Evidence used
- No CISA KEV confirmation is currently recorded.
- A structured source references public exploit or proof-of-concept material.
- EPSS is 0.51% for the current model date.
BlackTreeCVE IntelligenceFull vulnerability report · 2026
CVE-2026-29783High confidence
GitHub Copilot CLI allows for dangerous shell expansion patterns that enable arbitrary command execution
github · copilot-cli
Official source article: GitHub GHSA-G8R9-G2V8-JV6F ↗. Check the applicable product and release in the original source.
7.5HighCVSS 4.0
Within 7 days
Fix not verifiedHigh technical severity with public exploit material referenced by a structured source; prioritise exposed affected systems while verifying vendor guidance.
R
Open reassessment dashboard →Operational reassessment
Published severity in operational context
Published severityHigh→Operational priority:Critical, raised one band.upgradedsince 11 Mar 2026
Compensating controls
- Restrict the affected network interface to trusted sources where business-safe.
- Increase monitoring for the attack path and post-exploitation behaviour described in the report.
Verification
- Confirm that the asset runs github copilot-cli and falls inside the recorded affected range.
- Recheck the vendor advisory before scheduling a change because no verified fixed version is currently retained.
- Validate exposure, authentication requirements and compensating controls in the actual environment.
- Reopen this reassessment when CVSS, KEV, EPSS, exploit evidence or remediation changes.
Open-source package ranges1 source-attributed range
These OSV and GitHub advisory ranges apply only to the named package and ecosystem. A listed fixed version is not a universal product patch or proof that an update is installed.
| Ecosystem and package | Affected range | First fixed version | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| npm@github/copilot | <= 0.0.422 | 0.0.423 | GitHub advisory ↗upstream repository advisory · 13 Mar 2026 |
High technical severity with public exploit material referenced by a structured source; prioritise exposed affected systems while verifying vendor guidance.
Fix not verified01
What, why and how
The shell tool within GitHub Copilot CLI versions prior to and including 0.0.422 can allow arbitrary code execution through crafted bash parameter expansion patterns. An attacker who can influence the commands executed by the agent (e.g., via prompt injection through repository files, MCP server responses, or user instructions) can exploit bash parameter transformation operators to execute hidden commands, bypassing the safety assessment that classifies commands as "read-only." This has been patched in version 0.0.423. The vulnerability stems from how the CLI's shell safety assessment evaluates commands before execution. The safety layer parses and classifies shell commands as either read-only (safe) or write-capable (requires user approval). However, several bash parameter expansion features can embed executable code within arguments to otherwise read-only commands, causing them to appear safe while actually performing arbitrary operations. The specific dangerous patterns are ${var@P}, ${var=value} / ${var:=value}, ${!var}, and nested $(cmd) or <(cmd) inside ${...} expansions. An attacker who can influence command text sent to the shell tool - for example, through prompt injection via malicious repository content (README files, code comments, issue bodies), compromised or malicious MCP server responses, or crafted user instructions containing obfuscated commands - could achieve arbitrary code execution on the user's workstation. This is possible even in permission modes that require user approval for write operations, since the commands can appear to use only read-only utilities to ultimately trigger write operations. Successful exploitation could lead to data exfiltration, file modification, or further system compromise.
What
The shell tool within GitHub Copilot CLI versions prior to and including 0.0.422 can allow arbitrary code execution through crafted bash parameter expansion patterns. An attacker who can influence the commands executed by the agent (e.g., via prompt injection through repository files, MCP server responses, or user instructions) can exploit bash parameter transformation operators to execute hidden commands, bypassing the safety assessment that classifies commands as "read-only." This has been patched in version 0.0.423. The vulnerability stems from how the CLI's shell safety assessment evaluates commands before execution. The safety layer parses and classifies shell commands as either read-only (safe) or write-capable (requires user approval). However, several bash parameter expansion features can embed executable code within arguments to otherwise read-only commands, causing them to appear safe while actually performing arbitrary operations. The specific dangerous patterns are ${var@P}, ${var=value} / ${var:=value}, ${!var}, and nested $(cmd) or <(cmd) inside ${...} expansions. An attacker who can influence command text sent to the shell tool - for example, through prompt injection via malicious repository content (README files, code comments, issue bodies), compromised or malicious MCP server responses, or crafted user instructions containing obfuscated commands - could achieve arbitrary code execution on the user's workstation. This is possible even in permission modes that require user approval for write operations, since the commands can appear to use only read-only utilities to ultimately trigger write operations. Successful exploitation could lead to data exfiltration, file modification, or further system compromise.
Why
Untrusted input is incorporated into an operating-system command without safe parameter handling.
How
An attacker operating through a network path may attempt exploitation when the stated preconditions are met. If successful, the issue may execute code or commands in the affected security context.
What
The shell tool within GitHub Copilot CLI versions prior to and including 0.0.422 can allow arbitrary code execution through crafted bash parameter expansion patterns. An attacker who can influence the commands executed by the agent (e.g., via prompt injection through repository files, MCP server responses, or user instructions) can exploit bash parameter transformation operators to execute hidden commands, bypassing the safety assessment that classifies commands as "read-only." This has been patched in version 0.0.423. The vulnerability stems from how the CLI's shell safety assessment evaluates commands before execution. The safety layer parses and classifies shell commands as either read-only (safe) or write-capable (requires user approval). However, several bash parameter expansion features can embed executable code within arguments to otherwise read-only commands, causing them to appear safe while actually performing arbitrary operations. The specific dangerous patterns are ${var@P}, ${var=value} / ${var:=value}, ${!var}, and nested $(cmd) or <(cmd) inside ${...} expansions. An attacker who can influence command text sent to the shell tool - for example, through prompt injection via malicious repository content (README files, code comments, issue bodies), compromised or malicious MCP server responses, or crafted user instructions containing obfuscated commands - could achieve arbitrary code execution on the user's workstation. This is possible even in permission modes that require user approval for write operations, since the commands can appear to use only read-only utilities to ultimately trigger write operations. Successful exploitation could lead to data exfiltration, file modification, or further system compromise.
Why
Untrusted input is incorporated into an operating-system command without safe parameter handling.
How
An attacker operating through a network path may attempt exploitation when the stated preconditions are met. If successful, the issue may execute code or commands in the affected security context.
02
Exploit reality and attack path
CVSS severity, EPSS forecast probability, public exploit material and CISA-confirmed exploitation are separate signals.
Observed exploitation No confirmed evidence
?
Confirmed exploitation and public exploit material are separate signals. Attacks can occur without public proof-of-concept or exploit code.No CISA KEV match was present at the last successful refresh. This means no confirmation from that source, not proof of no exploitation.
Public PoC / exploit material Reference recorded
?
Confirmed exploitation and public exploit material are separate signals. Attacks can occur without public proof-of-concept or exploit code.A structured CVE source labels at least one public reference as exploit material. BlackTree has not independently validated that it is safe, reliable or weaponised.
- Likely attack path
- a network path → Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in an OS Command ('OS Command Injection') → execute code or commands in the affected security context
- Attack surface
- Network
- Privileges required
- None: unauthenticated exploitation is possible
- User interaction
- Active interaction required
- Attack complexity
- Low: no specialised conditions are recorded
- Security boundary
- Not a CVSS 4.0 base metric
- Weakness
?
CWE means Common Weakness Enumeration: a standard category for the underlying weakness. - CWE-78 ↗
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.
- CVSS vector
?
CVSS means Common Vulnerability Scoring System. The vector records the metric values used to calculate technical severity. CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:N/UI:A/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/SC:N/SI:N/SA:NCommon Vulnerability Scoring System 4.0: the compact vector below is decoded into plain language.
AVNetworkAttack vector: The vulnerable component can be reached over a network.ACLowAttack complexity: No specialised conditions are required beyond attacker-controlled input.ATPresentAttack requirements: A particular deployment or execution condition must be present.PRNonePrivileges required: The attacker does not need an account or existing privileges.UIActiveUser interaction: A user must take a deliberate action for exploitation to succeed.VCHighVulnerable-system confidentiality: A successful attack can cause a major loss.VIHighVulnerable-system integrity: A successful attack can cause a major loss.VAHighVulnerable-system availability: A successful attack can cause a major loss.SCNoneSubsequent-system confidentiality: No direct loss is represented by this metric.SINoneSubsequent-system integrity: No direct loss is represented by this metric.SANoneSubsequent-system availability: No direct loss is represented by this metric.- Post-exploitation / living off the land
- After compromise, an attacker may use built-in shells, scripting engines, scheduled tasks and native network utilities for discovery, persistence or movement. This is a plausible LoTL path, not evidence that it has occurred for every attack.
03
Patch and workaround
Operational remediation based on structured source evidence.
- Status
?
Patch availability is based on structured fixed-version fields and authoritative update references. If no fix is verified, check the vendor advisory before making a change. - Fix not verified
- Affected
- copilot-cli: <= 0.0.422
- Fixed
- No fixed version is explicitly recorded in the structured CVE data.
- Action
- No verified patch reference is present in the current structured sources. Check the vendor advisory before making a change.
- Workaround
- No verified workaround is recorded. If business-safe, reduce exposure to the affected interface and allow only trusted sources until authoritative guidance is available.
04
Evidence and provenance
Published 6 Mar 2026 · Last source change 11 Mar 2026, 03:56 UTC · CWE-78 · Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in an OS Command ('OS Command Injection')
CVE recordCVE.org · 5.2
CVSS sourceCNA
EPSS source FIRST · tracked since 2026-08-14
?
The date BlackTree first stored a score for this CVE from the daily FIRST EPSS feed.European sourceENISA EUVD · EUVD-2026-10049
Product sourceCNA
Remediation sourceCVE/CNA references
CWE sourceCNA
NVD statusNVD enriched
Core structured fields are present and their contributing authorities are shown above.
Material change intelligence
View recent updates ↗What changed after publication
No material field changes have been recorded since change tracking began. Routine source refreshes and cosmetic edits are intentionally excluded.
Technical terms and abbreviations used in this report
- CVE
- Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures: the public identifier for one disclosed vulnerability.
- CVSS
- Common Vulnerability Scoring System: a technical severity framework; it is not patching priority by itself.
- EPSS
- Exploit Prediction Scoring System: FIRST's estimate of the probability that exploitation activity will be observed in the next 30 days; it is a forecast, not confirmation.
- CWE
- Common Weakness Enumeration: the standard category describing the underlying software or hardware weakness.
- CNA
- CVE Numbering Authority: an organisation authorised to assign and publish CVE records.
- CISA ADP
- Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency Authorized Data Publisher: structured enrichment added to a CVE record.
- NVD
- National Vulnerability Database: NIST's enrichment service for CVE records.
- CERT / CSIRT
- A computer security incident response team that publishes warnings or coordinates incident response.
- PoC
- Proof of concept: public material that demonstrates or helps reproduce exploitation.
- CSAF
- Common Security Advisory Framework: a machine-readable format for security advisories.
- LoTL
- Living off the land: abuse of legitimate tools or system functions during an attack.