CVE-2026-115883

MEDIUMPre-NVD 6.06.0
EchelonGraph scoreMEDIUM confidence

“—” beside the score: it is equal to the CVSS score beside it.

This medium-severity CVE scores 6.0 under a secondary CVSS source (NVD's own analysis pending). EPSS exploit probability: 0.3% (22nd percentile of EPSS-scored CVEs). No GitHub Security Advisory CVSS is on record for this CVE.

Triggered by: Headline CVSS from a secondary CVSS source
Sources: EPSS, a secondary CVSS source
Trending — 3 sources updated this week

Also known asEUVD-2026-109182 (ENISA EUVD) · GHSA-6hmw-9432-67qq (GitHub Security Advisories)Source: ENISA EUVD

6.0EG
EchelonGraph verdictMonitorRemediate within your standard update timelines (the SSVC decision on this page).
  • Lower severity and no public exploit yet
CISA-KEV: Not listedEPSS PROB: 0.3%CVSS: 6.0Exploit: None knownExposed services: Not assessed

A fix is available — apply it.

LangGraph checkpoint savers provide Postgres- and SQLite-backed state persistence for LangGraph workflows and agents. Prior to langgraph-checkpoint-postgres 3.1.3 and langgraph-checkpoint-sqlite 3.1.2, PostgresStore, AsyncPostgresStore, SqliteStore, and AsyncSqliteStore flatten namespace labels with ".".join(namespace), while BaseStore validates labels only for put and aput. Unvalidated dotted labels passed through get, search, delete, list_namespaces, their asynchronous equivalents, or direct batch and abatch operations can resolve to another tenant's stored namespace, allowing cross-namespace reads, overwrites, or deletion. InMemoryStore is not affected because it compares namespace tuples. This issue is fixed in langgraph-checkpoint-postgres 3.1.3 and langgraph-checkpoint-sqlite 3.1.2.

CVSS v3
6.0
EG Score
6.0MEDIUMmedium confidence
EG Risk
27
EG Risk 27/100

EG Risk is EchelonGraph's 0–100 priority score. It fuses impact severity (EG Severity, the CVSS base score, never the KEV-floored or EPSS-lifted EG Score) with real-world exploitation and automatability, under weights EchelonGraph set by hand, so you can rank equal-severity CVEs and fix the most dangerous first. Higher = act sooner.

How it’s computed (value × EchelonGraph’s weight)
Severity60% × 45%
Impact severity (EG Severity): CVSS 6.0 of 10. Never the KEV-floored or EPSS-lifted EG Score.
Exploitation0.3% × 40%
FIRST EPSS: the 30-day exploitation probability when EchelonGraph scored this CVE.
Automatability0% × 15%
CISA's SSVC Automatable value: no (Vulnrichment).
SSVC (CISA's decision table, applied by EchelonGraph): Track at every mission impact level.
Exploitation none (CISA Vulnrichment) · Automatable no (CISA Vulnrichment) · Technical impact partial (CISA Vulnrichment). All three are CISA's SSVC values (Vulnrichment). EchelonGraph applied CISA's decision table to them; CISA publishes SSVC inputs and the table, not a decision for each CVE.
Action: A fix is available. Apply it within your standard update timelines.
EPSS PROB
0.3%
EPSS %ILE
22nd
KEV
Not listed

What the EG score is made of (scorer v4.0: the three questions the 0–10 score mixes, published apart · methodology)

The EG score (6.0): severity, escalated by confirmed exploitation. This CVE's 6.0 is its impact severity (EG Severity), not escalated.

EG Severity
6.0 MEDIUMCVSS-B, impact only: no KEV listing, EPSS or EG-KEV tier raises it.a secondary CVSS source · CVSS v3.0 or v3.1
EG Likelihood
0.3% within 30 daysSource: FIRST EPSS (model v2026.06.15, score date 2026-10-26). FIRST's exploitation probability, not an EchelonGraph model.
Confirmed exploitation
None on record (CISA KEV, EG-KEV Tier 1)Reported apart from the likelihood: an observed fact, not a probability.
EG Priority
SSVC Track at medium mission impactTrack at every mission impact level.CISA BOD 26-04: 60 days if the affected system is publicly exposed; Fix on system upgrade if it is not.Each input and its source: the SSVC and BOD 26-04 blocks below.

SSVC (CISA's decision table, applied by EchelonGraph)Track at every mission impact level.

A fix is available. Apply it within your standard update timelines.

Exploitation none (CISA Vulnrichment) · Automatable no (CISA Vulnrichment) · Technical impact partial (CISA Vulnrichment). All three are CISA's SSVC values (Vulnrichment). EchelonGraph applied CISA's decision table to them; CISA publishes SSVC inputs and the table, not a decision for each CVE. Mission impact is CISA's Mission & Well-being decision point, and only you can judge it. CISA's table makes it high when Mission Prevalence is Essential — the vulnerable component "directly provides capabilities that constitute at least one MEF for at least one entity" (MEF: mission essential function) — or when Public Well-Being Impact is Irreversible: "multiple fatalities are likely", the cyber-physical system "is likely lost or destroyed", "extreme or serious externalities" are imposed on other parties, or social systems such as elections or the financial grid "are destabilized and potentially collapse". CISA's decision table

BOD 26-04 (CISA's remediation timeline, Table 1)60 days if the affected system is publicly exposed; Fix on system upgrade if it is not.

In CISA KEV no (CISA's KEV catalog) · Automatable no (CISA Vulnrichment) · Technical impact partial (CISA Vulnrichment). Whether your system is publicly exposed is yours to answer. BOD 26-04 binds US Federal Civilian Executive Branch agencies; for anyone else it is CISA's published timeline, a reference rather than an obligation. The directive · how EchelonGraph applies it

Published

October 23, 2026

Last Modified

October 26, 2026

Advisory Details (3)

Auto-updated Oct 23, 2026
Patch available. Sources: github_commit, github_pr, github.
GitHub advisoryMentions a patch (unverified)

Namespace labels containing `.` reach other namespaces in Postgres and SQLite stores · Advisory · langchain-ai/langgraph · GitHub

https://github.com/langchain-ai/langgraph/security/advisories/GHSA-6hmw-9432-67qq
GitHub pull request Patch Available

fix(checkpoint,checkpoint-postgres,checkpoint-sqlite): validate namespace labels before store dispatch

Patch available: langchain-ai/langgraph checkpoint==4.3.0 (PR #9217 merged 2026-10-08)

https://github.com/langchain-ai/langgraph/pull/9217
GitHub commit Patch Available

commit bfcfea554ed5 (langchain-ai/langgraph)

Patch available: langchain-ai/langgraph checkpoint==4.3.0 (contains commit bfcfea554ed5)

https://github.com/langchain-ai/langgraph/commit/bfcfea554ed5c7f7be562cebf8825e911b493ab1

Vendor Advisories for CVE-2026-115883(1)

These vendors published their own advisory mentioning this CVE — often with vendor-specific remediation steps + affected product lists not in NVD.

Affected Packages

(2 across 1 ecosystem)
PyPI(2)
PackageVulnerable rangeFix by version rangeDependents
langgraph-checkpoint-postgres1.0.0 ... 3.1.2 (50 versions)
  • every version up to 3.1.3: fixed in 3.1.3
—
langgraph-checkpoint-sqlite1.0.0 ... 3.1.1 (24 versions)
  • every version up to 3.1.2: fixed in 3.1.2
—

Weakness Classification(2)

MITRE Common Weakness Enumeration — the root-cause categories this CVE belongs to.

Data Freshness Timeline

(refreshed 9× in last 7d / 9× in last 30d)

Each row is a time one of our pipelines fetched, updated or re-scored this CVE. For example, "NVD update" means NVD published or revised its analysis for this CVE; "MITRE cvelistV5" means we ingested or refreshed it from the CNA feed. An arrow marks a change the record states ("CVSS v3 → 9.1"); EPSS and GHSA rows show the values recorded at that time, not what changed (EPSS values are rounded; hover one for the exact figures). Most recent first.

  1. 2026-10-26 19:07 UTCEG score recompute
  2. 2026-10-26 17:48 UTCEG score recompute
  3. 2026-10-26 16:30 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.3% · 22nd percentile
  4. 2026-10-25 16:32 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.3% · 22nd percentile
  5. 2026-10-25 14:50 UTCEG score recompute
  6. 2026-10-24 16:32 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 34th percentile
  7. 2026-10-23 22:33 UTCEG score recompute
  8. 2026-10-23 21:25 UTCEG score recomputeFirst assessed: 6.0 MEDIUM
  9. 2026-10-23 21:24 UTCMITRE cvelistV5first tracked

Related CVEs(same product + same CWE)

Same product

4 shown

PyPI:langgraph-checkpoint-postgres · PyPI:langgraph-checkpoint-sqlite

Frequently asked(5)

What is CVE-2026-115883?
CVE-2026-115883 is a medium-severity vulnerability; its CVE record was published on October 23, 2026. LangGraph checkpoint savers provide Postgres- and SQLite-backed state persistence for LangGraph workflows and agents. Prior to langgraph-checkpoint-postgres 3.1.3 and langgraph-checkpoint-sqlite 3.1.2, PostgresStore, AsyncPostgresStore, SqliteStore, and AsyncSqliteStore flatten namespace labels…
When was the CVE record for CVE-2026-115883 published?
The CVE record for CVE-2026-115883 was published on October 23, 2026. That is the record's publication date; the vulnerability itself may have been made public earlier. EchelonGraph's copy of the record carries a last-modified date of October 26, 2026; the record at its source may have been updated since.
Is CVE-2026-115883 actively exploited?
CVE-2026-115883 is not currently on CISA's Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog. FIRST EPSS estimates a 0.3% probability of exploitation in the next 30 days (22nd percentile of EPSS-scored CVEs).
What is the CVSS score of CVE-2026-115883?
CVE-2026-115883 has a CVSS base score of 6.0 (a secondary CVSS source that NVD displays; NVD's own analysis pending).
How do I remediate CVE-2026-115883?
A fix for CVE-2026-115883 is available: update to the fixed version the vendor names in its advisory. The vendor advisories EchelonGraph has for CVE-2026-115883 are linked in the Vendor Advisories panel on this page.

Dependency Blast Radius

See which npm, PyPI, Go, and Maven packages are affected by CVE-2026-115883

Explore →

Is Your Infrastructure Affected by CVE-2026-115883?

EchelonGraph automatically scans your cloud infrastructure and maps CVE exposure using blast radius analysis.

Book a Demo →Browse All CVEs