NVD / CVE Program· CNA GitHub_M

CVE-2026-54344: ToolJet GitHub Actions comment body shell injection exposes deployment secrets

Noroxi assessment

Priority: Monitor (action score 35/100)

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: 0.36% (FIRST EPSS).
Someone on the same network segment can trigger it. No account or password is required. No user action is required. No special conditions are required; it is repeatable.
Fixed version: ToolJet ToolJet 3.20.180.
Severity is disputed: the assigning authority (CNA) scores it 4.7, NVD 8.8.

Low priority for now. Upgrade to ToolJet ToolJet 3.20.180 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

ToolJet is an open-source low-code platform for building internal tools. Prior to 3.20.180, ToolJet's render preview deployment workflow interpolates github.event.comment.body directly into a bash conditional in a run step, allowing any GitHub user who can comment on an open pull request with a deploy command to execute shell commands on the CI runner and exfiltrate deployment secrets. This issue is reported as fixed in version 3.20.180.

HighCVSS 8.8 · v3.1—No exploit Fix available

Published: Jul 8, 2026
Updated: Aug 26, 2026
EPSS: 0.3% · 30th percentile
CWE: CWE-78

Report tools

JSON

Action score

Monitor

Low priority for now.

CVSS: 35 / 40 · 8.8 / 10
CISA KEV: 0 / 30 · Not listed
EPSS: 0 / 30 · 0.3%

CISA SSVC decision

Exploitation: proof of concept
Automatable: no
Technical impact: partial

Vulnrichment: CISA's decision-tree inputs.

CNA vs NVD score

NVD: 8.8
CNA · GitHub_M: 4.7; 4.1 point gap

CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:L/I:N/A:N

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

Is your version affected? Check it

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 help

Affected 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
tooljet	tooljet	cpe:2.3:a:tooljet:tooljet

Affected versions

NVD version ranges (for catalog products). Add the product to your stack with a version and matching uses these.

tooljet tooljetbefore 3.20.180

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.

ToolJet ToolJet
- < 3.20.180affected

Same product

tooljet: all records

Other highest-scoring records for the same primary product.

CVE-2026-82874ToolJet before v3.16.208 Cross-Tenant Authorization Bypass via tooljet-db
37Monitor
CVE-2026-55413ToolJet - Marketplace Plugin Poisoning Enables Instance-Wide Remote Code Execution
37Monitor
CVE-2022-3019Improper Access Control in tooljet/tooljet
35Monitor

Published before and after this one in the same product

← EarlierCVE-2026-55411Jun 25, 2026 · ToolJet: Cross-tenant credential decryption (IDOR) in POST /api/data-sources/decrypt — any authenticated user can decrypt any organization's data-source secrets
27Monitor
← EarlierCVE-2026-55412Jun 25, 2026 · ToolJet Cloud - SSRF to Azure Cloud Infrastructure Compromise
33Monitor
Later →CVE-2026-73068Aug 11, 2026 · ToolJet: Cross-tenant Broken Access Control in ToolJet Database (tooljet-db): any authenticated user can read and write another organization's tables
23Monitor

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
ToolJet ToolJet	3.20.180 · description	Vendor (CNA)

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.

No history yet (it accumulates with the daily EPSS job).

Patch and commit links

Commit, PR and diff links among the references. A starting point for patch-diffing and variant hunting; fixes, not exploits.

No commit or PR link among the references.

Credits

All researchers

Finders, 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

Someone on the same network segment 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: Adjacent
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:A/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 class

A representative example of this vulnerability class. Not the vendor's source code; it shows the faulty pattern and its fix.

Vulnerable

1const host = req.body.host;
2exec("ping -c 1 " + host, onResult);

Fixed

1const host = req.body.host;
2if (!/^[a-z0-9.-]{1,253}$/i.test(host)) return res.sendStatus(400);
3execFile("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)

ATT&CK techniques

—

Change log

Fix✗ → ✓Sep 29, 2026, 11:57 AM UTC

For records you follow, these changes also arrive as notifications. →

All records