Vulnerabilities
Misconfiguration
Compliance
CVE Vulnerabilities

CVE-2026-44495

Improper Control of Generation of Code ('Code Injection')

Published: Jun 11, 2026 | Modified: Jul 02, 2026
CVSS 3.x
N/A
Source:
NVD
CVSS 2.x
RedHat/V2
RedHat/V3
7 IMPORTANT
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:L/A:L
Ubuntu
MEDIUM
Vulnerability-free packages from our partners
root.io logo minimus.io logo echo.ai logo
Additional information
NVDhttps://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-44495
CWEhttps://cwe.mitre.org/data/definitions/94.html

Axios is a promise based HTTP client for the browser and Node.js. From 0.19.0 to before 0.31.1 and 1.15.2, Axios contains prototype-pollution gadgets in request config processing. If another vulnerability in the same JavaScript process has already polluted Object.prototype.transformResponse, affected Axios versions may treat that inherited value as request configuration or as an option validator. Axios does not itself create the prototype pollution. Exploitability requires a separate prototype-pollution vulnerability or equivalent attacker control over Object.prototype before Axios creates a request. This vulnerability is fixed in 0.31.1 and 1.15.2.

Weakness

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.

Affected Software

NameVendorStart VersionEnd Version
Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform 2.6 for RHEL 9RedHatautomation-platform-ui-0:2.6.10-1.el9ap*
Multicluster engine for Kubernetes 2.8RedHatmulticluster-engine/console-mce-rhel9:1782157085*
Red Hat Advanced Cluster Management for Kubernetes 2.13RedHatrhacm2/console-rhel9:1782157514*
Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes 4.10RedHatadvanced-cluster-security/rhacs-main-rhel8:1779293013*
Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes 4.9RedHatadvanced-cluster-security/rhacs-main-rhel8:1779371594*
Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform 2.6RedHatansible-automation-platform-26/gateway-rhel9:1782761510*
Red Hat Container Native Virtualization 4.14RedHatcontainer-native-virtualization/kubevirt-console-plugin-rhel9:1781807944*
Red Hat Developer Hub 1.9RedHatrhdh/rhdh-hub-rhel9:1781187342*
Red Hat Developer Hub 1.9RedHatrhdh/rhdh-hub-rhel9:1782761244*
Red Hat Discovery 2RedHatdiscovery/discovery-ui-rhel9:1782166952*
Red Hat OpenShift Container Platform 4.15RedHatopenshift4/ose-console:1782127091*
Red Hat OpenShift Container Platform 4.16RedHatopenshift4/ose-console-rhel9:1782244020*
Red Hat OpenShift Container Platform 4.20RedHatopenshift4/ose-monitoring-plugin-rhel9:1781695012*
Red Hat OpenShift Container Platform 4.21RedHatopenshift4/ose-monitoring-plugin-rhel9:1781731914*
Red Hat OpenShift Service Mesh 2.6RedHatopenshift-service-mesh/kiali-ossmc-rhel8:1781937133*
Red Hat OpenShift Service Mesh 2.6RedHatopenshift-service-mesh/kiali-rhel8:1782287580*
Red Hat OpenShift Service Mesh 3.0RedHatopenshift-service-mesh/kiali-ossmc-rhel9:1782201894*
Red Hat OpenShift Service Mesh 3.0RedHatopenshift-service-mesh/kiali-rhel9:1782201833*
Red Hat OpenShift Service Mesh 3.1RedHatopenshift-service-mesh/kiali-ossmc-rhel9:1782201696*
Red Hat OpenShift Service Mesh 3.1RedHatopenshift-service-mesh/kiali-rhel9:1782201537*
Red Hat OpenShift Service Mesh 3.2RedHatopenshift-service-mesh/kiali-ossmc-rhel9:1782201851*
Red Hat OpenShift Service Mesh 3.2RedHatopenshift-service-mesh/kiali-rhel9:1782201812*
Red Hat OpenShift Service Mesh 3.3RedHatopenshift-service-mesh/kiali-ossmc-rhel9:1782231869*
Red Hat OpenShift Service Mesh 3.3RedHatopenshift-service-mesh/kiali-rhel9:1782201466*
Node-axiosUbuntuupstream*

Potential Mitigations

  • Run your code in a “jail” or similar sandbox environment that enforces strict boundaries between the process and the operating system. This may effectively restrict which code can be executed by your product.
  • Examples include the Unix chroot jail and AppArmor. In general, managed code may provide some protection.
  • This may not be a feasible solution, and it only limits the impact to the operating system; the rest of your application may still be subject to compromise.
  • Be careful to avoid CWE-243 and other weaknesses related to jails.
  • Assume all input is malicious. Use an “accept known good” input validation strategy, i.e., use a list of acceptable inputs that strictly conform to specifications. Reject any input that does not strictly conform to specifications, or transform it into something that does.
  • When performing input validation, consider all potentially relevant properties, including length, type of input, the full range of acceptable values, missing or extra inputs, syntax, consistency across related fields, and conformance to business rules. As an example of business rule logic, “boat” may be syntactically valid because it only contains alphanumeric characters, but it is not valid if the input is only expected to contain colors such as “red” or “blue.”
  • Do not rely exclusively on looking for malicious or malformed inputs. This is likely to miss at least one undesirable input, especially if the code’s environment changes. This can give attackers enough room to bypass the intended validation. However, denylists can be useful for detecting potential attacks or determining which inputs are so malformed that they should be rejected outright.
  • To reduce the likelihood of code injection, use stringent allowlists that limit which constructs are allowed. If you are dynamically constructing code that invokes a function, then verifying that the input is alphanumeric might be insufficient. An attacker might still be able to reference a dangerous function that you did not intend to allow, such as system(), exec(), or exit().
  • For Python programs, it is frequently encouraged to use the ast.literal_eval() function instead of eval, since it is intentionally designed to avoid executing code. However, an adversary could still cause excessive memory or stack consumption via deeply nested structures [REF-1372], so the python documentation discourages use of ast.literal_eval() on untrusted data [REF-1373].

References

Aqua Security is the largest pure-play cloud native security company, providing customers the freedom to innovate and run their businesses with minimal friction. The Aqua Cloud Native Security Platform provides prevention, detection, and response automation across the entire application lifecycle to secure the build, secure cloud infrastructure and secure running workloads wherever they are deployed.
Copyright © 2026 Aqua Security Software Ltd.   Privacy Policy | Terms of Use