Skip to content

CVE-2026-40068

Improper Input Validation: Is CVE-2026-40068 real, exploitable, or a false positive? Here's the community verdict.

signals

public sources

Exploited in wild
Not listed
CISA KEV
Public exploit
None known
Metasploit/EDB/PoC
Base severity
8.8 High
CVSS
Exploitation prob.
0.3%
FIRST EPSS
Weakness
CWE-20 · Improper Input Validation
CWE

High CVSS base score, but low real-world exploitation probability (EPSS). Likely less urgent than the score implies.

baseline read

auto · not a community verdict

Real, but low real-world risk

A genuine vulnerability on paper, but EPSS shows little real-world exploitation — the base score may overstate urgency. This is not the same as a false positive.

Based on CVSS · FIRST EPSS

Confirm or dispute →

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H

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.

Published

Embed this verdict
TruePositive verdict for CVE-2026-40068
Markdown
[![TruePositive verdict](https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-40068/badge.svg)](https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-40068)
HTML
<a href="https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-40068"><img src="https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-40068/badge.svg" alt="TruePositive verdict for CVE-2026-40068"></a>

Live badge that updates automatically as the community verdict changes.

Community ground truth

Be the first practitioner to weigh in

So far this is only TruePositive's editorial baseline from public sources. Add your real-world verdict below — it becomes the signal the next person triaging this relies on.

🥇 The first 50 practitioners to contribute earn a Founding Contributor badge.

In your experience, is this finding real and exploitable?

awaiting field verdicts
Real, but not a risk here
Not a real issue

No account needed. Anonymous verdicts post as an unverified signal. Log in to make yours verified and earn reputation.

Field notes & remediation

Verdicts are the quick signal. Notes are the evidence and fixes behind them.

No notes yet. Be the first to share what you saw, or a fix that worked.

    Add a field note or remediationoptional
    Note type

    What are you adding?

    Markdown supported · minimum 20 characters.

    Same weakness: CWE-20 · Improper Input Validation.