Skip to content

ouroboros-ai: Incomplete fix of CVE-2026-47211: untrusted project .env can still reach RCE via omitted execution-routing keys

High severity GitHub Reviewed Published Jun 18, 2026 in Q00/ouroboros

Package

pip ouroboros-ai (pip)

Affected versions

<= 0.42.0

Patched versions

0.42.1

Description

Impact

The CVE-2026-47211 fix (0.39.0) added _UNTRUSTED_ENV_DENYLIST to stop an untrusted project-directory .env from redirecting execution. The denylist was incomplete — several execution-routing keys of the same RCE class were omitted, so a malicious cloned repo can still reach arbitrary command execution by shipping a .env (auto-loaded at import, no review step):

  • Backend config-home roots CODEX_HOME, OPENCODE_CONFIG, OPENCODE_CONFIG_DIR, XDG_CONFIG_HOME: a spawned vendor CLI resolves its config from these. CODEX_HOME=./.evil + committed ./.evil/config.toml redirects the nested Codex agent to attacker config — mcp_servers.<name>.command/args (RCE) and approval_policy="never" / sandbox_mode="danger-full-access" (silent removal of the human approval gate). (reported by matte1782)
  • MCP bridge / plugin execution roster OUROBOROS_MCP_CONFIG (the YAML's server command/args are spawned via stdio_client — RCE), OUROBOROS_PLUGIN_LOCKFILE, OUROBOROS_PLUGIN_TRUST_ROOT (redirect the installed-plugin roster / trust root so ooo <name> dispatches into attacker code). (reported by hackkim)
  • SSRF guard toggle OUROBOROS_ALLOW_LOCAL_TRANSPORT (re-enables loopback/private MCP transport targets).
  • Instruction / capability roots OUROBOROS_AGENTS_DIR, COPILOT_CUSTOM_INSTRUCTIONS_DIRS (replace spawned sub-agent role prompts), OUROBOROS_RUNTIME_PROFILE (backend selector), OUROBOROS_TOOL_CAPABILITIES (override YAML can lower a tool's approval_class, weakening the approval gate).

Additionally, the MCP bridge auto-loaded ./.ouroboros/mcp_servers.yaml from the working directory (create_bridge_from_env(cwd=Path.cwd())), so running ooo inside a malicious repo spawned the committed roster's command — RCE with no .env at all. (cwd-branch noted by hackkim)

Patches

Fixed in 0.42.1. All listed keys were added to _UNTRUSTED_ENV_DENYLIST; the cwd auto-discovery branch was removed (only the explicit OUROBOROS_MCP_CONFIG env var and ~/.ouroboros/mcp_servers.yaml remain, both trusted). The regression suite now derives from the source denylist to prevent future drift.

Workarounds

Do not run Ouroboros from an untrusted/cloned repository directory; remove any project-directory .env and ./.ouroboros/mcp_servers.yaml before running.

Credit

Reported privately via coordinated disclosure by matte1782 and hackkim (https://github.com/hackkim).

References

@Q00 Q00 published to Q00/ouroboros Jun 18, 2026
Published to the GitHub Advisory Database Jun 19, 2026
Reviewed Jun 19, 2026

Severity

High

CVSS overall score

This score calculates overall vulnerability severity from 0 to 10 and is based on the Common Vulnerability Scoring System (CVSS).
/ 10

CVSS v4 base metrics

Exploitability Metrics
Attack Vector Network
Attack Complexity Low
Attack Requirements None
Privileges Required None
User interaction Active
Vulnerable System Impact Metrics
Confidentiality High
Integrity High
Availability High
Subsequent System Impact Metrics
Confidentiality None
Integrity None
Availability None

CVSS v4 base metrics

Exploitability Metrics
Attack Vector: This metric reflects the context by which vulnerability exploitation is possible. This metric value (and consequently the resulting severity) will be larger the more remote (logically, and physically) an attacker can be in order to exploit the vulnerable system. The assumption is that the number of potential attackers for a vulnerability that could be exploited from across a network is larger than the number of potential attackers that could exploit a vulnerability requiring physical access to a device, and therefore warrants a greater severity.
Attack Complexity: This metric captures measurable actions that must be taken by the attacker to actively evade or circumvent existing built-in security-enhancing conditions in order to obtain a working exploit. These are conditions whose primary purpose is to increase security and/or increase exploit engineering complexity. A vulnerability exploitable without a target-specific variable has a lower complexity than a vulnerability that would require non-trivial customization. This metric is meant to capture security mechanisms utilized by the vulnerable system.
Attack Requirements: This metric captures the prerequisite deployment and execution conditions or variables of the vulnerable system that enable the attack. These differ from security-enhancing techniques/technologies (ref Attack Complexity) as the primary purpose of these conditions is not to explicitly mitigate attacks, but rather, emerge naturally as a consequence of the deployment and execution of the vulnerable system.
Privileges Required: This metric describes the level of privileges an attacker must possess prior to successfully exploiting the vulnerability. The method by which the attacker obtains privileged credentials prior to the attack (e.g., free trial accounts), is outside the scope of this metric. Generally, self-service provisioned accounts do not constitute a privilege requirement if the attacker can grant themselves privileges as part of the attack.
User interaction: This metric captures the requirement for a human user, other than the attacker, to participate in the successful compromise of the vulnerable system. This metric determines whether the vulnerability can be exploited solely at the will of the attacker, or whether a separate user (or user-initiated process) must participate in some manner.
Vulnerable System Impact Metrics
Confidentiality: This metric measures the impact to the confidentiality of the information managed by the VULNERABLE SYSTEM due to a successfully exploited vulnerability. Confidentiality refers to limiting information access and disclosure to only authorized users, as well as preventing access by, or disclosure to, unauthorized ones.
Integrity: This metric measures the impact to integrity of a successfully exploited vulnerability. Integrity refers to the trustworthiness and veracity of information. Integrity of the VULNERABLE SYSTEM is impacted when an attacker makes unauthorized modification of system data. Integrity is also impacted when a system user can repudiate critical actions taken in the context of the system (e.g. due to insufficient logging).
Availability: This metric measures the impact to the availability of the VULNERABLE SYSTEM resulting from a successfully exploited vulnerability. While the Confidentiality and Integrity impact metrics apply to the loss of confidentiality or integrity of data (e.g., information, files) used by the system, this metric refers to the loss of availability of the impacted system itself, such as a networked service (e.g., web, database, email). Since availability refers to the accessibility of information resources, attacks that consume network bandwidth, processor cycles, or disk space all impact the availability of a system.
Subsequent System Impact Metrics
Confidentiality: This metric measures the impact to the confidentiality of the information managed by the SUBSEQUENT SYSTEM due to a successfully exploited vulnerability. Confidentiality refers to limiting information access and disclosure to only authorized users, as well as preventing access by, or disclosure to, unauthorized ones.
Integrity: This metric measures the impact to integrity of a successfully exploited vulnerability. Integrity refers to the trustworthiness and veracity of information. Integrity of the SUBSEQUENT SYSTEM is impacted when an attacker makes unauthorized modification of system data. Integrity is also impacted when a system user can repudiate critical actions taken in the context of the system (e.g. due to insufficient logging).
Availability: This metric measures the impact to the availability of the SUBSEQUENT SYSTEM resulting from a successfully exploited vulnerability. While the Confidentiality and Integrity impact metrics apply to the loss of confidentiality or integrity of data (e.g., information, files) used by the system, this metric refers to the loss of availability of the impacted system itself, such as a networked service (e.g., web, database, email). Since availability refers to the accessibility of information resources, attacks that consume network bandwidth, processor cycles, or disk space all impact the availability of a system.
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:A/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N

EPSS score

Weaknesses

External Control of System or Configuration Setting

One or more system settings or configuration elements can be externally controlled by a user. Learn more on MITRE.

Improper Control of Generation of Code ('Code Injection')

The product constructs all or part of a code segment using externally-influenced input from an upstream component, but it does not neutralize or incorrectly neutralizes special elements that could modify the syntax or behavior of the intended code segment. Learn more on MITRE.

CVE ID

No known CVE

GHSA ID

GHSA-jv2h-4p9v-wf5w

Source code

Credits

Loading Checking history
See something to contribute? Suggest improvements for this vulnerability.