Cursor is a code editor built for programming with AI.
CVE-2024-48919 is a critical-severity improper input validation vulnerability in cursor from Getcursor, with a CVSS 4.0 base score of 9.2 out of 10. It can be exploited remotely over the network by an unauthenticated attacker, without any action from a user. Affected cursor versions: < 0.42. The record does not name a fixed version, so check the vendor advisory. There is no confirmed exploitation so far. EPSS estimates a 0.51% chance of exploitation within 30 days, which is low compared with other CVEs.
Critical severity: a successful attack would have severe impact.
What to do
- Update cursor to 0.42 or a later version.
- Read the advisory on github.com for workarounds and exact fixed builds.
- Until you can update, restrict network access to the affected service so it is not reachable from untrusted networks.
Affected products and versions
Version data comes from the organisation that assigned the CVE. Confirm against the vendor advisory before deciding you are unaffected.
How the severity score breaks down
- Attack vector
- NetworkCan be exploited remotely over a network, including the internet.
- Attack complexity
- LowNo special conditions are needed; the attack works reliably.
- Attack requirements
- PresentThe target must be in a specific state or configuration for the attack to work.
- Privileges required
- NoneNo account or login is needed.
- User interaction
- NoneNo action by a victim is required.
- Confidentiality (vulnerable system)
- HighSerious loss of confidentiality on the vulnerable system.
- Integrity (vulnerable system)
- HighSerious loss of integrity on the vulnerable system.
- Availability (vulnerable system)
- HighSerious loss of availability on the vulnerable system.
- Confidentiality (other systems)
- NoneNo loss of confidentiality on systems beyond the vulnerable one.
- Integrity (other systems)
- NoneNo loss of integrity on systems beyond the vulnerable one.
- Availability (other systems)
- NoneNo loss of availability on systems beyond the vulnerable one.
Vector: CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:X/CR:X/IR:X/AR:X/MAV:X/MAC:X/MAT:X/MPR:X/MUI:X/MVC:X/MVI:X/MVA:X/MSC:X/MSI:X/MSA:X/S:X/AU:X/R:X/V:X/RE:X/U:X. Scored by CNA (github.com).
Official description
Cursor is a code editor built for programming with AI. Prior to Sep 27, 2024, if a user generated a terminal command via Cursor's Terminal Cmd-K/Ctrl-K feature and if the user explicitly imported a malicious web page into the Terminal Cmd-K prompt, an attacker with control over the referenced web page could have a significant chance of influencing a language model to output arbitrary commands for execution in the user's terminal. This scenario would require the user explicitly opt-in to including the contents of a compromised webpage, and it would require that the attacker display prompt injection text in the the contents of the compromised webpage. A server-side patch to not stream back newlines or control characters was released on September 27, 2024, within two hours of the issue being reported. Additionally, Cursor 0.42 includes client-side mitigations to prevent any newline or control character from being streamed into the terminal directly. It also contains a new setting, `"cursor.terminal.usePreviewBox"`, which, if set to true, streams the response into a preview box whose contents then have to be manually accepted before being inserted into the terminal. This setting is useful if you're working in a shell environment where commands can be executed without pressing enter or any control character. The patch has been applied server-side, so no additional action is needed, even on older versions of Cursor. Separately, Cursor's maintainers also recommend, as best practice, to only include trusted pieces of context in prompts.
Source: the CVE record as published by its numbering authority, via NVD and CVE.org.
The underlying weakness: Improper Input Validation
The product receives input or data, but it does not validate or incorrectly validates that the input has the properties that are required to process the data safely and correctly.
How developers prevent this class of flaw
- Consider using language-theoretic security (LangSec) techniques that characterize inputs using a formal language and build recognizers for that language. This effectively requires parsing to be a distinct layer that effectively enforces a boundary between raw input and internal data representations, instead of allowing parser code to be scattered throughout the program, where it could be subject to errors or inconsistencies that create weaknesses.
- Use an input validation framework such as Struts or the OWASP ESAPI Validation API. Note that using a framework does not automatically address all input validation problems; be mindful of weaknesses that could arise from misusing the framework itself (CWE-1173).
- Understand all the potential areas where untrusted inputs can enter the product, including but not limited to: parameters or arguments, cookies, anything read from the network, environment variables, reverse DNS lookups, query results, request headers, URL components, e-mail, files, filenames, databases, and any external systems that provide data to the application. Remember that such inputs may be obtained indirectly through API calls.
Timeline
- CVE record published.
- CISA published its SSVC assessment (exploitation: none, automatable: no, technical impact: total).
- Record last changed materially (score, affected products, status or references).
References
Other vulnerabilities in cursor
- 8.0 High severity
Recent Improper Input Validation vulnerabilities
- 9.8 Critical severity
- 8.1 High severity
- 8.1 High severity
- 8.5 High severity
- 9.1 Critical severity
- 7.5 High severity
Spotted an error? Tell us.