GHSA-6FGX-X7M2-74QM

tracexec has env command argument injection via environment variables starting with dash in traced exec events

Workarounds

Don't blindly paste and execute commands copied from tracexec that contains environment variable where the key starts with a dash.

For tracexec's command line reconstruction feature, when a traced process executes another process with a environment variable where the key starts with a dash, tracexec incorrectly shows its commandline where such environment variables could cause argument injection for the env command.
Such an injection is completely at the UI level unless the user tries to copy the command line with the injection and paste it into a terminal to execute it.

A minimal POC is executing env -- -a=b bash --norc in tracexec's TUI mode. The resulting command line of env executing bash would be env -a bash -a=b _=/usr/bin/env /usr/bin/bash --norc in tracexec's TUI, which injects -a=b into env's arguments.

This has very limited effect for security. A local adversarial could leverage this to make tracexec show an inaccurate reconstructed commandline for their executed command. If the user of tracexec decides to copy and run the reconstructed commandline,
there could be injection for env's --block-signal, --default-signal, --ignore-signal, --split-string, --unset, --chdir, --argv0 arguments.

Untrusted input is inserted into a command that is later executed by the application, allowing the attacker to alter the intent of that command. Typical impact: arbitrary command execution in the application's environment.

Kodem intelligence

Already deployed Kodem?

The fix is https://github.com/kxxt/tracexec/pull/118. Users are advised to upgrade to 0.14.0.

1. What is GHSA-6FGX-X7M2-74QM? GHSA-6FGX-X7M2-74QM is a low-severity command injection vulnerability in tracexec (rust), affecting versions < 0.14.0. It is fixed in 0.14.0. Untrusted input is inserted into a command that is later executed by the application, allowing the attacker to alter the intent of that command.
2. Which versions of tracexec are affected by GHSA-6FGX-X7M2-74QM? tracexec (rust) versions < 0.14.0 is affected.
3. Is there a fix for GHSA-6FGX-X7M2-74QM? Yes. GHSA-6FGX-X7M2-74QM is fixed in 0.14.0. Upgrade to this version or later.
4. Is GHSA-6FGX-X7M2-74QM exploitable, and should I be worried? Whether GHSA-6FGX-X7M2-74QM 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
5. What actually determines whether GHSA-6FGX-X7M2-74QM 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.
6. How do I fix GHSA-6FGX-X7M2-74QM? Upgrade tracexec to 0.14.0 or later.