Skip to main content

CVE-2026-54145tinyhumansai openhuman cleartext storage of sensitive data

Schedule itHigh8.8EPSS 0.09%, higher than 0% of scored CVEs

CVE-2026-54145 is a cleartext storage of sensitive data in tinyhumansai openhuman, rated high (8.8 on CVSS 3.1).

Why this priority: High severity, with no exploitation signal yet.

Published · Updated · NVD status: Deferred

What it is

Sensitive data is stored unencrypted where others can read it. Secrets or personal data are written to log files.

How it is reached

An attacker can exploit it by someone who can already run code or sign in on the machine, with an ordinary user account, and nobody has to click anything.

What an attacker gains

A successful attack can read the data it protects, change data or behaviour and take it offline. In practice, this kind of flaw lets an attacker sign in with credentials the vendor shipped or stored unprotected. The damage can spread past the vulnerable component into others.

Is it being exploited?

There is no public report of exploitation yet. EPSS estimates a 0.09% chance of exploitation activity in the next 30 days, higher than 0% of scored CVEs.

What to do

  1. Upgrade tinyhumansai openhuman to 0.57.5 or later.
  2. Limit who can run code or sign in on the hosts that run it.

Description from NVD

OpenHuman is an open-source agent harness available as a desktop application and Rust library. In affected versions before 0.57.5, the approval gate uses the JSON-RPC bearer token as an approval session identifier. This exposes the credential through persisted approval records, events, debug logs, and RPC responses, including during normal desktop operation. An attacker who obtains these artifacts can recover the token and access the core RPC interface while it remains valid. This can expose sensitive agent and integration data and permit privileged operations. Stable tokens remain usable until rotated; launch-specific tokens remain usable while the corresponding core instance is active. The fix is included in version 0.57.5.

What this means for your architecture.

A CVE names a product. Whether it matters depends on where that product sits in your systems: what reaches it, which trust boundary it guards and what it can reach once compromised. Veriom maps your components, their relationships and your trust boundaries from your code, cloud and delivery evidence, so you can see where a component like this sits. The radar itself does not look at your systems.

Components it touches

  • Credentials kept in code, configuration, images or firmware. The flaw sits between a stored secret and anyone who can read where it is kept.
  • Error responses, logs and debug endpoints. The flaw sits between internal data and whoever can read the response or log.
  • APIs that over-share. The flaw sits between internal data and whoever can read the response or log.

Trust boundaries in play

  • Host boundary. The attacker needs a foothold on the machine first; the flaw turns a small foothold into a bigger one.
  • Isolation between components. The impact crosses out of the vulnerable component into others it should be isolated from.
  • Between a stored secret and anyone who can read where it is kept. An attacker who crosses it can sign in with credentials the vendor shipped or stored unprotected.
  • Between internal data and whoever can read the response or log. An attacker who crosses it can learn data or internals that help a follow-up attack.

Questions to answer about your own systems

  • Where does tinyhumansai openhuman run in your systems, and at which version?
  • Which of those hosts also run code or users you do not fully trust?
  • What can it reach once compromised: which data stores, secrets and services?

Sources

  • CVE records and CVSS scores from the NVD CVE API. This product uses the NVD API but is not endorsed or certified by the NVD.
  • Exploitation status from CISA’s Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog.
  • Exploit likelihood from FIRST’s Exploit Prediction Scoring System (EPSS), refreshed daily.
  • Explanations are written by Veriom from fixed templates over each record’s data, not by a person reviewing each CVE. Descriptions are quoted from the records as published.