Details
## Overview
A critical **Arbitrary Code Execution (ACE)** vulnerability exists in the Knowns Language Server Protocol (LSP) detection and startup pipeline. The system blindly trusts the `settings.lsp.languages.<lang>.binary` field defined in the project-level `.knowns/config.json` file.
Because this field is **never validated** against an allowlist of managed binaries, and absolute paths are implicitly accepted, opening a malicious repository (or a legitimate repository where the config has been tampered with) results in the immediate execution of an attacker-controlled binary. The payload is executed **twice** per session: once during the initial `runVersionCheck` (health check), and again when the LSP server process is spawned via `Server.Start()`. When chained with the previously identified Config Overwrite vulnerabilities, this flaw yields a fully unauthenticated Remote Code Execution chain.
## Affected paths
| File Path | Role | Vulnerability & Execution Impact |
| :--- | :--- | :--- |
| **`internal/models/config.go`** | Validation Gap | **Missing Binary Validation (CWE-829):** `ProjectSettings.Validate()` enforces duration formats for task lifecycles but **completely ignores** the `LSPLanguageSettings.Binary` field. Absolute paths, shell interpreters, and untrusted executables are silently accepted. |
| **`internal/lsp/detect.go`** | Execution Sink #1 | **Unsanitized Health Check Execution:** `Detector.resolve()` passes the unvalidated override to `exec.LookPath()`, then invokes `runVersionCheck()` which blindly calls `cmd.Run()` on the attacker-controlled binary with `CheckArgs`. |
| **`internal/lsp/server.go`** | Execution Sink #2 | **Unsanitized LSP Server Spawn:** `Server.Start()` passes the resolved binary path to `knownsprocess.Command()` and spawns it as a long-running background process via `cmd.Start()`, executing the payload a second time. |
## Root Cause
### Missing Validation in Configuration Schema
In `internal/models/config.go`, the `ProjectSettings.Validate()` function is responsible for sanitizing the project configuration loaded from `.knowns/config.json`. However, it only validates task lifecycle durations:
```go
func (s ProjectSettings) Validate() error {
settings := s.EffectiveTaskLifecycle()
if _, err := ParseTaskLifecycleDuration(settings.ArchiveAfter); err != nil { ... }
// NO VALIDATION FOR s.LSP.Languages[lang].Binary
return nil
}
```
The `LSPLanguageSettings` struct exposes a `Binary` string field. When a malicious project is loaded, this string is passed unmodified into the LSP resolution pipeline.
### Blind Execution in LSP Detector
In `internal/lsp/detect.go`, the `Detector.resolve()` function accepts an `override` string (from the config) and forces it into the execution pipeline:
```go
func (d *Detector) resolve(ctx context.Context, root string, lang Language, override string) (ServerCommand, bool) {
binaries := lang.Binaries
if override != "" {
binary := Binary{Name: override} // Attacker's malicious path injected here
binaries = []Binary{binary}
}
for _, binary := range binaries {
path, err := d.LookPath(binary.Name) // Accepts absolute paths (e.g., /tmp/evil.sh)
// ...
err = d.RunCheck(checkCtx, path, binary.CheckArgs...) // EXECUTION #1
// ...
}
}
```
`d.RunCheck` maps to `runVersionCheck`, which executes the binary via `knownsprocess.CommandContext(ctx, path, args...).Run()`.
### Unrestricted Process Spawn
In `internal/lsp/server.go`, when the LSP manager starts the server, it executes the same compromised path:
```go
func (s *Server) Start(ctx context.Context) error {
// ...
cmd := knownsprocess.Command(s.Command.Path, s.Command.Args...) // EXECUTION #2
cmd.Dir = s.Root
// ...
if err := cmd.Start(); err != nil { ... }
}
```
## Attack Vector
| Phase | Request / Action | Effect |
| :--- | :--- | :--- |
| **1. Plant** | Attacker commits `.knowns/config.json` containing `{"settings":{"lsp":{"languages":{"go":{"binary":"/tmp/evil.sh"}}}}}` to a repository. | Malicious config embedded in the project. |
| **2. Trigger** | Victim (or AI Agent) clones the repo and opens it with `knowns mcp` or `knowns browser`. | Auto-detection scans the project, finds a `.go` file, and loads the malicious config. |
| **3. Execute (Health Check)** | `Detector.resolve()` calls `runVersionCheck("/tmp/evil.sh", "version")`. | **RCE Execution #1** occurs silently in the background. |
| **4. Execute (LSP Spawn)** | `Server.Start()` calls `cmd.Start()` with the same binary. | **RCE Execution #2** occurs, spawning the malicious process as a long-running daemon. |
**Chained Attack Vector (Unauthenticated RCE):**
If combined with the **Config Overwrite** vulnerability (via `code.replace` path traversal), a remote attacker can overwrite `.knowns/config.json` in a target project, inject a payload, and trigger an LSP restart (via `docs.update` or server reload), achieving **Remote Code Execution without any user interaction**.
## Analysis
This vulnerability is a textbook example of **Inclusion of Functionality from Untrusted Control Sphere (CWE-829)**, commonly known in the IDE/Editor space as the "Malicious Workspace" vulnerability (similar to historical CVEs in VS Code where `.vscode/settings.json` could point to malicious interpreter paths).
The core failure is the lack of a strict allowlist for executable paths. By relying on `exec.LookPath()`, the code allows an attacker to bypass binary name resolution simply by providing an absolute path (`/abs/path/evil.sh`) or a path containing a slash (`./evil.sh`).
Furthermore, the execution happens **automatically** upon project load. In modern AI-driven development workflows, AI Agents automatically scan project files (like `.go`, `.ts`, `.py`) to provide context. The LSP detector triggers on file extensions, meaning the victim or agent does not even need to explicitly run a "build" or "start" command; the mere act of the Agent indexing the workspace triggers the payload.
## Fix
*Patch is available right now at [New Release](https://github.com/knowns-dev/knowns/releases).*
EPSS, exploit probability
Low0.21%
estimated chance of real-world exploitation in the next 30 days, higher than 10.5% of every CVE FIRST.org scores
Refreshed 10/6/2026, via FIRST.org's EPSS model, not CVSS, this measures likelihood of exploitation, not how severe it would be.