CVE Watch23 oct 2026

CVE-2026-115478

obsidian-tc is a governed, agent-ready Model Context Protocol server for Obsidian vaults. From 1.0.1 until 1.31.4, `create_entity`, `link_en

CVSS

—

Sin CVSS

EPSS

—

KEV

—

Exploit Today

—

0-100

Publicado: 23 oct 2026 · Última mod.: 23 oct 2026 · CWE-459 · CWE-863

EPSS · 30d

Sin historial EPSS suficiente todavía.

Descripción técnica

obsidian-tc is a governed, agent-ready Model Context Protocol server for Obsidian vaults. From 1.0.1 until 1.31.4, `create_entity`, `link_entities`, `rename_entity`, `unlink_entities` and `delete_entity` regenerate memory notes from SQLite at the computed `memory/<type>/<name>.md` path without reliably preserving note ownership or the consistency of a failed lifecycle operation. During shared materialization, a hand-authored note or an orphan left by a different entity whose name sanitized to the same path could have its entire body overwritten on the next write naming that type and name, with non-owned frontmatter preserved. `rename_entity` also seeded the destination path with a direct atomic write without validating ownership and could overwrite a foreign note there. Separately, several tools mutated SQLite before fallible filesystem work: `create_entity` and `link_entities` inserted the row or relation before materialization; `rename_entity` updated the entity, including a retired status, before updating its note; `unlink_entities` removed a relation before rematerializing the source note; and `delete_entity`'s cascade removed the target and its relations before rematerializing neighbouring notes. A later filesystem failure could therefore leave a row or relation changed and the memory graph inconsistent with the notes on disk even when the operation failed. An authorized caller with the required memory-tool permissions could, without intending to, destroy the body of a vault note outside the entity being written; `delete_entity` additionally requires its deletion permission and destructive confirmation, which this memory flaw does not bypass. Snapshots-before-write through `restore_note` mitigate the overwrite only where snapshots are enabled and the note had previously been written through obsidian-tc. This issue is fixed in version 1.31.4.

Referencias oficiales

CVEs relacionados

CVECVSSEPSSKEVRExplotTítuloVis.

CVE-2026-115477—

—

———obsidian-tc is a governed, agent-ready Model Context Protocol server for Obsidian vaults. From 1.13.0 until 1.31.4, on a Streamable HTTP deployment with `auth.jwtSecret` configured and a 2026-07-28-era client declaring `elicitation.form` support, a dispatch-gated tool call offered an `inputRequired` confirmation could still complete after the human declined or cancelled, or the elicitation response was omitted or malformed, provided the client echoed the validly bound `requestState` on resubmission. The server trusted an authentic, call-bound state as proof of approval even though that state was minted before the `elicitation/create` leg was asked and proved only that the resubmission belonged to the same call. A client behaving incorrectly or under an attacker's control could therefore execute dispatch-gated destructive vault operations without the human's approval, while still requiring the caller's ordinary tool permissions. Only tools marked `destructive: true` or requiring a scope with a human-in-the-loop floor were reachable through this bypass. The sixteen handler-side conditionally gated tools, including `write_note` overwrite and `move_note`, did not read elicitation state on the modern wire and let neither approval nor decline through that path. Affected deployments using stdio or leaving `auth.jwtSecret` unset instead used the CLI `elicit_token` fallback and did not offer this `requestState` round trip. The fix does not prevent a malicious client from reporting a fabricated approval, because the server cannot verify that the client displayed the form or that a human saw it. This issue is fixed in version 1.31.4.6h CVE-2026-1146236.5 MED

—

———baserCMS is a website development framework. In versions 5.0.0 before 5.3.2 and 5.4.0 before 5.4.2, an authenticated user with only theme-file view permission can traverse outside the theme directory through the optional BcThemeFile plugin's Admin web screen. ThemeFilesController::parseArgs() constructs a path containing literal ../ segments, and the view and edit actions pass it to ThemeFilesService::get() without containment validation. Authorization checks the unresolved request path, after which ThemeFile::_getContents() reads the resolved file and exposes its contents in the form textarea. A client must preserve the dot segments rather than normalize them away. Readable files are limited to .php, .css, .js, and .ctp; this can disclose application source and config/install.php database credentials in MySQL or PostgreSQL deployments, while SQLite configurations have an empty database password. Reading config/app_local.php may expose the Security.salt fallback, which is effective only when not overridden by environment configuration. The flaw does not disclose .env, .pem, or SQLite .db files, does not itself permit file writes or code execution, and does not affect the separate API getFullpath() route. The plugin is disabled by default and unauthenticated requests are not sufficient. This issue has been patched in versions 5.3.2 and 5.4.2.5h CVE-2026-571427.8 ALT

—

———PraisonAI is a multi-agent teams system. From version 4.5.87 to before version 4.6.61, PraisonAI recipe execution has a dangerous-tool policy that is supposed to block default-denied tools unless the caller explicitly passes allow_dangerous_tools=True. That policy only checks tools declared in TEMPLATE.yaml requires.tools. For steps-based recipes, the actual execution path loads workflow.yaml with YAMLWorkflowParser. That parser resolves agent-level tools: declarations and preserves top-level approve:. Workflow.start() then installs those YAML-approved tools into the approval context. As a result, an untrusted recipe can omit execute_command from TEMPLATE.yaml requires.tools, declare it in workflow.yaml agents.*.tools, and add top-level approve: [execute_command]. The caller did not set allow_dangerous_tools=True, but the recipe policy allows the recipe and the workflow approval path self-approves the critical shell tool. This issue has been patched in version 4.6.61.8h CVE-2026-571178.8 ALT

—

———PraisonAI is a multi-agent teams system. From version 4.6.10 to before version 4.6.59, LocalManagedAgent / SandboxedAgent compute bridging wraps read_file, list_files, and write_file when a compute provider is attached. The bridge converts those file operations into shell command strings using raw path arguments, then sends those strings to shell-backed compute providers. An attacker who can influence a file-tool path argument can break out of the quoted path and execute arbitrary shell commands in the compute environment. With compute="local", commands execute through the local subprocess compute provider on the host. With Docker, commands execute in the container. This issue has been patched in version 4.6.59.8h CVE-2026-568387.8 ALT

—

———PraisonAI is a multi-agent teams system. From version 4.5.87 to before version 4.6.59, PraisonAI recipe execution blocks default-denied dangerous tools unless the caller explicitly passes allow_dangerous_tools=True. The normal recipe.run() path enforces this with _check_tool_policy(). The streaming path, recipe.run_stream(), loads the same recipe, checks dependencies, and then calls _execute_recipe() without running the dangerous-tool policy check. As a result, a recipe that honestly declares execute_command in TEMPLATE.yaml requires.tools is denied by recipe.run(), but reaches the execution engine through recipe.run_stream() with allow_dangerous_tools=False. This issue has been patched in version 4.6.59.9h CVE-2026-568358.3 ALT

—

———PraisonAI is a multi-agent teams system. From version 3.11.0 to before version 4.6.59, PraisonAI's Slack bot applies its configured allowed_users, allowed_channels, and unknown-user pairing policy in the normal Slack message event handler, but not in the adjacent Slack app_mention event handler. A Slack workspace user who can mention the bot in a channel where the Slack app is present can trigger the configured PraisonAI agent even when: the sender is not in BotConfig.allowed_users; the channel is not in BotConfig.allowed_channels; unknown_user_policy="deny" is configured; and the same event content is correctly dropped by the normal message handler. This issue has been patched in version 4.6.59.9h