NIST deprecates RSA-2048 from 2030. Find every one of them before attackers do.
🐍
🐍 PyPI
Not in CISA KEV
CRITICAL severity

CVE-2026-44335 — praisonaiagents

CRITICAL

CVE-2026-44335 is a critical-severity (CVSS 9.8) Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) vulnerability in praisonaiagents. A fix is available for praisonaiagents — see the affected versions and patch details below.

PraisonAI has an SSRF bypass

Also known asPYSEC-2026-2950
Published
Updated
Affected
1 pkg
Patched
1 / 1
Exploits
None indexed
Exploitation data as of Nov 2, 2026 · OSV.dev, NVD, FIRST.org (EPSS)

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.
  • CISA assesses this as automatable — exploitation doesn’t require manual, per-target effort, which raises the odds of mass scanning and opportunistic attacks.

Exploitation and automatability from CISA’s SSVC triage for CVE-2026-44335.

EPSS Exploitation Probability

via FIRST.org ↗
0.4%probability of exploitation in next 30 days
Lower Risk0.00%
Lower risk than most CVEs32th percentile — riskier than 32% of all scored CVEsHighest risk
0.00%0.36%0.71%1.07%0.1%0.4%Jun 26Sep 26Nov 26

Probability of exploitation in the next 30 days, from FIRST.org EPSS.

How urgent is this, really

Where this sits among everything scored

Real-World Exposure

1 pkg affected
🐍praisonaiagents

Real-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 URL checking logic in PraisonAI has a logical flaw that could be bypassed by attackers, leading to SSRF attacks.

Details

The current PraisonAI project uses _validate_url to validate the input URL. The main logic is to perform security checks on the host portion of the URL extracted by urlparse to prevent SSRF attacks.

<img width="1290" height="1145" alt="QQ20260424-151256-24-1" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/d5f16b74-5ad2-444f-8600-b05f78a4b769" />

However, there are indeed differences in parsing between urlparse and the library that actually sends the request. Currently, almost all application scenarios in this project involve first using _validate_url for URL validation, and then using _get_session().get to send the request.

<img width="1143" height="740" alt="QQ20260424-151437-24-2" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/b1bf6ec2-d32a-4dac-b814-da819e8d3c83" />

In reality, its underlying mechanism is requests.get.

<img width="1042" height="576" alt="QQ20260424-151645-24-3" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/e17352c3-4205-44d6-ab6e-75566480215b" />

The core issue: urlparse() and requests disagree on which host a URL like http://127.0.0.1:6666\@1.1.1.1 points to:

  • urlparse() treats \ as a regular character and @ as the userinfo-host delimiter, so it extracts hostname as 1.1.1.1 (public)
  • requests treats \ as a path character, connecting to 127.0.0.1 (internal)

Below is a test code I wrote following the code.

import sys
from pathlib import Path
from pprint import pprint

sys.path.insert(0, str(Path(r"D:/BaiduNetdiskDownload/PraisonAI-main/PraisonAI-main/src/praisonai-agents")))

from praisonaiagents.tools import spider_tools

# url = "http://127.0.0.1:6666\@1.1.1.1"
url = "http://127.0.0.1:6666"

result = spider_tools.scrape_page(url)

if isinstance(result, dict) and "error" in result:
    print("scrape failed:", result["error"])
else:
    pprint(result)

When an attacker uses http://127.0.0.1:6666/, the existing detection logic can detect that this is an internal network address and block it.

<img width="1068" height="128" alt="QQ20260424-152007-24-4" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/294bff10-2af6-4960-bf69-dbf3340b1e9b" />

However, when an attacker uses http://127.0.0.1:6666\@1.1.1.1, the detection logic resolves the host to 1.1.1.1, which is a public IP address, thus passing the verification. But in the actual request process, this URL is forwarded by requests.get to http://127.0.0.1:6666, bypassing the detection and achieving an SSRF attack.

<img width="2089" height="324" alt="QQ20260424-152123-24-5" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/4421ce42-e47b-48de-a97a-56ce56a2bbc9" />

PoC

http://127.0.0.1:6666\@1.1.1.1

Impact

SSRF

Affected Packages

1 total 1 fixed
EcosystemPackageVulnerable rangeFix
🐍PyPIpraisonaiagentsall versions1.6.32pip install --upgrade 'praisonaiagents==1.6.32'

Affected Products

1 product · 1 configurations
Application
praisonaiagentspraison
< 1.6.32
range

Detection & mitigation playbook

Open-source dependency
  1. Detect

    Scan your dependency tree (package-lock.json, pnpm-lock.yaml, requirements.txt, go.sum, etc.) for praisonaiagents, including transitive dependencies — a direct dependency you never call can still pull in a vulnerable version.

  2. Fix

    Update praisonaiagents to 1.6.32 or later, then make sure no transitive (indirect) dependency still pins the vulnerable range — O3 confirms CVE-2026-44335 is resolved across your whole dependency graph.

  3. Workarounds

    Restrict outbound requests from the affected component to an allowlist of hosts, block access to link-local and internal address ranges at the network layer, and require authentication on internal services so a forged request cannot reach them unauthenticated.

Frequently Asked Questions

### Summary The URL checking logic in PraisonAI has a logical flaw that could be bypassed by attackers, leading to SSRF attacks. ### Details The current PraisonAI project uses _validate_url to validate the input URL. The main logic is to perform security checks on the host portion of the URL extracted by urlparse to prevent SSRF attacks. <img width="1290" height="1145" alt="QQ20260424-151256-24-1" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/d5f16b74-5ad2-444f-8600-b05f78a4b769" /> However, there are indeed differences in parsing between urlparse and the library that actually sends the r
O3 Security · Impact-Aware SCA

Is CVE-2026-44335 in your dependencies?

Find it across PyPI, including transitive dependencies.

CVE-2026-44335: praisonaiagents SSRF — Fixed in 1.6.32