Quick answer
Direct answer
Risk scores
| CVSS metric | What it means |
|---|---|
| Attack vector (AV:N) | Network: reachable remotely |
| Attack complexity (AC:L) | Low complexity |
| Attack requirements (AT:N) | No attack requirements |
| Privileges required (PR:N) | No privileges required |
| User interaction (UI:P) | Passive user interaction |
| Confidentiality (VC:H) | High confidentiality impact |
| Integrity (VI:N) | No integrity impact |
| Availability (VA:N) | No availability impact |
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:P/VC:H/VI:N/VA:N/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
About Anthropic Claude Code
CVE-2026-24052 affects Anthropic Claude Code, a product from Anthropic. Before acting, confirm where Anthropic Claude Code runs in your estate, who owns it and whether it is reachable from the internet, because exposure decides real risk more than the score alone.
What the flaw is
In plain terms: Claude Code is an agentic coding tool. Prior to version 1.0.111, Claude Code contained insufficient URL validation in its trusted domain verification mechanism for WebFetch requests. The application used a startsWith() function to validate trusted domains (e.g., docs.python.org, modelcontextprotocol.io), this could have enabled attackers to register domains like modelcontextprotocol.io.example.com that would pass validation. This could enable automatic requests to attacker-controlled domains without user consent, potentially leading to data exfiltration. This issue has been patched in version 1.0.111.
The weakness class is Open Redirect. A trusted link can send users to an attacker site.
Based on its CVSS vector, the flaw can be reached over the network, needs no login, and relies on a user taking an action. Apply the vendor fix and confirm exposure on internet facing and business critical assets first.
Affected versions and timeline
| Field | Detail |
|---|---|
| Product | Anthropic Claude Code |
| Affected versions | Claude Code before 1.0.111 |
| Published | Feb 3, 2026 |
| Last modified | Jun 17, 2026 |
| Added to CISA KEV | Not listed |
| Assigning CNA | security-advisories@github.com |
How to detect it
- Inventory every instance of Anthropic Claude Code and record the running version against the affected range above.
- Check external attack surface scans for internet facing instances of the component.
- Review logs on affected systems for unusual requests, errors or new processes around the vulnerable function.
- Confirm with an authenticated vulnerability scan once your scanner has a check for this CVE.
How to fix it
- Apply the fixed version of Anthropic Claude Code named in the vendor advisory.
- If patching must wait, restrict network access to the affected service and put it behind authentication or a web application firewall rule.
- Rescan after the change to prove the exposure is gone, then close the ticket.
CTEM action plan
| CTEM stage | What to do for this CVE |
|---|---|
| Scope | Add every business service that depends on Anthropic Claude Code to the current CTEM cycle. |
| Discover | Find all instances, including shadow and cloud deployments, and record versions and exposure. |
| Prioritize | Rank using EPSS and CVSS together with asset exposure and business impact. |
| Validate | Confirm the flaw is reachable and exploitable in your environment and that compensating controls work. |
| Mobilize | Assign the fix to the asset owner with a due date matched to the priority, then verify closure. |
CWE References
- CWE-601: Open Redirect More CVEs with this weakness
Technical References
Frequently asked questions
Related CVEs
Claude Code is an agentic coding tool. From 2.1.38 until 2.1.163, Claude Code's worktree handling allowed creation of worktrees named ".git" and navigation to worktrees outside the sandbox context, enabling git directory confusion attacks. By exploiting symlink manipulation and git fsmonitor execution during worktree operations, an attacker could overwrite files in the user's home directory (such as .zshenv), leading to code execution outside of seatbelt sandbox restrictions. Reliably exploiting this required the user to clone a malicious repository containing prompt injection content and run Claude Code against it. This vulnerability is fixed in 2.1.163.
The Claude Desktop app gives you Claude Code with a graphical interface built for running multiple sessions side by side. Prior to 1.3834.0, the CoworkVMService component in Claude Desktop for Windows ran as SYSTEM and did not validate whether the VM bundle directory was a real directory or an NTFS directory junction before creating files within it. A local non-elevated user could replace the user-writable VM bundle directory with a directory junction pointing to an attacker-chosen location, causing the service to create a SYSTEM-owned file in an arbitrary directory. This could be leveraged for local privilege escalation. This vulnerability is fixed in 1.3834.0.
In versions 2.1.63 through 2.1.83 of Claude Code, the folder trust determination logic used the git worktree commondir file without validating its contents. An attacker could craft a malicious repository with a commondir file pointing to a path the victim had previously trusted, causing Claude Code to bypass its trust confirmation dialog and immediately execute hooks defined in `.claude/settings.json`. Exploitation requires the victim to clone the malicious repository and run Claude Code within it, and the attacker must know or guess a path the victim had already trusted. This issue has been fixed in version 2.1.84.
Claude Code is an agentic coding tool. Prior to version 2.1.64, Claude Code's sandbox did not prevent sandboxed processes from creating symlinks pointing to locations outside the workspace. When Claude Code subsequently wrote to a path within such a symlink, its unsandboxed process followed the symlink and wrote to the target location outside the workspace without prompting the user for confirmation. This allowed a sandbox escape where neither the sandboxed command nor the unsandboxed app could independently write outside the workspace, but their combination could write to arbitrary locations, potentially leading to code execution outside the sandbox. Reliably exploiting this required the ability to add untrusted content into a Claude Code context window to trigger sandboxed code execution via prompt injection. Users on standard Claude Code auto-update have received this fix automatically. Users performing manual updates are advised to update to version 2.1.64 or later.
Claude Code is an agentic coding tool. Versions prior to 2.1.53 resolved the permission mode from settings files, including the repo-controlled .claude/settings.json, before determining whether to display the workspace trust confirmation dialog. A malicious repository could set permissions.defaultMode to bypassPermissions in its committed .claude/settings.json, causing the trust dialog to be silently skipped on first open. This allowed a user to be placed into a permissive mode without seeing the trust confirmation prompt, making it easier for an attacker-controlled repository to gain tool execution without explicit user consent. This issue has been patched in version 2.1.53.
Claude Code is an agentic coding tool. Prior to version 2.1.2, Claude Code's bubblewrap sandboxing mechanism failed to properly protect the .claude/settings.json configuration file when it did not exist at startup. While the parent directory was mounted as writable and .claude/settings.local.json was explicitly protected with read-only constraints, settings.json was not protected if it was missing. This allowed malicious code running inside the sandbox to create this file and inject persistent hooks (such as SessionStart commands) that would execute with host privileges when Claude Code was restarted. This issue has been patched in version 2.1.2.
Earn your free CTEM certification.
Learn to scope, prioritize, validate and mobilize fixes for CVEs like CVE-2026-24052 with a free CTEM certification.
Beginner / Practitioner / Program Leader
Explore certifications