Skip to content

GHSA-r7v3-x45f-g7hp CVE-2026-55538 PYSEC-2026-3894

PraisonAI: [Auth Bypass] `praisonai serve agents --api-key` is silently ignored — agent-invocation routes (`POST /agents`, `POST /agents/{agent_name}`) run unauthenticated

High PyPI
Severity
7.3 / 10
High · CVSS 3.1
Exploit chance (EPSS)
0.45%
Chance of exploitation in the next 30 days. Higher than 39.00% of scored vulnerabilities.
Known exploited
No
Not in CISA's catalog
Weakness
CWE-306 Missing Authentication for Critical Function
Fix
4.6.58
Upgrade praisonai to this version or later

Description

Summary

praisonai serve agents exposes HTTP routes that invoke registered agents. The CLI advertises --api-key with help text "API key for authentication", parses it, and forwards it into ServeHandler. But _create_agents_app() never reads config["api_key"] again and installs no auth dependency or middleware on its direct routes. The configured key is a no-op flag.

As a result, an unauthenticated network caller can invoke exposed agents (POST /agents and POST /agents/{agent_name}) even when the operator passed --api-key. Requests with no credentials, a wrong Authorization: Bearer, a wrong X-API-Key, or an empty bearer all reach agent.start().

The failure is made sharper by the fact that a working auth dependency already exists in the same module — praisonai.api.agent_invoke.verify_token guards every /api/v1/... route with Depends(verify_token) and is mounted into the very same app. The direct n8n-compat routes simply do not use it.

Technical Detail

Source-to-sink trace

1. CLI advertises and forwards --api-key:

# cli/commands/serve.py
@app.command("agents")
def serve_agents(..., api_key: Optional[str] = typer.Option(None, "--api-key", help="API key for authentication")):
    ...
    if api_key:
        args.extend(["--api-key", api_key])
    exit_code = handle_serve_command(args)

2. cmd_agents() parses api_key into the spec — and that is the last time it is touched:

# cli/features/serve.py — cmd_agents()
spec = { ..., "api_key": {"default": None} }
parsed = self._parse_args(args, spec)
app = self._create_agents_app(parsed)

A grep of the entire cli/features/serve.py for api_key returns only the two spec entries (cmd_agents line ~199 and cmd_unified line ~847). config["api_key"] is never read inside _create_agents_app() / _create_unified_app(); it is never compared, and no dependency is attached.

3. _create_agents_app() imports FastAPI, HTTPException, Request — no Depends, no Header, no auth middleware. Every HTTPException raised in the agents routes is 400/404/500 (validation / not-found / execution error); none is 401.

4. Sink — unauthenticated request reaches agent.start():

# cli/features/serve.py
@app.post("/agents/{agent_name}")          # n8n compatibility route
async def invoke_single_agent(agent_name: str, request: Request):
    body = await request.json()
    query = body.get("query", "") or body.get("message", "")
    ...
    agent = agent_invoke.get_agent(agent_name)
    result = await loop.run_in_executor(None, agent.start, query)   # no auth anywhere above
    return {"response": str(result)}
 
@app.post(path)                            # default path "/agents"
async def invoke_agents(request: Request, query_data: AgentQuery = None):
    ... agent.start(query) ...

The auth dependency exists — it just isn't applied here

_create_agents_app() mounts the agent_invoke router into the same app:

# cli/features/serve.py
if getattr(agent_invoke, 'FASTAPI_AVAILABLE', False) and hasattr(agent_invoke, 'router'):
    app.include_router(agent_invoke.router)

That router properly authenticates every sensitive route:

# api/agent_invoke.py
CALL_SERVER_TOKEN = os.getenv('CALL_SERVER_TOKEN')
async def verify_token(request, authorization=Header(None)) -> None:
    ...
    if token != CALL_SERVER_TOKEN:
        raise HTTPException(status_code=401, detail="Unauthorized")
 
@router.get("/api/v1/agents")
async def list_agents(_: None = Depends(verify_token)): ...   # and register/unregister/info all use it

So in the same process GET /api/v1/agents returns 401 without a token, while POST /agents/{agent_name} returns 200. Note also that verify_token reads the CALL_SERVER_TOKEN env var — not the CLI --api-key — so the CLI option feeds no auth path at all.

Trigger conditions

praisonai serve agents --file agents.yaml --host 0.0.0.0 --port 8765 --api-key expected-secret
POST /agents/{agent_name}   body {"query":"..."}   with no / wrong / empty credentials

Proof of Concept

Built the real _create_agents_app() and exercised it over HTTP via FastAPI TestClient. Only praisonaiagents.Agent is stubbed (.start() returns EXEC:<query>), so no real LLM/credentials. CALL_SERVER_TOKEN=expected-secret was set so the sibling /api/v1 router is genuinely armed — making the contrast explicit.

Operator started with: --api-key expected-secret  (CALL_SERVER_TOKEN also set)
 
== Sibling /api/v1 route WITH Depends(verify_token) ==
  GET /api/v1/agents [no creds    ] -> HTTP 401
  GET /api/v1/agents [wrong bearer] -> HTTP 401
 
== Direct agent-invocation route (the bug) ==
  POST /agents/owned [no creds      ] -> HTTP 200  {'response': 'EXEC:hello'}
  POST /agents/owned [wrong bearer  ] -> HTTP 200  {'response': 'EXEC:hello'}
  POST /agents/owned [wrong x-api-key] -> HTTP 200  {'response': 'EXEC:hello'}
  POST /agents/owned [empty bearer  ] -> HTTP 200  {'response': 'EXEC:hello'}
  POST /agents       [no creds      ] -> HTTP 200  {'response': 'EXEC:hi'}

The auth mechanism works for /api/v1 (401) and is entirely absent on the direct /agents routes (200), despite --api-key being configured.

Equivalent HTTP trigger in a fully installed environment

praisonai serve agents --file agents.yaml --host 0.0.0.0 --port 8765 --api-key expected-secret
curl -sS -X POST http://TARGET:8765/agents/owned \
  -H 'Content-Type: application/json' --data-binary '{"query":"hello"}'
# -> 200 {"response":"..."}  (expected: 401 Unauthorized)

Impact

  • Direct primitive: unauthenticated agent invocation despite a configured API key.
  • Misleading control (aggravating): because the CLI advertises --api-key as authentication, operators may deliberately expose the service (e.g. --host 0.0.0.0, reverse proxy, n8n integration) believing it is protected, increasing the real-world likelihood of exposure.
  • Downstream: exposed agents commonly hold LLM provider credentials, RAG/memory, browser/search, MCP, or shell/file tools; the bypass lets an attacker drive those capabilities. Baseline impact is unauthorized LLM cost + access to agent responses.

Suggested Mitigation

  • When config["api_key"] is set, build a shared auth dependency and attach it to every agent-invocation / state-changing route in _create_agents_app() and _create_unified_app() (dependencies=[Depends(verify)]).
  • Reuse / unify with the existing verify_token so the direct /agents routes and the /api/v1 routes share one mechanism, and wire the CLI --api-key into that mechanism (today it feeds nothing; verify_token reads CALL_SERVER_TOKEN).
  • Use constant-time comparison (hmac.compare_digest); verify_token currently uses !=.
  • Update discovery metadata from auth_modes=["none"] to ["api-key","bearer"] for protected endpoints.
  • Regression tests next to tests/unit/test_serve_unified.py: _create_agents_app({"api_key":"secret",...}) → POST /agents/{name} with no creds / wrong Authorization / wrong X-API-Key returns 401; correct key succeeds.
import hmac
from fastapi import Header, HTTPException, Depends
 
def _auth_dependency(expected_key: str):
    async def verify(authorization: str | None = Header(None),
                     x_api_key: str | None = Header(None, alias="X-API-Key")):
        token = x_api_key
        if authorization and authorization.startswith("Bearer "):
            token = authorization[7:]
        if not token or not hmac.compare_digest(token, expected_key):
            raise HTTPException(status_code=401, detail="Unauthorized")
    return Depends(verify)

Affected versions

PyPI

PackageVulnerableFixed 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 3.1 7.3

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L

Attack vector
Network
Attack complexity
Low
Privileges required
None
User interaction
None
Scope
Unchanged
Confidentiality
Low
Integrity
Low
Availability
Low

Weakness

CWE-306: Missing Authentication for Critical Function

The product does not perform any authentication for functionality that requires a provable user identity or consumes a significant amount of resources.

How to prevent it
  • Architecture and Design: Divide the software into anonymous, normal, privileged, and administrative areas. Identify which of these areas require a proven user identity, and use a centralized authentication capability. Identify all potential communication channels, or other means of interaction with the software, to ensure that all channels are appropriately protected, including those channels that are assumed to be accessible only by authorized parties. Developers sometimes perform authentication at the primary channel, but open up a secondary channel that is assumed to be private. For example, a login mechanism may be listening on one network port, but after successful authentication, it may open up a second port where it waits for the connection, but avoids authentication because it assumes that only the authenticated party will connect to the port. In general, if the software or protocol allows a single session or user state to persist across multiple connections or channels, authentication and appropriate credential management need to be used throughout.
  • Architecture and Design: For any security checks that are performed on the client side, ensure that these checks are duplicated on the server side, in order to avoid CWE-602. Attackers can bypass the client-side checks by modifying values after the checks have been performed, or by changing the client to remove the client-side checks entirely. Then, these modified values would be submitted to the server.
  • Architecture and Design: Where possible, avoid implementing custom, "grow-your-own" authentication routines and consider using authentication capabilities as provided by the surrounding framework, operating system, or environment. These capabilities may avoid common weaknesses that are unique to authentication; support automatic auditing and tracking; and make it easier to provide a clear separation between authentication tasks and authorization tasks. In environments such as the World Wide Web, the line between authentication and authorization is sometimes blurred. If custom authentication routines are required instead of those provided by the server, then these routines must be applied to every single page, since these pages could be requested directly.
  • 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 libraries with authentication capabilities such as OpenSSL or the ESAPI Authenticator [REF-45].
  • Implementation, System Configuration, Operation: When storing data in the cloud (e.g., S3 buckets, Azure blobs, Google Cloud Storage, etc.), use the provider's controls to require strong authentication for users who should be allowed to access the data [REF-1297] [REF-1298] [REF-1302].

References

Timeline

  1. Published
  2. Last updated by the source
  3. Latest EPSS score
AdvisorySeverityWhy 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-pvxx-r596-f5qj
PraisonAI: `--api-key` flag on `praisonai serve` is not properly enforced
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
Is this in your code?

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