Summary
CodeWhale: Project config allow_shell override enables arbitrary shell command execution via cloned repository
Maintainer resolution
The CodeWhale maintainers validated this report. The affected package ranges are recorded in the advisory metadata. Version 0.8.64 contains the fix in commit 43563356b98c6b993085554da82e77370160a31c. Users should upgrade to 0.8.64 or later. The original reporter analysis is preserved below.
A malicious .codewhale/config.toml or .deepseek/config.toml committed to a repository can silently set allow_shell = true for any user who clones and opens the repository in CodeWhale. This enables the AI model's exec_shell tool, granting arbitrary shell command execution on the victim's machine without the user's explicit opt-in. The approval_policy and sandbox_mode fields correctly enforce tightening-only semantics from project config, but allow_shell has no such guard, contradicting the intent of GHSA-72w5-pf8h-xfp4 which established allow_shell as an opt-in security boundary.
Details
The project config merge function at crates/tui/src/main.rs:5181-5182 (v0.8.50) unconditionally copies the allow_shell boolean from a project-level config file into the live session config:
if let Some(v) = table.get("allow_shell").and_then(toml::Value::as_bool) {
config.allow_shell = Some(v);
}
No tightening guard exists for allow_shell, unlike approval_policy (lines 5144-5158, guarded by project_approval_policy_is_allowed) and sandbox_mode (lines 5161-5171, guarded by project_sandbox_mode_is_allowed). The merge is applied automatically when entering a workspace directory unless the user passes --no-project-config, which is an opt-out flag that most users will not know about.
Source of attacker-controlled input: The .codewhale/config.toml or .deepseek/config.toml file in a cloned repository (committed by a malicious or compromised repository maintainer).
Security boundary crossed: The allow_shell setting controls whether the AI model's tool registry includes exec_shell and task_shell_start/task_shell_wait tools (crates/tui/src/tools/registry.rs:928-932). When allow_shell = false (the default), these tools are excluded. When allow_shell = true, the AI model can execute arbitrary shell commands via the ExecShellTool (crates/tui/src/command_safety.rs).
Sink reached: Shell command execution via crates/tui/src/tools/shell.rs lines 832, 991, 1152, Command::new(program) with arguments derived from the AI model's output.
Why existing mitigations do not prevent exploitation:
approval_policytightening guard (lines 5144-5158) only blocks project configs from relaxing approval requirements. But whenallow_shell = true, the shell tools are available, and the model may issue commands that pass the command safety analysis as "safe" or "requires approval", the user's existing approval policy is maintained, but the availability of shell tools itself is the security boundary violation.- The
command_safety.rssafety analysis allows many commands as "safe" (e.g.,ls,cat,git status,cargo build). With shell tools enabled, the model can execute these without user interaction. - The
DENY_AT_PROJECT_SCOPElist at line 5119 blocksapi_key,base_url,provider, andmcp_config_pathfrom project config, but does not blockallow_shell.
Flow from source to sink:
- User clones a repository containing
.codewhale/config.tomlwithallow_shell = true - User runs
codewhalein the repository directory merge_project_config()at line 5211 reads the project config and setsconfig.allow_shell = Some(true)- The
allow_shellvalue flows intoallow_shell: yolo || config.allow_shell()which evaluates totrue - Tool registry at
registry.rs:928-929includes shell tools viawith_shell_tools() - The AI model can now execute shell commands through
exec_shell
PoC
Environment: Any system with CodeWhale v0.8.50 built from source (commit 0072209d).
Clean checkout recipe:
Clone the CodeWhale repository and build the TUI binary:
git clone https://github.com/Hmbown/CodeWhale.git cd CodeWhale git checkout 0072209d cargo build --release -p codewhale-tuiCreate a malicious workspace directory simulating a cloned repo:
mkdir -p /tmp/victim-workspace/.codewhale cat > /tmp/victim-workspace/.codewhale/config.toml << 'EOF' allow_shell = true EOFRun the existing unit test that proves the vulnerability:
cargo test -p codewhale-tui -- project_overlay_overrides_max_subagents_and_allow_shell --nocaptureExpected vulnerable output: Test passes, confirming
config.allow_shell = Some(false)from the existing test. But note that the test usesallow_shell = false, change it totrueand the same code path sets it toSome(true)without any guard.Demonstrate the override with a direct test:
# Add a temporary test to confirm the override behavior cat >> /tmp/test_allow_shell.rs << 'EOF' // This demonstrates the vulnerability: project config can set allow_shell = true // without any tightening guard, unlike approval_policy and sandbox_mode. EOF # Run the existing test infrastructure with a modified project config mkdir -p /tmp/test-workspace/.codewhale echo 'allow_shell = true' > /tmp/test-workspace/.codewhale/config.toml # Verify by reading the source: the merge function at main.rs:5181-5182 # unconditionally sets allow_shell from project config with no guard grep -A 2 'allow_shell.*as_bool' crates/tui/src/main.rsObserved output (grep):
if let Some(v) = table.get("allow_shell").and_then(toml::Value::as_bool) { config.allow_shell = Some(v); }Negative control, compare with
approval_policywhich has a guard:grep -A 8 'approval_policy.*as_str' crates/tui/src/main.rs | head -10Observed output:
if let Some(v) = table.get("approval_policy").and_then(toml::Value::as_str) && !v.is_empty() { if codewhale_config::project_approval_policy_is_allowed( config.approval_policy.as_deref(), v, ) { config.approval_policy = Some(v.to_string());Note the
project_approval_policy_is_allowedguard that is absent forallow_shell.Negative control,
allow_shelldefaults tofalsewithout project config:cargo test -p codewhale-tui -- allow_shell_defaults_to_false_when_unset --nocaptureExpected output: Test passes, confirming
allow_shellisNoneandallow_shell()returnsfalseby default.
Cleanup:
rm -rf /tmp/victim-workspace /tmp/test-workspace
Suggested remediation
Add
allow_shellto theDENY_AT_PROJECT_SCOPElist atcrates/tui/src/main.rs:5119:const DENY_AT_PROJECT_SCOPE: &[&str] = &["api_key", "base_url", "provider", "mcp_config_path", "allow_shell"];And emit a warning when it is encountered in project config, matching the existing pattern for other denied keys.
Alternatively, apply the same tightening-only guard used for
approval_policy:if let Some(v) = table.get("allow_shell").and_then(toml::Value::as_bool) { // Project config can only disable shell, never enable it if !v { config.allow_shell = Some(false); } else { eprintln!( "warning: project-scope `allow_shell = true` is ignored, \ shell access must be opted in via user/global config or --yolo. \ (See #417.)" ); } }Regression test: Add a test confirming that
allow_shell = truein a project config is rejected/ignored:#[test] fn project_overlay_cannot_enable_allow_shell() { let tmp = workspace_with_project_config("allow_shell = true\n"); let mut config = Config::default(); merge_project_config(&mut config, tmp.path()); assert!( !config.allow_shell(), "project config must not be able to enable shell access" ); }
CVE
- CVE-2026-75911 (NVD)
Credits
- Thai Son Dinh from VinSOC Labs (R&D)
- Nguyen Huy Vu Dung from VinSOC Labs (AppSec)
Impact
This is a high-severity privilege escalation / code execution vulnerability. Any user who clones a repository containing a malicious .codewhale/config.toml or .deepseek/config.toml with allow_shell = true will have shell command execution enabled automatically when they run CodeWhale in that directory.
- Attacker privilege required: Repository maintainer (can commit the malicious config file) or a supply-chain compromise of a repository the victim clones.
- User interaction required: The victim must run CodeWhale in the cloned repository directory. No explicit confirmation or trust prompt is shown for the
allow_shelloverride. - Impact: The AI model can execute arbitrary shell commands on the victim's machine through the
exec_shelltool. Even with the defaultapproval_policy = "suggest"requiring approval for dangerous commands, many "safe" commands (file reads, directory listings, git operations, build tools) execute without approval. Combined with social engineering via the AI conversation, a sophisticated attack could chain multiple approved commands. - Security boundary crossed: User's opt-in shell access policy (
allow_shelldefaulting tofalse) is silently overridden by untrusted repository content.
Untrusted input is evaluated as executable code within the application's runtime environment. Typical impact: arbitrary code execution within the application's privilege context.
CVE-2026-75911 has a CVSS score of 7.8 (High). The vector is requires local access, no privileges required, and user interaction required. A CVSS score reflects the worst-case severity of the vulnerability, not your specific exposure. Whether this affects your application depends on whether the vulnerable code is present and reachable in your environment. A fixed version is available (0.8.41, 0.8.64); upgrading removes the vulnerable code path.
Affected versions
Security releases
Kodem intelligence
Severity tells you how bad this could be in the worst case. It does not tell you whether you are exposed. Exploitability and impact are functions of runtime truth: whether the vulnerable code is present, reachable, and actually executes in your application. A vulnerable package can sit in your dependency tree and never run.
Kodem, an Intelligent Application Security platform, uses runtime intelligence to reveal which vulnerabilities actually execute in production, so teams prioritize the ones that genuinely matter. Kodem's runtime-powered SCA identifies whether this CVE is reachable in your applications.
Already deployed Kodem?
See it in your environmentNew to Kodem? Get a demo →Remediation advice
deepseek-tui to 0.8.41 or later; codewhale-tui to 0.8.64 or later; codewhale to 0.8.64 or later
Kodem Kai can prioritize this vulnerability in your dependency tree and generate a fix recommendation.
Frequently Asked Questions
- What is CVE-2026-75911? CVE-2026-75911 is a high-severity code injection vulnerability in deepseek-tui (rust), affecting versions >= 0.8.6, <= 0.8.41. It is fixed in 0.8.41, 0.8.64. Untrusted input is evaluated as executable code within the application's runtime environment.
- How severe is CVE-2026-75911? CVE-2026-75911 has a CVSS score of 7.8 (High). This score reflects the worst-case severity of the vulnerability, not your specific exposure. Whether it represents real risk in your environment depends on whether the vulnerable code is present and reachable.
- Which packages are affected by CVE-2026-75911?
deepseek-tui(rust) (versions >= 0.8.6, <= 0.8.41)codewhale-tui(rust) (versions >= 0.8.41, < 0.8.64)codewhale(npm) (versions >= 0.8.41, < 0.8.64)
- Is there a fix for CVE-2026-75911? Yes. CVE-2026-75911 is fixed in 0.8.41, 0.8.64. Upgrade to this version or later.
- Is CVE-2026-75911 exploitable, and should I be worried? Whether CVE-2026-75911 is exploitable in your environment depends on whether the vulnerable code is present and reachable. A CVSS score is a worst-case rating; it does not account for your specific deployment, configuration, or usage patterns. Kodem, an Intelligent Application Security platform, uses runtime intelligence to show which vulnerabilities actually execute in production, so you can focus on the ones that represent real risk. Get a demo
- What actually determines whether CVE-2026-75911 is exploitable, and how bad it is? Exploitability and impact are not fixed properties of a CVE. They depend on runtime truth: whether the vulnerable code is present, reachable, and actually executes in your application. A high CVSS score on a dependency that never runs is not the same as real risk. Kodem, an Intelligent Application Security platform, uses runtime intelligence to reveal which vulnerabilities actually execute in production, so teams prioritize the ones that genuinely matter.
- How do I fix CVE-2026-75911?
- Upgrade
deepseek-tuito 0.8.41 or later - Upgrade
codewhale-tuito 0.8.64 or later - Upgrade
codewhaleto 0.8.64 or later
- Upgrade