Home/CVE/Crawl4AI is an open-source LLM-friendly web crawler and scraper. Prior to 0.9.0, the Docker API server accepted request-
CVE
CVE-2026-57572
Crawl4AI is an open-source LLM-friendly web crawler and scraper. Prior to 0.9.0, the Docker API server accepted request-
Crawl4AI is an open-source LLM-friendly web crawler and scraper. Prior to 0.9.0, the Docker API server accepted request-supplied browser_config.extra_args, which flowed into Chromium's launch arguments. An attacker could inject Chromium switches that replace a child-process launch command together with --no-zygote, causing Chromium to fork or exec an attacker-controlled command as the container's runtime user.
The Docker API is unauthenticated by default, so a single request yields arbitrary command execution. This issue is fixed in version 0.9.0.
CRITICAL · CVSS 10
EPSS 0.00523
EPSS exploitation odds0.52% · top 59%
Schedule remediation
- CVSS base score ≥ 7.0
No Sigma yet — build one →
YARA rules0
Look this up elsewhere - one-click external pivots
▸
How to read a CVE - triage first, then detect and patch
This page is every public fact about CVE-2026-57572, cross-linked. Its job is to answer one question fast - does this need my attention now? - and then hand you the two things you do about it. Here is how an analyst reads it.
Triage: should I act now? Four signals, and they are not interchangeable:
CVSSseverity - how bad it is IF exploited, 0-10. A high CVSS alone is not urgency; a flaw can be a perfect 10 and never actually be attacked.
EPSSprobability - a model’s estimate of the chance it is exploited in the next 30 days, 0-1. This is the “will it actually happen” signal.
CISA KEVconfirmed - it is being exploited in the wild right now. The strongest signal on the page; KEV beats any score.
Weaponisedavailability - public exploits / PoCs, and especially Metasploit modules rated Excellent / Great. Reliable, packaged exploit code means low-skill attackers can use it today.
How they combine: KEV, or a dependable Metasploit module, means patch now regardless of CVSS. High CVSS + low EPSS + no exploit is real but not an emergency - schedule it. Low CVSS but KEV-listed still gets patched now. The verdict above already weighed these for you; this is how it got there.
Then what - two workflows:
Detectwhen you cannot patch today, follow this CVE to the ATT&CK techniques it enables, then Build a SIEM detection (the green button) - author a rule, test it in Atomic, deploy it. That buys visibility while the patch waits.
PatchAffected products / packages tell you if you are exposed; Fixed versions by distribution and Vendor advisories give the exact version that closes it.
Reading order for the panels below: verdict + badges, then Public exploits / Metasploit (is it weaponised), then ATT&CK techniques + Sigma / IDS rules (can I detect it), then Affected products / packages + Fixed versions (am I exposed, what patches it), then Threat actors / IOCs (who uses it), then Scoring & timeline / references (the evidence).
EPSS exploitation probability
0.52%
Top 59%odds of exploitation in the next 30 days
CVSS metric silhouette
shape grows toward worst-case
SSVC triage
No SSVC vulnrichment for this CVE. CISA's Vulnrichment program scores newer CVEs (~2024 onwards) plus selected older critical ones. Use the EPSS probability + KEV status to triage instead.
CVSS vector breakdown
Exploitability - how they get in
Attack Vector
Network
Adjacent
Local
Physical
Attack Complexity
Low
High
Privileges Required
None
Low
High
User Interaction
None
Required
Scope
Unchanged
Changed
Impact - what breaks
Confidentiality
None
Low
High
Integrity
None
Low
High
Availability
None
Low
High
VECTOR
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H◆
ATT&CK techniques
4Techniques this CVE enables. Pills with a solid outline are high confidence - named directly in ATT&CK or Nuclei, or human-curated by CTID; the rest are inferred from the weakness type using MITRE's CVE Mapping Methodology and the CWE → CAPEC chain. Broad, generic-weakness guesses are filtered out. A small N× marks a technique that N independent sources agree on.
T1027.006 · HTML Smuggling T1027.009 · Embedded Payloads T1059 · Command and Scripting Interpreter T1564.009 · Resource Forking
▤ Build a SIEM detection for these techniques
▤
CAPEC attack patterns
8Attack patterns this CVE enables - the bridge from weakness to ATT&CK technique.
CAPEC-CAPEC-137 · Parameter Injection CAPEC-CAPEC-174 · Flash Parameter Injection CAPEC-CAPEC-242 · Code Injection CAPEC-CAPEC-35 · Leverage Executable Code in Non-Executable Files CAPEC-CAPEC-41 · Using Meta-characters in E-mail Headers to Inject Malicious Payloads CAPEC-CAPEC-460 · HTTP Parameter Pollution (HPP) CAPEC-CAPEC-77 · Manipulating User-Controlled Variables CAPEC-CAPEC-88 · OS Command Injection
⬡
Weakness Classification
▤
Related CVEs
8CVEs linked to this one by a shared weakness (CWE) or affected product - joins on data already in the engine, with the reason shown per row.
CVE-1999-0113
Some implementations of rlogin allow root access if given a -froot parameter.
1
same CWE-88
CVE-2001-0150
Internet Explorer 5.5 and earlier executes Telnet sessions using command line ar...
1
same CWE-88
CVE-2001-1246
PHP 4.0.5 through 4.1.0 in safe mode does not properly cleanse the 5th parameter...
1
same CWE-88
CVE-2001-0667
Internet Explorer 6 and earlier, when used with the Telnet client in Services fo...
same CWE-88
HIGH
CVE-1999-0509
Perl, sh, csh, or other shell interpreters are installed in the cgi-bin director...
same CWE-94
CVE-1999-0491
The prompt parsing in bash allows a local user to execute commands as another us...
1
same CWE-94
CVE-1999-0891
The "download behavior" in Internet Explorer 5 allows remote attackers to read a...
1
same CWE-94
CVE-1999-0702
Internet Explorer 5.0 and 5.01 allows remote attackers to modify or execute file...
1
same CWE-94
🔗
References & Sources
2Source URLs (vendor pages, mailing lists, write-ups). Exploit/PoC links are in their own section above to avoid duplication.