CVE-2026-85012
CVE-2026-85012 — OS command injection in the Amazon CodeCatalyst blueprints SDK
Improper neutralization of special elements used in an OS command (CWE-78) in the blueprint resynthesis framework in Amazon Web Services codecatalyst-blueprints before 0.3.156 might allow a user with permission to commit to a repository in the project to execute arbitrary commands in the blueprint resynthesis environment via shell metacharacters in the owner field of a [local] merge strategy entry in a crafted .ownership-file. Version 0.3.156 removes shell interpretation of the owner field, running the command directly rather than through a shell, and rejects values outside an allowlisted command form. This eliminates shell metacharacter command injection. To remediate this issue, users should upgrade to version 0.3.156 or later. No action is required for use of the Amazon CodeCatalyst service. Resynthesis runs in an isolated per-project environment with scoped credentials, and the service applies server-side validation there that rejects [local] merge strategy commands outside a restricted allowlisted form, including for blueprint versions published before 0.3.156.
Published Updated Sources: NVD, AWS (CNA), GitHub, SOCRadar CTI
Triage
Is it exploited, how likely is exploitation, what does it touch, and how severe do the scoring sources call it.
Exploitation
Unreported
no source claims exploitation
EPSS
0%
ahead of 0% of scored CVEs
CVSS base
8
high · 2 sources
CISA SSVC assessment
Three decision points CISA publishes for the CVEs it assesses · SSVC 2.0.3. A stakeholder decision, not a severity score.
Exploitation
None
none · proof-of-concept · active
Automatable
No
can an attacker script all four kill-chain steps
Technical impact
Total
partial · total control of the vulnerable component
Remediation
The vendor's own words where we have them.
Upgrade @amazon-codecatalyst/blueprints.blueprint to a fixed release. Apply vendor patches per advisory and restrict external exposure of the affected component until patched.
First 24 hours
Ordered from the record's own fields — exposure first, because you cannot patch what you have not found.
- Identify exposed assets running affected vendor/product/version combinations.
- Prioritize based on EPSS, PoC availability, and external exposure.
- Search available logs for exploit probes, errors, authentication anomalies, or suspicious child processes matching the vulnerability class.
Affected scope
Vendor, product and version as the advisories word them.
| Vendor | Product | Versions | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| AWS | @amazon-codecatalyst/blueprints.blueprint | 0 to < 0.3.156 | Vulnerable |
Attack characteristics
The CVSS vector, decoded. It describes the attack, not your exposure to it.
Availability
High
Confidentiality
High
Integrity
High
Scope
Unchanged
Attack Complexity
Low
Attack Vector
Network
Privileges Req
Low
User Interaction
Required
Every base score collected
Sources score independently and disagree; each row says who scored it and under which version.
| Score | Version | Severity | Expl. | Impact | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 8 | CVSS 3.1 | high | 2.1 | 5.9 | CNA, AWS (CNA) |
| 8.5 | CVSS 4.0 | high | — | — | AWS (CNA) |
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
What this weakness leads to
MITRE's own consequences and mitigations for the weakness class — the authority's wording, not guidance derived from the CVSS vector.
CWE-78 · Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in an OS Command ('OS Command Injection')
- Execute Unauthorized Code or Commands
- DoS: Crash, Exit, or Restart
- Read Files or Directories
- Modify Files or Directories
Mitigation: If at all possible, use library calls rather than external processes to recreate the desired functionality.
Weakness & attack patterns
- CWE-78OS Command Injection
Attack patterns reported against this CVE. The ATT&CK techniques below are inferred from its weakness class.
Detection
Read off the CVSS vector and the weakness class. Starting points, not rules we have tested.
- Prioritize edge telemetry for network-reachable @amazon-codecatalyst/blueprints.blueprint.
Timeline
What happened to this CVE, newest first — with the readings a source repeats on a schedule counted underneath rather than listed.
- 2026
Added · CVSS 3.1 8.0 (AV:N)
Sep 3, 2026 · NVD
Initial · CVE published
Sep 3, 2026 · NVD
CVE published by MITRE.
Sep 3, 2026 · SOCRadar CTI
References
3 on the record
- aws.amazon.com/security/security-bulletins/2026-095-aws/
Vendor Advisory, NIST
- github.com/aws/codecatalyst-blueprints/security/advisories/GHSA-c7rj-fr2j-64w7
Exploit, Third Party Advisory, NIST
- www.npmjs.com/package/@amazon-codecatalyst/blueprints.blueprint/v/0.3.156
Vendor Advisory
Elsewhere on this site
- AWSevery CVE for this vendor
- Remote Code Execsame class
- CWE-78other pages naming this weakness
Not in any source we poll
Listed rather than left blank: an empty field and an unmeasured one look identical on screen, and only one is a reason to look elsewhere.
- No confirmed IOCs, IP addresses, domains, file hashes, or malware artifacts supplied.
- No organization-specific asset inventory, compensating-control status, or patch deployment evidence supplied.
- No exploit packet captures, log samples, or incident case IDs supplied.
Answered from this record1
What should defenders know first?
CVE-2026-85012 is OS command injection in the Amazon CodeCatalyst blueprints SDK, a high vulnerability affecting @amazon-codecatalyst/blueprints.blueprint from AWS. The current evidence does not list it in CISA KEV, and the exploit status is: Active exploitation is not confirmed from current sources for CVE-2026-85012. Public exploit evidence is: A public PoC is not confirmed from current sources for CVE-2026-85012. The affected-version evidence is listed in the key facts and affected products tables. Defenders should first verify whether exposed or business-critical assets run those versions, then apply vendor patches or mitigations, restrict reachable attack surface, and preserve logs for detection review. CVSS 8 describes technical severity, while EPSS 0% helps estimate near-term exploit likelihood; neither replaces asset context. Unknown fields should remain explicit in tickets, and threat actor, IOC, victimology, or payload claims should not be added unless a cited source supports them. Monitor CISA KEV, vendor advisories, NVD changes, public PoC repositories, and internal telemetry for update triggers.