AgentReadyHomeAgent Listing

← desktop-commander

desktop-commander — agentic threat model

9.9AIVSS 9.9 · Critical

Desktop-commander presents an extremely high-risk profile due to its exposure of arbitrary terminal execution and filesystem access via an MCP server. Without robust sandboxing or human-in-the-loop guardrails, any prompt injection or compromised upstream agent can achieve full local code execution on the host system.

OWASP AIVSS score rationale

AIVSS = (CVSS_Base + AARS) × Mitigation_Factor, where AARS = (10 − CVSS_Base) × (Factor_Sum / 10) × ThM
CVSS base 9.8AARS uplift 0.11Factor sum 4.8/10Threat ×1.1Mitigation ×1.0
Autonomy of Action
0.80
Goal-Driven Planning
0.50
Self-Modification
0.30
Dynamic Tool Use
0.90
Persistent Memory
0.20
Contextual Awareness
0.50
Dynamic Identity
0.20
Multi-Agent Interactions
0.30
Non-Determinism
0.60
Opacity & Reflexivity
0.50

Scored with the canonical OWASP AIVSS formula (AIVSS calculator reference); agentic risk factors estimated from the agent’s described capabilities.

MAESTRO 7-layer threat model

Per-layer threats for this agent. Layers tagged “not certain from listing” are general, caveated commentary where the public description didn’t pin that layer.

L1 · Foundation Models⚠ not certain from listing

Not certain from the listing — The listing describes an MCP server plugin rather than a specific foundation model. However, any connected LLM is highly vulnerable to prompt injection that could translate directly into malicious shell commands.

L2 · Data Operations⚠ not certain from listing

Not certain from the listing — The agent performs file operations across many formats (PDF, DOCX, Excel) but does not detail its own RAG pipeline. Parsing untrusted local files could expose the system to file-format parser exploits.

L3 · Agent Frameworks✓ mapped

The MCP framework integration exposes highly sensitive tools (terminal execution, process management, filesystem access). Insecure tool validation or lack of strict input sanitization on shell commands represents a critical vulnerability.

L4 · Deployment & Infrastructure✓ mapped

The agent runs locally on a desktop with access to the host filesystem and shell. Without explicit mention of containerization or sandboxing, a compromise leads directly to host OS takeover and potential privilege escalation.

L5 · Evaluation & Observability⚠ not certain from listing

Not certain from the listing — There is no mention of logging, guardrails, or monitoring of executed commands to detect anomalous or malicious shell activity.

L6 · Security & Compliance (cross-cutting)✓ mapped

The tool lacks explicit authentication, authorization, or user-confirmation (Human-in-the-Loop) policies for destructive terminal commands or file modifications, presenting a significant compliance and security gap.

L7 · Agent Ecosystem✓ mapped

As an MCP server, it is designed to be called by other agents or LLM clients. This creates a massive risk of Agent-to-Agent (A2A) trust abuse, where an untrusted or compromised upstream agent calls this desktop-commander to execute malicious payloads.

MAESTRO — the 7-layer agentic threat-modeling framework (Cloud Security Alliance / Ken Huang).