CVE-2026-55538: PraisonAI [Auth Bypass] `praisonai Serve Agents Vulnerability
HIGHCVE-2026-55538 is a HIGH (CVSS 7.3) [auth bypass] `praisonai serve agents vulnerability (CWE-306: Missing Authentication for Critical Function) affecting PraisonAI libraries in the PyPI ecosystem. The issue involves [auth bypass] `praisonai serve agents --api-key` is silently ignored — agent-invocation routes (`post /agents`, `post /agents/{agent_name}`) run unauthenticated. Remediation is available by upgrading affected packages to version 4.6.58.
CVE-2026-55538 at a Glance
Security Impact
CVSS: 7.3
The security impact metrics below are parsed directly from the CVSS v3.1 vector string (CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L).
How to Fix CVE-2026-55538
To remediate this vulnerability, upgrade all affected PraisonAI dependencies to a patched release. Both direct and transitive dependencies should be checked, as frameworks or security libraries may pull in vulnerable versions transitively.
pip install PraisonAI>=4.6.58
Run the following command in your project directory to verify that all resolved dependencies use the patched release:
pip show PraisonAI
How to Check if You Are Affected
To determine whether your Python environment is affected by CVE-2026-55538, inspect your installed packages using pip:
pip show PraisonAI
Analyze the terminal output to locate any version of PraisonAI in your dependency tree. If any resolved version matches the vulnerable ranges listed in the table below (for example, versions earlier than 4.6.58), your application is affected.
Note: The pip show PraisonAI command checks currently installed packages in your active Python environment.
Technical Details
Vulnerability Mechanism & Technical Analysis
This vulnerability is classified under CWE-306: Missing Authentication for Critical Function, where the product does not perform any authentication for functionality that requires a provable user identity or consumes a significant amount of resources. In PraisonAI, 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
CVE-2026-55538 Affected PraisonAI Versions
1 component(s)| Product / Package | Ecosystem | Affected Versions | Fixed Version |
|---|---|---|---|
|
PraisonAI
|
PyPI |
< 4.6.58
|
4.6.58
|
References
Frequently Asked Questions
What is CVE-2026-55538?
Which PraisonAI versions are affected?
What version fixes CVE-2026-55538?
Is PraisonAI affected?
What is the CVSS score of CVE-2026-55538?
What CWE is associated with CVE-2026-55538?
How can I check PyPI dependencies for CVE-2026-55538?
Machine-readable OSV JSON
OSV v1.5 Schema
{
"schema_version" : "1.4.0",
"id" : "GHSA-r7v3-x45f-g7hp",
"modified" : "2026-08-25T14:56:59Z",
"published" : "2026-08-25T14:56:59Z",
"aliases" : [ "CVE-2026-55538" ],
"summary" : "PraisonAI: [Auth Bypass] `praisonai serve agents --api-key` is silently ignored — agent-invocation routes (`POST /agents`, `POST /agents/{agent_name}`) run unauthenticated",
"details" : "### Summary\n`praisonai serve agents` exposes HTTP routes that invoke registered agents. The CLI advertises `--api-key` with help text \"API key for authentication\", parses it, and forwards it into `ServeHandler`. But `_create_agents_app()` **never reads `config[\"api_key\"]` again** and installs no auth dependency or middleware on its direct routes. The configured key is a no-op flag.\n \nAs a result, an unauthenticated network caller can invoke exposed agents (`POST /agents` and `POST /agents/{agent_name}`) even when the operator passed `--api-key`. Requests with no credentials, a wrong `Authorization: Bearer`, a wrong `X-API-Key`, or an empty bearer all reach `agent.start()`.\n \nThe failure is made sharper by the fact that a **working auth dependency already exists in the same module** — `praisonai.api.agent_invoke.verify_token` guards every `/api/v1/...` route with `Depends(verify_token)` and is mounted into the very same app. The direct n8n-compat routes simply do not use it.\n\n## Technical Detail\n \n### Source-to-sink trace\n \n**1. CLI advertises and forwards `--api-key`:**\n \n```python\n# cli/commands/serve.py\n@app.command(\"agents\")\ndef serve_agents(..., api_key: Optional[str] = typer.Option(None, \"--api-key\", help=\"API key for authentication\")):\n ...\n if api_key:\n args.extend([\"--api-key\", api_key])\n exit_code = handle_serve_command(args)\n```\n \n**2. `cmd_agents()` parses `api_key` into the spec — and that is the last time it is touched:**\n \n```python\n# cli/features/serve.py — cmd_agents()\nspec = { ..., \"api_key\": {\"default\": None} }\nparsed = self._parse_args(args, spec)\napp = self._create_agents_app(parsed)\n```\n \nA grep of the entire `cli/features/serve.py` for `api_key` returns **only** the two `spec` entries (`cmd_agents` line ~199 and `cmd_unified` line ~847). `config[\"api_key\"]` is never read inside `_create_agents_app()` / `_create_unified_app()`; it is never compared, and no dependency is attached.\n \n**3. `_create_agents_app()` imports `FastAPI, HTTPException, Request` — no `Depends`, no `Header`, no auth middleware.** Every `HTTPException` raised in the agents routes is `400`/`404`/`500` (validation / not-found / execution error); none is `401`.\n \n**4. Sink — unauthenticated request reaches `agent.start()`:**\n \n```python\n# cli/features/serve.py\n@app.post(\"/agents/{agent_name}\") # n8n compatibility route\nasync def invoke_single_agent(agent_name: str, request: Request):\n body = await request.json()\n query = body.get(\"query\", \"\") or body.get(\"message\", \"\")\n ...\n agent = agent_invoke.get_agent(agent_name)\n result = await loop.run_in_executor(None, agent.start, query) # no auth anywhere above\n return {\"response\": str(result)}\n \n@app.post(path) # default path \"/agents\"\nasync def invoke_agents(request: Request, query_data: AgentQuery = None):\n ... agent.start(query) ...\n```\n\n### The auth dependency exists — it just isn't applied here\n \n`_create_agents_app()` mounts the `agent_invoke` router into the same app:\n \n```python\n# cli/features/serve.py\nif getattr(agent_invoke, 'FASTAPI_AVAILABLE', False) and hasattr(agent_invoke, 'router'):\n app.include_router(agent_invoke.router)\n```\n \nThat router properly authenticates every sensitive route:\n \n```python\n# api/agent_invoke.py\nCALL_SERVER_TOKEN = os.getenv('CALL_SERVER_TOKEN')\nasync def verify_token(request, authorization=Header(None)) -> None:\n ...\n if token != CALL_SERVER_TOKEN:\n raise HTTPException(status_code=401, detail=\"Unauthorized\")\n \n@router.get(\"/api/v1/agents\")\nasync def list_agents(_: None = Depends(verify_token)): ... # and register/unregister/info all use it\n```\n \nSo in the same process `GET /api/v1/agents` returns `401` without a token, while `POST /agents/{agent_name}` returns `200`. Note also that `verify_token` reads the `CALL_SERVER_TOKEN` env var — **not** the CLI `--api-key` — so the CLI option feeds no auth path at all.\n \n### Trigger conditions\n \n```\npraisonai serve agents --file agents.yaml --host 0.0.0.0 --port 8765 --api-key expected-secret\nPOST /agents/{agent_name} body {\"query\":\"...\"} with no / wrong / empty credentials\n```\n \n## Proof of Concept\n \nBuilt the **real** `_create_agents_app()` and exercised it over HTTP via FastAPI `TestClient`. Only `praisonaiagents.Agent` is stubbed (`.start()` returns `EXEC:<query>`), so no real LLM/credentials. `CALL_SERVER_TOKEN=expected-secret` was set so the sibling `/api/v1` router is genuinely armed — making the contrast explicit.\n \n```\nOperator started with: --api-key expected-secret (CALL_SERVER_TOKEN also set)\n \n== Sibling /api/v1 route WITH Depends(verify_token) ==\n GET /api/v1/agents [no creds ] -> HTTP 401\n GET /api/v1/agents [wrong bearer] -> HTTP 401\n \n== Direct agent-invocation route (the bug) ==\n POST /agents/owned [no creds ] -> HTTP 200 {'response': 'EXEC:hello'}\n POST /agents/owned [wrong bearer ] -> HTTP 200 {'response': 'EXEC:hello'}\n POST /agents/owned [wrong x-api-key] -> HTTP 200 {'response': 'EXEC:hello'}\n POST /agents/owned [empty bearer ] -> HTTP 200 {'response': 'EXEC:hello'}\n POST /agents [no creds ] -> HTTP 200 {'response': 'EXEC:hi'}\n```\n \nThe auth mechanism works for `/api/v1` (401) and is entirely absent on the direct `/agents` routes (200), despite `--api-key` being configured.\n \n### Equivalent HTTP trigger in a fully installed environment\n \n```bash\npraisonai serve agents --file agents.yaml --host 0.0.0.0 --port 8765 --api-key expected-secret\ncurl -sS -X POST http://TARGET:8765/agents/owned \\\n -H 'Content-Type: application/json' --data-binary '{\"query\":\"hello\"}'\n# -> 200 {\"response\":\"...\"} (expected: 401 Unauthorized)\n```\n\n## Impact\n \n- **Direct primitive**: unauthenticated agent invocation despite a configured API key.\n- **Misleading control (aggravating)**: because the CLI advertises `--api-key` as authentication, operators may deliberately expose the service (e.g. `--host 0.0.0.0`, reverse proxy, n8n integration) believing it is protected, increasing the real-world likelihood of exposure.\n- **Downstream**: exposed agents commonly hold LLM provider credentials, RAG/memory, browser/search, MCP, or shell/file tools; the bypass lets an attacker drive those capabilities. Baseline impact is unauthorized LLM cost + access to agent responses.\n\n## Suggested Mitigation\n \n- When `config[\"api_key\"]` is set, build a shared auth dependency and attach it to every agent-invocation / state-changing route in `_create_agents_app()` and `_create_unified_app()` (`dependencies=[Depends(verify)]`).\n- Reuse / unify with the existing `verify_token` so the direct `/agents` routes and the `/api/v1` routes share one mechanism, and wire the CLI `--api-key` into that mechanism (today it feeds nothing; `verify_token` reads `CALL_SERVER_TOKEN`).\n- Use constant-time comparison (`hmac.compare_digest`); `verify_token` currently uses `!=`.\n- Update discovery metadata from `auth_modes=[\"none\"]` to `[\"api-key\",\"bearer\"]` for protected endpoints.\n- Regression tests next to `tests/unit/test_serve_unified.py`: `_create_agents_app({\"api_key\":\"secret\",...})` → `POST /agents/{name}` with no creds / wrong `Authorization` / wrong `X-API-Key` returns `401`; correct key succeeds.\n```python\nimport hmac\nfrom fastapi import Header, HTTPException, Depends\n \ndef _auth_dependency(expected_key: str):\n async def verify(authorization: str | None = Header(None),\n x_api_key: str | None = Header(None, alias=\"X-API-Key\")):\n token = x_api_key\n if authorization and authorization.startswith(\"Bearer \"):\n token = authorization[7:]\n if not token or not hmac.compare_digest(token, expected_key):\n raise HTTPException(status_code=401, detail=\"Unauthorized\")\n return Depends(verify)\n```",
"severity" : [ {
"type" : "CVSS_V3",
"score" : "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L"
} ],
"affected" : [ {
"package" : {
"ecosystem" : "PyPI",
"name" : "PraisonAI"
},
"ranges" : [ {
"type" : "ECOSYSTEM",
"events" : [ {
"introduced" : "0"
}, {
"fixed" : "4.6.58"
} ]
} ]
} ],
"references" : [ {
"type" : "WEB",
"url" : "https://github.com/MervinPraison/PraisonAI/security/advisories/GHSA-r7v3-x45f-g7hp"
}, {
"type" : "WEB",
"url" : "https://github.com/MervinPraison/PraisonAI/commit/2f9677abb2ea68eab864ee8b6a828fd0141612e1"
}, {
"type" : "PACKAGE",
"url" : "https://github.com/MervinPraison/PraisonAI"
}, {
"type" : "WEB",
"url" : "https://github.com/MervinPraison/PraisonAI/releases/tag/v4.6.58"
} ],
"database_specific" : {
"cwe_ids" : [ "CWE-306" ],
"severity" : "HIGH",
"github_reviewed" : true,
"github_reviewed_at" : "2026-08-25T14:56:59Z",
"nvd_published_at" : null
}
}