace-oss/dynatrace-mcp-server npm < 2.0.0 2.0.0

Do you use @dynatrace-oss/dynatrace-mcp-server? You're affected.

How severe is it?

CVSS 3.1
4.2 / 10
EPSS
N/A
Exploitation Status
No known exploitation
Sophistication
N/A

What is the attack surface?

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

What should I do?

Patch available

Update @dynatrace-oss/dynatrace-mcp-server to version 2.0.0

Which compliance frameworks are affected?

Compliance analysis pending. Sign in for full compliance mapping when available.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is GHSA-xrmj-5g4g-8987?

### Summary A template injection vulnerability in the `create_workflow_for_notification` tool lets a caller embed Jinja2 expressions that the Dynatrace workflow engine evaluates at runtime, exfiltrating event data to attacker-controlled destinations through a workflow that persists in the tenant after the MCP session ends. ### Details The `create_workflow_for_notification` tool interpolates three caller-supplied parameters (`teamName`, `problemType`, `channel`) directly into a Dynatrace Workflow definition. Dynatrace Workflows use Jinja2 templating: per the [official documentation](https://docs.dynatrace.com/docs/analyze-explore-automate/workflows/reference), `{{ ... }}` expressions in action inputs are evaluated at workflow runtime for every action except `Run Javascript` (which is carved out specifically to avoid code injection). A caller can therefore supply, for example, `teamName = "{{ event() }}"` and have the workflow engine evaluate that expression at runtime, serialising the full event object into the message body delivered to the Slack channel. The vulnerable code is in `src/capabilities/create-workflow-for-problem-notification.ts`, lines 82-99: ```typescript let notificationWorkflow: WorkflowCreate = { title: `[MCP POC] Notify team ${teamName} on problem of type ${problemType}`, description: `Automatically created workflow to notify team ${teamName} on problems of type ${problemType} - ...`, isPrivate: isPrivate, type: 'SIMPLE', tasks: { send_notification: { name: 'Send notification', action: 'dynatrace.slack:slack-send-message', description: 'Sends a notification to a Slack channel', input: { connectionId: 'slack-connection-id', channel: `{{ \"${channel}\" }}`, // <-- channel sits inside {{ }} message: `๐Ÿšจ Alert for Team ${teamName}\n*Problem Type*: ${problemType}\n` + `*Problem ID*: {{ event()["display_id"] }}\n*Status*: {{ event()["event.status"] }}\n` + `<{{ environment().url }}/ui/apps/.../problem/{{ event()["event.id"] }}|Click here>`, }, active: true, }, }, }; ``` The action used is `dynatrace.slack:slack-send-message`, which is not in the documented Jinja-expression exception list. Its inputs are evaluated at workflow runtime. The schema in `src/index.ts:1052-1070` registers `teamName`, `problemType`, and `channel` as `z.string().optional()` with no pattern validation. The `isPrivate` parameter has `.default(false)`, so created workflows are visible tenant-wide unless the caller explicitly sets it. The approval prompt at `src/index.ts:1069-1072`: ```typescript const approved = await requestHumanApproval( `Create a workflow for notifying team ${teamName} via ${channel} about ${problemType} problems`, ); ``` Renders `{{ event() }}` literally to the operator with no indication that it will be templated, and does not surface the workflow's visibility. The workflow is persistent: it remains in the tenant after the MCP session ends, after the operator's MCP credentials are revoked, and after the MCP server is uninstalled. It fires on every matching problem until manually deleted from the Workflows app. The `channel` parameter is uniquely dangerous because it is interpolated inside an existing `{{ "..." }}` expression context - close the string with `"` and you can run arbitrary Jinja expressions in the destination field itself. ### PoC Tested end-to-end against a real Dynatrace tenant. The MCP server was run in stdio mode with the operator's Platform Token. A `tools/call create_workflow_for_notification` was sent with: ```json { "teamName": "{{ event() }}", "problemType": "ERROR", "channel": "#mcp-sec-poc", "isPrivate": true } ``` The operator approved the prompt (which read: `"Create a workflow for notifying team {{ event() }} via #mcp-sec-poc about ERROR problems"`). The MCP returned a workflow ID. Fetching the stored workflow body via the Dynatrace Automation API (`GET /platform/automation/v1/workflows/<id>`) showed the injected expression stored verbatim: ``` title: "[MCP POC] Notify team {{ event() }} on problem of type ERROR" message: "๐Ÿšจ Alert for Team {{ event() }}\n*Problem Type*: ERROR\n*Problem ID*: {{ event()[\"display_id\"] }}\n..." channel: '{{ "#mcp-sec-poc" }}' action: "dynatrace.slack:slack-send-message" ``` The workflow was then triggered manually via the "Run workflow" feature in the Dynatrace Workflows app, with a synthetic event payload `{"display_id":"P-123","event.status":"OPEN","event.id":"abc-123"}`. The execution log for the `send_notification` task shows the workflow engine evaluated the injected expressions at runtime. The "Input" tab for the executed action contains: ``` channel: #mcp-sec-poc message: Alert for Team {'display_id': 'P-123', 'event.status': 'OPEN', 'event.id': 'abc-123'} *Problem Type*: ERROR *Problem ID*: P-123 *Status*: OPEN <https://<tenant>.apps.dynatrace.com/ui/apps/.../problem/abc-123|Click here for details> ``` The injected `{{ event() }}` resolved to the actual event object before the Slack action was called. The Slack action then failed only because the workflow uses a hardcoded placeholder `connectionId: 'slack-connection-id'` that does not resolve to any real connection. If a real Slack connector had been configured, the message would have been delivered with the serialized event data in place of `{{ event() }}`. This is end-to-end confirmation of the Jinja-evaluation chain. ### Impact A workflow created with a malicious template payload acts as a persistent exfiltration channel: - It fires on every matching problem indefinitely. - The injected template is evaluated at runtime and resolves to whatever the Jinja function returns (`event()` gives the full event object, `environment()` gives tenant metadata, plus other available functions per the Dynatrace Workflows documentation). - The resolved output is delivered to a destination the attacker controls (the `channel` parameter is also templated, and is even more dangerous because it is interpolated inside an existing `{{ "..." }}` expression context). - The workflow persists in the tenant after the MCP session, operator credentials, and MCP server are gone. - With `isPrivate=false` (the default), the workflow is visible to all tenant users. Exploitation requires either prompt injection (an LLM under the MCP server's control is reading attacker-controlled data and follows an injection that calls `create_workflow_for_notification` with the malicious arguments) or operator carelessness (the approval prompt shows the raw team name literal and the operator clicks Approve without recognising `{{ event() }}` as a template fragment). Both are realistic in practice.

Is GHSA-xrmj-5g4g-8987 actively exploited?

No confirmed active exploitation of GHSA-xrmj-5g4g-8987 has been reported, but organizations should still patch proactively.

How to fix GHSA-xrmj-5g4g-8987?

Update to patched version: @dynatrace-oss/dynatrace-mcp-server 2.0.0.

What is the CVSS score for GHSA-xrmj-5g4g-8987?

GHSA-xrmj-5g4g-8987 has a CVSS v3.1 base score of 4.2 (MEDIUM).

What are the technical details?

Original Advisory

### Summary A template injection vulnerability in the `create_workflow_for_notification` tool lets a caller embed Jinja2 expressions that the Dynatrace workflow engine evaluates at runtime, exfiltrating event data to attacker-controlled destinations through a workflow that persists in the tenant after the MCP session ends. ### Details The `create_workflow_for_notification` tool interpolates three caller-supplied parameters (`teamName`, `problemType`, `channel`) directly into a Dynatrace Workflow definition. Dynatrace Workflows use Jinja2 templating: per the [official documentation](https://docs.dynatrace.com/docs/analyze-explore-automate/workflows/reference), `{{ ... }}` expressions in action inputs are evaluated at workflow runtime for every action except `Run Javascript` (which is carved out specifically to avoid code injection). A caller can therefore supply, for example, `teamName = "{{ event() }}"` and have the workflow engine evaluate that expression at runtime, serialising the full event object into the message body delivered to the Slack channel. The vulnerable code is in `src/capabilities/create-workflow-for-problem-notification.ts`, lines 82-99: ```typescript let notificationWorkflow: WorkflowCreate = { title: `[MCP POC] Notify team ${teamName} on problem of type ${problemType}`, description: `Automatically created workflow to notify team ${teamName} on problems of type ${problemType} - ...`, isPrivate: isPrivate, type: 'SIMPLE', tasks: { send_notification: { name: 'Send notification', action: 'dynatrace.slack:slack-send-message', description: 'Sends a notification to a Slack channel', input: { connectionId: 'slack-connection-id', channel: `{{ \"${channel}\" }}`, // <-- channel sits inside {{ }} message: `๐Ÿšจ Alert for Team ${teamName}\n*Problem Type*: ${problemType}\n` + `*Problem ID*: {{ event()["display_id"] }}\n*Status*: {{ event()["event.status"] }}\n` + `<{{ environment().url }}/ui/apps/.../problem/{{ event()["event.id"] }}|Click here>`, }, active: true, }, }, }; ``` The action used is `dynatrace.slack:slack-send-message`, which is not in the documented Jinja-expression exception list. Its inputs are evaluated at workflow runtime. The schema in `src/index.ts:1052-1070` registers `teamName`, `problemType`, and `channel` as `z.string().optional()` with no pattern validation. The `isPrivate` parameter has `.default(false)`, so created workflows are visible tenant-wide unless the caller explicitly sets it. The approval prompt at `src/index.ts:1069-1072`: ```typescript const approved = await requestHumanApproval( `Create a workflow for notifying team ${teamName} via ${channel} about ${problemType} problems`, ); ``` Renders `{{ event() }}` literally to the operator with no indication that it will be templated, and does not surface the workflow's visibility. The workflow is persistent: it remains in the tenant after the MCP session ends, after the operator's MCP credentials are revoked, and after the MCP server is uninstalled. It fires on every matching problem until manually deleted from the Workflows app. The `channel` parameter is uniquely dangerous because it is interpolated inside an existing `{{ "..." }}` expression context - close the string with `"` and you can run arbitrary Jinja expressions in the destination field itself. ### PoC Tested end-to-end against a real Dynatrace tenant. The MCP server was run in stdio mode with the operator's Platform Token. A `tools/call create_workflow_for_notification` was sent with: ```json { "teamName": "{{ event() }}", "problemType": "ERROR", "channel": "#mcp-sec-poc", "isPrivate": true } ``` The operator approved the prompt (which read: `"Create a workflow for notifying team {{ event() }} via #mcp-sec-poc about ERROR problems"`). The MCP returned a workflow ID. Fetching the stored workflow body via the Dynatrace Automation API (`GET /platform/automation/v1/workflows/<id>`) showed the injected expression stored verbatim: ``` title: "[MCP POC] Notify team {{ event() }} on problem of type ERROR" message: "๐Ÿšจ Alert for Team {{ event() }}\n*Problem Type*: ERROR\n*Problem ID*: {{ event()[\"display_id\"] }}\n..." channel: '{{ "#mcp-sec-poc" }}' action: "dynatrace.slack:slack-send-message" ``` The workflow was then triggered manually via the "Run workflow" feature in the Dynatrace Workflows app, with a synthetic event payload `{"display_id":"P-123","event.status":"OPEN","event.id":"abc-123"}`. The execution log for the `send_notification` task shows the workflow engine evaluated the injected expressions at runtime. The "Input" tab for the executed action contains: ``` channel: #mcp-sec-poc message: Alert for Team {'display_id': 'P-123', 'event.status': 'OPEN', 'event.id': 'abc-123'} *Problem Type*: ERROR *Problem ID*: P-123 *Status*: OPEN <https://<tenant>.apps.dynatrace.com/ui/apps/.../problem/abc-123|Click here for details> ``` The injected `{{ event() }}` resolved to the actual event object before the Slack action was called. The Slack action then failed only because the workflow uses a hardcoded placeholder `connectionId: 'slack-connection-id'` that does not resolve to any real connection. If a real Slack connector had been configured, the message would have been delivered with the serialized event data in place of `{{ event() }}`. This is end-to-end confirmation of the Jinja-evaluation chain. ### Impact A workflow created with a malicious template payload acts as a persistent exfiltration channel: - It fires on every matching problem indefinitely. - The injected template is evaluated at runtime and resolves to whatever the Jinja function returns (`event()` gives the full event object, `environment()` gives tenant metadata, plus other available functions per the Dynatrace Workflows documentation). - The resolved output is delivered to a destination the attacker controls (the `channel` parameter is also templated, and is even more dangerous because it is interpolated inside an existing `{{ "..." }}` expression context). - The workflow persists in the tenant after the MCP session, operator credentials, and MCP server are gone. - With `isPrivate=false` (the default), the workflow is visible to all tenant users. Exploitation requires either prompt injection (an LLM under the MCP server's control is reading attacker-controlled data and follows an injection that calls `create_workflow_for_notification` with the malicious arguments) or operator carelessness (the approval prompt shows the raw team name literal and the operator clicks Approve without recognising `{{ event() }}` as a template fragment). Both are realistic in practice.

Weaknesses (CWE)

CWE-1336 โ€” Improper Neutralization of Special Elements Used in a Template Engine: The product uses a template engine to insert or process externally-influenced input, but it does not neutralize or incorrectly neutralizes special elements or syntax that can be interpreted as template expressions or other code directives when processed by the engine.

  • [Architecture and Design] Choose a template engine that offers a sandbox or restricted mode, or at least limits the power of any available expressions, function calls, or commands.
  • [Implementation] Use the template engine's sandbox or restricted mode, if available.

Source: MITRE CWE corpus.

CVSS Vector

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

Timeline

Published
July 31, 2026
Last Modified
July 31, 2026
First Seen
July 31, 2026