Shell Command Denylist Bypass in significant-gravitas/autogpt
A vulnerability in significant-gravitas/autogpt version 0.5.1 allows an attacker to bypass the shell commands denylist settings. The issue arises when the denylist is configured to block specific commands, such as 'whoami' and '/bin/whoami'. An attacker can circumvent this restriction by executing commands with a modified path, such as '/bin/./whoami', which is not recognized by the denylist.
- Published
- Sep 11, 2024
- Updated
- Jun 17, 2026
- EPSS
- 0.8% · 55th percentile
- CWE
- CWE-78
Sign in to follow · You’ll be notified if a followed record enters KEV, gets an exploit or is updated.
Report tools
Action score
39
Monitor
Low priority for now.
- CVSS
- 39 / 40 · 9.8 / 10
- CISA KEV
- 0 / 30 · Not listed
- EPSS
- 0 / 30 · 0.8%
CISA SSVC decision
- Exploitation
- proof of concept
- Automatable
- yes
- Technical impact
- total
Vulnrichment: CISA's decision-tree inputs.
CNA vs NVD score
- NVD
- 9.8
- CNA · @huntr_ai
- 9.8
- agree
CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
The score given by the assigning authority versus NVD’s independent score. A gap means the severity is contested.
Noroxi analysis
No Noroxi analysis for this record yet
We don't hand-write analysis for the hundreds of thousands of vulnerabilities in the database; that wouldn't be honest. For notable, high-impact vulnerabilities our team writes the mechanism, detection and remediation steps.
We use this product, ask for helpAffected systems
| Vendor | Product | CPE |
|---|---|---|
| agpt | autogpt classic | cpe:2.3:a:agpt:autogpt_classic |
Affected versions
NVD version ranges (for catalog products). Add the product to your stack with a version and matching uses these.
- agpt autogpt classic0.5.1
Versions reported by the vendor
Affected version ranges reported by the assigning authority (@huntr_ai). Independent of NVD's CPE analysis and usually ahead of it.
significant-gravitas significant-gravitas/autogpt
- unspecified and later · before 0.5.1affected
Package-level exposure
OSV and GitHub Advisory data: ecosystem, package and range. SBOM matching uses this table.
| Ecosystem | Package | Affected range | Fix |
|---|---|---|---|
| PyPI | agpt | up to and including 0.5.1 | — |
Same product
agpt: all recordsOther highest-scoring records for the same primary product.
- CVE-2024-8156Command Injection in significant-gravitas/autogpt40Plan
- CVE-2024-1881Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in an OS Command in significant-gravitas/autogpt39Monitor
- CVE-2024-1879CSRF to RCE in significant-gravitas/autogpt35Monitor
- CVE-2023-37273Docker escape in Auto-GPT when running from docker-compose.yml included in git repo35Monitor
- CVE-2024-1880OS Command Injection in MacOS Text-To-Speech Class in significant-gravitas/autogpt31Monitor
- CVE-2023-37274Python code execution sandbox escape in non-docker version in Auto-GPT31Monitor
Remediation
Which version to upgrade to
Fix versions compiled from the vendor, package registries and Microsoft. Verify the vendor's note before upgrading.
No fix version is recorded for this entry. Check the references for vendor advisories.
Exploit status
No known public exploit
No public exploit has been observed yet. That doesn't mean you're safe, only that the bar is a little higher.
Research context
For pentesters and researchers: attack profile, score disagreement, timeline, patch commits, credits, variant and chain candidates, bug bounty scope. All derived from existing data; no exploit code.
Timeline
From publication to today: proof of concept, Metasploit module, CISA KEV and fix record. Dates are as reported by the sources.
No dated events beyond publication.
FIRST EPSS daily score; only changes of 0.01 or more are recorded (step chart).
Patch and commit links
Commit, PR and diff links among the references. A starting point for patch-diffing and variant hunting; fixes, not exploits.
Credits
All researchersFinders, reporters and analysts named in the CNA record. Click a name for that researcher’s other records.
No credits in the CNA record.
Variant candidates
Same product, same weakness class, within 18 months. If the patch missed the root cause, the sibling bug is here.
- CVE-2024-188197 days apartImproper Neutralization of Special Elements used in an OS Command in significant-gravitas/autogpt39Monitor
- CVE-2024-188097 days apartOS Command Injection in MacOS Text-To-Speech Class in significant-gravitas/autogpt31Monitor
Chain candidates
An authentication bypass and a privilege-requiring bug in the same product, published close together: combined they may become an unauthenticated path.
—
Bug bounty scope
No known public program.
Source: bounty-targets-data (public HackerOne, Bugcrowd, Intigriti, YesWeHack listings).
Technical details
Attack conditions
- Anyone who can reach it over the internet can trigger it.
- No account or password is required.
- No user action is required.
- No special conditions are required; it is repeatable.
If successful
- Confidentiality
- high · data can be read
- Integrity
- high · data or configuration can be modified
- Availability
- high · the service can be disrupted
- Attack vector
- Network
- Attack complexity
- Low
- Privileges required
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality impact
- High
- Integrity impact
- High
- Availability impact
- High
Weakness class (CWE)
CWE-78 · Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in an OS Command ('OS Command Injection')CVSS vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
nvd-primary
Root cause
User input is inserted as text into a shell command. The shell may interpret special characters in the input as part of the command.
The bug in code
The whole CWE-78 classA representative example of this vulnerability class. Not the vendor's source code; it shows the faulty pattern and its fix.
Vulnerable
const host = req.body.host;exec("ping -c 1 " + host, onResult);Fixed
const host = req.body.host;if (!/^[a-z0-9.-]{1,253}$/i.test(host)) return res.sendStatus(400);execFile("ping", ["-c", "1", host], onResult);Attack context
MITRE CAPEC attack patterns and ATT&CK techniques for this weakness class (CWE). A starting point for detection rules and threat hunting.
Attack patterns (CAPEC)
- Command Line Execution through SQL InjectionCAPEC-108likelihood: Low · Very High
- Command DelimitersCAPEC-15likelihood: High · High
- Exploiting Multiple Input Interpretation LayersCAPEC-43likelihood: Medium · High
- Argument InjectionCAPEC-6likelihood: High · High
- OS Command InjectionCAPEC-88likelihood: High · High
ATT&CK techniques
—
Change log
No changes recorded on tracked fields yet. Score, KEV, exploit maturity and fix status changes appear here.
References
Vendor advisories and official records. Exploit/PoC links are deliberately left out.