Skip to content

Omnigent: Shared Agent Bundle Overwrite Leads to Authenticated Runner RCE

Critical severity GitHub Reviewed Published Jun 29, 2026 in omnigent-ai/omnigent • Updated Sep 2, 2026

Package

pip omnigent (pip)

Affected versions

< 0.3.0

Patched versions

0.3.0

Description

Summary

An authenticated user with edit access to their own session can overwrite a shared/template agent by uploading a full agent bundle through PUT /sessions/{session_id}/agent.

Shared/template agents are shown as not MCP-editable, but this upload path still accepts a replacement bundle. By adding a stdio MCP server to the shared agent, the attacker can cause future runner sessions using that shared agent to start an attacker-controlled command.

Details

The vulnerable endpoint is the full agent bundle upload route: PUT /sessions/{session_id}/agent
This route checks whether the caller can edit the session: LEVEL_EDIT session permission check
But it does not check whether the bound agent is a shared/template agent.
Shared/template agents have:

agent.session_id is None

The API already exposes that these agents are not meant to be MCP-editable: mcp_servers_editable is false for shared/template agents
The direct MCP edit endpoint correctly blocks shared/template agents: session_mcp_servers.py shared-agent guard

if agent.session_id is None:
    raise OmnigentError("Built-in agents are read-only through this endpoint.")

The full bundle upload endpoint is missing that same guard. It stores the uploaded bundle and updates the agent row: agent_store.update(agent.id, new_loc)
For shared/template agents, this changes the shared agent itself, not only the attacker's session.
This becomes command execution because stdio MCP servers start the configured command as a runner subprocess: tools/mcp.py stdio subprocess launch

Suggested fix: add the same agent.session_id is None guard to PUT /sessions/{session_id}/agent.

Impact

This is authenticated RCE against Omnigent runner hosts. A normal authenticated user with edit access to their own session can poison a shared/template agent bundle, even though that agent is shown as not MCP-editable. The poisoned bundle can then be used by future sessions created from the same shared agent.

Because stdio MCP servers run as local subprocesses, the attacker-controlled command executes with the permissions of the Omnigent runner process. In a shared or company-hosted deployment, this can let an attacker read runner-accessible files and credentials, modify workspace data, disrupt runner availability, pivot to internal services reachable from the runner, or establish an interactive remote shell if outbound networking is allowed.

This is high impact because it turns normal shared-agent session access into command execution on runner infrastructure used by other sessions.

References

@PattaraS PattaraS published to omnigent-ai/omnigent Jun 29, 2026
Published by the National Vulnerability Database Aug 21, 2026
Published to the GitHub Advisory Database Sep 2, 2026
Reviewed Sep 2, 2026
Last updated Sep 2, 2026

Severity

Critical

CVSS overall score

This score calculates overall vulnerability severity from 0 to 10 and is based on the Common Vulnerability Scoring System (CVSS).
/ 10

CVSS v3 base metrics

Attack vector
Network
Attack complexity
Low
Privileges required
Low
User interaction
Required
Scope
Changed
Confidentiality
High
Integrity
High
Availability
High

CVSS v3 base metrics

Attack vector: More severe the more the remote (logically and physically) an attacker can be in order to exploit the vulnerability.
Attack complexity: More severe for the least complex attacks.
Privileges required: More severe if no privileges are required.
User interaction: More severe when no user interaction is required.
Scope: More severe when a scope change occurs, e.g. one vulnerable component impacts resources in components beyond its security scope.
Confidentiality: More severe when loss of data confidentiality is highest, measuring the level of data access available to an unauthorized user.
Integrity: More severe when loss of data integrity is the highest, measuring the consequence of data modification possible by an unauthorized user.
Availability: More severe when the loss of impacted component availability is highest.
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:R/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H

EPSS score

Exploit Prediction Scoring System (EPSS)

This score estimates the probability of this vulnerability being exploited within the next 30 days. Data provided by FIRST.
(27th percentile)

Weaknesses

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. Learn more on MITRE.

CVE ID

CVE-2026-62674

GHSA ID

GHSA-jrrm-9hc7-2v3h

Source code

Credits

Loading Checking history
See something to contribute? Suggest improvements for this vulnerability.