Bots using py-cord as discord api wrapper are vulnerable to shutdowns through remote code execution
Noroxi assessment
Priority: Monitor (action score 26/100)
- The sources we track (CISA KEV, Exploit-DB, Metasploit, Nuclei, GitHub) show no public exploit code or exploitation in the wild.
- Probability of exploitation in the next 30 days: 0.79% (FIRST EPSS); higher than 56% of all records.
- Anyone who can reach it over the internet can trigger it. A low-privileged account is enough. No user action is required. No special conditions are required; it is repeatable.
- According to CISA the attack is automatable: targets can be found by mass scanning.
- Fixed version: Pycord-Development pycord 2.0.1.
Low priority for now. Upgrade to Pycord-Development pycord 2.0.1 or later.
Generated automatically from the record's data: CVSS (NVD and CNA), CISA KEV and SSVC, FIRST EPSS, exploit sources, fixed versions. How we calculate it
Primary sources: NVD · CVE.org · FIRST EPSS
py-cord is a an API wrapper for Discord written in Python. Bots creating using py-cord version 2.0.0 are vulnerable to remote shutdown if they are added to the server with the `application.commands` scope without the `bot` scope. Currently, it appears that all public bots that use slash commands are affected. This issue has been patched in version 2.0.1. There are currently no recommended workarounds - please upgrade to a patched version.
- Published
- Aug 18, 2022
- Updated
- Jun 17, 2026
- EPSS
- 0.7% · 56th percentile
- CWE
- CWE-284
Report tools
Action score
26
Monitor
Low priority for now.
- CVSS
- 26 / 40 · 6.5 / 10
- CISA KEV
- 0 / 30 · Not listed
- EPSS
- 0 / 30 · 0.7%
CISA SSVC decision
- Exploitation
- none
- Automatable
- yes
- Technical impact
- partial
Vulnrichment: CISA's decision-tree inputs.
CNA vs NVD score
- NVD
- 6.5
- CNA · GitHub_M
- 7.5
- 1.0 point gap
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
The score given by the assigning authority versus NVD’s independent score. A gap means the severity is contested.
Get told when this record changes
- Not in KEV: no record of exploitation in the wild
- No public exploit code on record
- A fix has been released
If any of these changes, we'll tell you in the daily email digest.
Running WordPress? Scan your site free with WP Lens
Noroxi analysis
What does it mean in your environment?
The assessment above is generated automatically from the record's data; it doesn't know your environment. Our team verifies on your systems whether this vulnerability is actually exploitable and which mitigation is enough.
We use this product, ask for helpAffected systems
Is your version affected?
Pick the product and type the version you run. It's compared with this record's version ranges in your browser; the version isn't sent anywhere.
| Vendor | Product | CPE |
|---|---|---|
| pycord development | pycord | cpe:2.3:a:pycord_development:pycord |
Affected versions
NVD version ranges (for catalog products). Add the product to your stack with a version and matching uses these.
- pycord development pycord2.0.0
Versions reported by the vendor
Affected version ranges reported by the assigning authority (GitHub_M). Independent of NVD's CPE analysis and usually ahead of it.
Pycord-Development pycord
- = 2.0.0affected
Package-level exposure
OSV and GitHub Advisory data: ecosystem, package and range. SBOM matching uses this table.
| Ecosystem | Package | Affected range | Fix |
|---|---|---|---|
| PyPI | py-cord | from 2.0.0 · before 2.0.1 | 2.0.1 |
Remediation
Which version to upgrade to
Fix versions compiled from the vendor, package registries and Microsoft. Verify the vendor's note before upgrading.
| Product / package | Fixed version | Source |
|---|---|---|
| Pycord-Development pycord | 2.0.1 · description | Vendor (CNA) |
| PyPI:py-cord | 2.0.1 | Package registry (OSV) |
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.
No nightly-computed relations.
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.
- A low-privileged account is enough.
- No user action is required.
- No special conditions are required; it is repeatable.
If successful
- Confidentiality
- none
- Integrity
- none
- Availability
- high · the service can be disrupted
- Attack vector
- Network
- Attack complexity
- Low
- Privileges required
- Low
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality impact
- None
- Integrity impact
- None
- Availability impact
- High
Weakness class (CWE)
CWE-284 · Improper Access ControlCVSS vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
nvd-primary
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)
- Embedding Scripts within ScriptsCAPEC-19likelihood: High · High
- Malicious Logic InsertionCAPEC-441likelihood: Medium · High
- Modification of Windows Service ConfigurationCAPEC-478likelihood: Low · High
- Malicious Root CertificateCAPEC-479likelihood: Low · Low
- Intent SpoofCAPEC-502
- WebView ExposureCAPEC-503
- Data Injected During ConfigurationCAPEC-536likelihood: Low · High
- Incomplete Data Deletion in a Multi-Tenant EnvironmentCAPEC-546likelihood: Low · Medium
ATT&CK techniques
- RootkitT1014
- Obfuscated Files or Information: Embedded PayloadsT1027.009
- Boot or Logon Initialization ScriptsT1037
- Taint shared contentT1080
- Server Software Component: Terminal Services DLLT1505.005
- Pre-OS Boot:BootkitT1542.003
- Create or Modify System ProcessT1543
- Create or Modify System Process: Launch AgentT1543.001
- Create or Modify System Process:Windows ServiceT1543.003
- Create or Modify System Process: Launch DaemonT1543.004
- Event Triggered Execution:Change Default File AssociationT1546.001
- Event Triggered Execution:.bash_profile and .bashrcT1546.004
- Event Triggered Execution: Accessibility FeaturesT1546.008
- Event Triggered Execution: Installer PackagesT1546.016
- Boot or Logon Autostart ExecutionT1547
- Boot or Logon Autostart Execution:Kernel Modules and ExtensionsT1547.006
Change log
- Fix✗ → ✓
For records you follow, these changes also arrive as notifications. →
References
Show all references (1 more)Show less
Vendor advisories and official records. Exploit/PoC links are deliberately left out.