Pivotick used plain JavaScript objects as lookup tables indexed by caller-controlled graph node identifiers in its tree-layout and cycle-detection components.
Node identifiers matching properties inherited from Object.prototype, such as constructor, toString, or __proto__, were not handled as ordinary identifiers. These values could be interpreted as existing inherited properties, resolve to values of an unexpected type, or—in the case of __proto__ assignments—modify the prototype of an internal lookup object.
An attacker who can supply graph data containing crafted node identifiers could consequently cause nodes or edges to be silently omitted, produce incorrect hierarchy levels, bypass or corrupt cycle-detection results, or trigger an exception that interrupts graph processing and rendering. This affects the integrity of graph visualisations and analytics and may cause a client-side denial-of-service condition.
The affected code also failed to safely handle edges whose source node was absent from the supplied node set. Furthermore, calculating the maximum tree depth by spreading all level values into Math.max() could exceed the JavaScript function-argument limit when processing a sufficiently large graph, resulting in an exception and denial of service.
The patch replaces identifier-keyed plain objects with Map instances, ignores invalid edges during tree construction, and calculates the maximum depth iteratively.
SSVC (CISA's decision table, applied by EchelonGraph)Track at every mission impact level.
An upstream fix is merged but not yet in a tagged release. Restrict network exposure of the affected system or apply the vendor's mitigation within your standard update timelines until it ships, then apply the release.
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