BlackTreeCVE Intelligence
← Back to the CVE catalogue
Full vulnerability report · 2026
CVE-2026-75858High confidence

CodeWhale rlm_eval before 0.8.64 Remote Code Execution

Hmbown · CodeWhale

Official source article: GitHub GHSA-WRJ3-VJ8C-784F ↗. Check the applicable product and release in the original source.

8.5HighCVSS 4.0
Recommended action
Within 7 days

High technical severity with public exploit material referenced by a structured source; prioritise exposed affected systems while verifying vendor guidance.

Patch available
R
Operational reassessment

Published severity in operational context

Open reassessment dashboard →
Published severityHighOperational priority:High, unchanged from published severity.unchanged

Evidence used

  • No CISA KEV confirmation is currently recorded.
  • A structured source references public exploit or proof-of-concept material.
  • EPSS is 0.36% for the current model date.

Compensating controls

  • Validate the affected product branch and deploy the verified fixed release.
  • Restrict local access and enforce least privilege on affected hosts.
  • Increase monitoring for the attack path and post-exploitation behaviour described in the report.

Verification

  1. Confirm that the asset runs Hmbown CodeWhale and falls inside the recorded affected range.
  2. Verify the installed build against the product-specific fixed version after deployment.
  3. Validate exposure, authentication requirements and compensating controls in the actual environment.
  4. Reopen this reassessment when CVSS, KEV, EPSS, exploit evidence or remediation changes.
Mitigation target: Within 30 daysRemediation target: Within 180 days

This automated reassessment organises public evidence. It does not know asset exposure, business impact or control effectiveness and does not replace CVSS or a human risk decision.

Open-source package ranges4 source-attributed ranges

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 packageAffected rangeFirst fixed versionEvidence
npmcodewhale>= 0.8.41, < 0.8.640.8.64GitHub advisory ↗upstream repository advisory · 4 Sep 2026
npmdeepseek-tui>= 0.8.33, < 0.8.410.8.41GitHub advisory ↗upstream repository advisory · 4 Sep 2026
rustcodewhale-tui>= 0.8.41, < 0.8.640.8.64GitHub advisory ↗upstream repository advisory · 4 Sep 2026
rustdeepseek-tui>= 0.8.33, <= 0.8.41Not statedGitHub advisory ↗upstream repository advisory · 4 Sep 2026
Optional official sources

National CERT insights
?CERT means Computer Emergency Response Team; CSIRT is the closely related term Computer Security Incident Response Team.

Choose official national sources for this report. Each advisory shows its original language. Your selection is remembered on this device and included in shared links.

Official European source

ENISA European Vulnerability Database

Official EUVD identifiers, advisory evidence and known-exploited context. Missing fields are not treated as evidence of low risk.

1 current
ENISA EUVD identifier

EUVD-2026-60965

No EUVD known-exploited evidence

CodeWhale (packages codewhale / codewhale-tui) versions >= 0.8.41 and < 0.8.64 contain a remote code execution vulnerability in the rlm_eval tool. The tool's approval_requirement() returns ApprovalRequirement::Auto, which the engine treats as 'never prompt,' causing arbitrary model-supplied Python code to run in a python3 interpreter without consulting the user's configured --approval-policy and without any approval prompt or audit step. An attacker can induce the agent to execute arbitrary code via prompt injection in untrusted content the agent reads (a web page, fetched URL, repository file, or MCP tool result); the companion rlm_open tool can stage such content. Code runs on the user's machine at the user's privilege level. Fixed in 0.8.64.

EUVD state
Present in the current official mapping
Known exploitation
Not present in the current ENISA EUVD known-exploited dataset. This is not proof of no exploitation.
ENISA score
8.5 · CVSS 4.0
Advisory evidence
No linked advisory details stored yet
Recommended actionWithin 7 days

High technical severity with public exploit material referenced by a structured source; prioritise exposed affected systems while verifying vendor guidance.

Patch available
01

What, why and how

CodeWhale (packages codewhale / codewhale-tui) versions >= 0.8.41 and < 0.8.64 contain a remote code execution vulnerability in the rlm_eval tool. The tool's approval_requirement() returns ApprovalRequirement::Auto, which the engine treats as 'never prompt,' causing arbitrary model-supplied Python code to run in a python3 interpreter without consulting the user's configured --approval-policy and without any approval prompt or audit step. An attacker can induce the agent to execute arbitrary code via prompt injection in untrusted content the agent reads (a web page, fetched URL, repository file, or MCP tool result); the companion rlm_open tool can stage such content. Code runs on the user's machine at the user's privilege level. Fixed in 0.8.64.

What

CodeWhale (packages codewhale / codewhale-tui) versions >= 0.8.41 and < 0.8.64 contain a remote code execution vulnerability in the rlm_eval tool. The tool's approval_requirement() returns ApprovalRequirement::Auto, which the engine treats as 'never prompt,' causing arbitrary model-supplied Python code to run in a python3 interpreter without consulting the user's configured --approval-policy and without any approval prompt or audit step. An attacker can induce the agent to execute arbitrary code via prompt injection in untrusted content the agent reads (a web page, fetched URL, repository file, or MCP tool result); the companion rlm_open tool can stage such content. Code runs on the user's machine at the user's privilege level. Fixed in 0.8.64.

Why

Untrusted data can cross into a code-evaluation path and be interpreted as executable instructions.

How

An attacker operating through local access may attempt exploitation when the stated preconditions are met. If successful, the issue may execute code or commands in the affected security context.

What

CodeWhale (packages codewhale / codewhale-tui) versions >= 0.8.41 and < 0.8.64 contain a remote code execution vulnerability in the rlm_eval tool. The tool's approval_requirement() returns ApprovalRequirement::Auto, which the engine treats as 'never prompt,' causing arbitrary model-supplied Python code to run in a python3 interpreter without consulting the user's configured --approval-policy and without any approval prompt or audit step. An attacker can induce the agent to execute arbitrary code via prompt injection in untrusted content the agent reads (a web page, fetched URL, repository file, or MCP tool result); the companion rlm_open tool can stage such content. Code runs on the user's machine at the user's privilege level. Fixed in 0.8.64.

Why

Untrusted data can cross into a code-evaluation path and be interpreted as executable instructions.

How

An attacker operating through local access 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
?Confirmed exploitation and public exploit material are separate signals. Attacks can occur without public proof-of-concept or exploit code.
No confirmed evidence

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
?Confirmed exploitation and public exploit material are separate signals. Attacks can occur without public proof-of-concept or exploit code.
Reference recorded

CISA Vulnrichment records proof-of-concept exploitation in its SSVC data. BlackTree has not independently executed or validated exploit material.

Likely attack path
local access → Improper Control of Generation of Code ('Code Injection') → execute code or commands in the affected security context
Attack surface
Local
Privileges required
None: unauthenticated exploitation is possible
User interaction
Passive 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-94 ↗

CWE-94: Improper Control of Generation of Code ('Code Injection'). The product constructs all or part of a code segment using externally-influenced input from an upstream component, but it does not neutralize or incorrectly neutralizes special elements that could modify the syntax or behavior of the intended code segment.

CVSS vector
?CVSS means Common Vulnerability Scoring System. The vector records the metric values used to calculate technical severity.
CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:P/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N

Common Vulnerability Scoring System 4.0: the compact vector below is decoded into plain language.

AVLocalAttack vector: The attacker needs local access to the vulnerable system.ACLowAttack complexity: No specialised conditions are required beyond attacker-controlled input.ATNoneAttack requirements: No additional deployment or execution condition is required.PRNonePrivileges required: The attacker does not need an account or existing privileges.UIPassiveUser interaction: A user must unknowingly interact with the vulnerable system.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.
UnauthenticatedRemote code executionCWE-94Public exploit reference
A

Official authority intelligence

Only matched European and national findings are included. Language selectors and unavailable sources are omitted.

ENISA EUVD · EUVD-2026-60965Official EUVD mapping

CodeWhale (packages codewhale / codewhale-tui) versions >= 0.8.41 and < 0.8.64 contain a remote code execution vulnerability in the rlm_eval tool. The tool's approval_requirement() returns ApprovalRequirement::Auto, which the engine treats as 'never prompt,' causing arbitrary model-supplied Python code to run in a python3 interpreter without consulting the user's configured --approval-policy and without any approval prompt or audit step. An attacker can induce the agent to execute arbitrary code via prompt injection in untrusted content the agent reads (a web page, fetched URL, repository file, or MCP tool result); the companion rlm_open tool can stage such content. Code runs on the user's machine at the user's privilege level. Fixed in 0.8.64.

Official EUVD record ↗
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.
Patch available
Affected
CodeWhale: 0.8.33 < 0.8.41, 0.8.41 < 0.8.64
Fixed
CodeWhale: 0.8.41, 0.8.64
Action
Review the linked authoritative reference and apply the recorded fixed release appropriate to the affected product branch.
Workaround
No verified workaround is recorded. Limit untrusted access and use least privilege until authoritative guidance is available.
04

Evidence and provenance

Published 18 Aug 2026 · Last source change 18 Aug 2026, 17:59 UTC · CWE-94 · Improper Control of Generation of Code ('Code Injection')

CVE recordCVE.org · 5.2
CVSS sourceCNA
EPSS source
?The date BlackTree first stored a score for this CVE from the daily FIRST EPSS feed.
FIRST · tracked since 2026-08-23
European sourceENISA EUVD · EUVD-2026-60965
Product sourceCNA
Remediation sourceCVE/CNA references
CWE sourceCNA
NVD statusNVD not scheduled

Core structured fields are present and their contributing authorities are shown above.

Material change intelligence

What changed after publication

View recent updates ↗
  1. Public exploit evidencePublic exploit evidence changed from No public exploit to Public exploit reference.
    Before
    No public exploit
    After
    Public exploit reference
    CVE.org ↗
  2. Catalogue recordCVE added to the BlackTree catalogue.
    CNA ↗
Material fields only · duplicate refreshes suppressed · history retained for the configured operational retention period
CVE published
Fixed release or patch reference recorded
ENISA EUVD · EUVD-2026-60965↗CISA Vulnrichment SSVC evidence↗CVE authority or vendor reference · GitHub GHSA-WRJ3-VJ8C-784F↗Official CVE record (CNA and ADP data)↗NVD record↗
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.
Free version - for non-commercial use only.CVE-2026-75858 · cve.blacktree.nl