Nixpkgs security tracker

Login with GitHub

Suggestions search

With package: python313Packages.pydantic-ai-slim

Found 2 matching suggestions

View:
Compact
Detailed
Permalink CVE-2026-54249
6.8 MEDIUM
  • CVSS version (CVSS): 3.1
  • Attack Vector (AV): Network (N)
  • Attack Complexity (AC): High (H)
  • Privileges Required (PR): None (N)
  • User Interaction (UI): None (N)
  • Scope (S): Changed (C)
  • Confidentiality (C): High (H)
  • Integrity (I): None (N)
  • Availability (A): None (N)
  • Modified Attack Vector (MAV): Network (N)
  • Modified Attack Complexity (MAC): High (H)
  • Modified Privileges Required (MPR): None (N)
  • Modified User Interaction (MUI): None (N)
  • Modified Confidentiality (MC): High (H)
  • Modified Scope (MS): Changed (C)
  • Modified Integrity (MI): None (N)
  • Modified Availability (MA): None (N)
updated 1 month, 2 weeks ago by @LeSuisse Activity log
  • Created suggestion
  • @LeSuisse accepted
  • @LeSuisse published on GitHub
VercelAIAdapter trusts client-controlled `providerMetadata` to construct `UploadedFile` — S3/GCS confused deputy via provider metadata injection

Pydantic AI is a Python agent framework for building Generative AI applications. In versions 1.65.0 through 1.105.0, and 2.0.0b1 through 2.0.0b5, a client that submits message history to a Pydantic AI UI adapter (such as the Vercel AI adapter) can reference arbitrary files in the application's model-provider or cloud-storage account. While file URL parts are validated against a scheme allowlist, UploadedFile references — which point to a file by provider file ID or cloud-storage URI (e.g. s3://…, gs://…) — were forwarded without validation. Because the provider resolves an UploadedFile using the server-side identity (IAM role, service account, or provider API key) rather than the client's, an attacker can craft message history to make the server read objects from its own account or other tenants, given a referenceable identifier. Exploitation requires a valid file identifier, which is not always unguessable depending on how the application names objects. This issue has been fixed in versions 1.106.0 and 2.0.0b6.

Affected products

pydantic-ai
  • ==>= 1.65.0, < 1.106.0
  • ==>= 2.0.0b1, < 2.0.0b6
pydantic-ai-slim
  • ==>= 1.65.0, < 1.106.0
  • ==>= 2.0.0b1, < 2.0.0b6

Matching in nixpkgs

Package maintainers

Permalink CVE-2026-65975
6.5 MEDIUM
  • CVSS version (CVSS): 3.1
  • Attack Vector (AV): Network (N)
  • Attack Complexity (AC): Low (L)
  • Privileges Required (PR): None (N)
  • User Interaction (UI): None (N)
  • Scope (S): Unchanged (U)
  • Confidentiality (C): Low (L)
  • Integrity (I): Low (L)
  • Availability (A): None (N)
  • Modified Attack Vector (MAV): Network (N)
  • Modified Attack Complexity (MAC): Low (L)
  • Modified Privileges Required (MPR): None (N)
  • Modified User Interaction (MUI): None (N)
  • Modified Confidentiality (MC): Low (L)
  • Modified Scope (MS): Unchanged (U)
  • Modified Integrity (MI): Low (L)
  • Modified Availability (MA): None (N)
updated 1 month, 2 weeks ago by @LeSuisse Activity log
  • Created suggestion
  • @LeSuisse accepted
  • @LeSuisse published on GitHub
Pydantic AI AG-UI Adapter: A dangling client-submitted tool call can execute when a trailing message is dropped during `sanitize_messages`

Pydantic AI is a Python agent framework for building applications and workflows with Generative AI. In versions 1.88.0 up to but not including 1.107.1 and 2.0.0b1 up to but not including 2.5.0, the UI adapters (AG-UI via Agent.to_ag_ui()/AGUIAdapter, and Vercel AI via VercelAIAdapter) use sanitize_messages to strip unresolved ("dangling") client-submitted tool calls from untrusted message history before it reaches the agent, a defense-in-depth default that prevents the agent from executing tool calls the model never emitted. However, the strip anchored to a message index computed before sanitization ran, so when a trailing client message sanitized to empty and was dropped (for example a client system message under the default manage_system_prompt='server'), a preceding assistant response carrying an unresolved tool call became the new tail and was dispatched without inspection. As a result, a remote client could cause a registered, non-approval server tool to run with client-supplied arguments rather than arguments the model produced. The impact is bounded by what the affected tools do and is most significant for applications that gate tool execution in a model-request hook (before_model_request / after_model_request), since a forged call skips the model turn and bypasses that guardrail; approval-gated tools (requires_approval=True) are not auto-executed by this path. This issue has been fixed in versions 1.107.1 and 2.5.0.

Affected products

pydantic-ai
  • ==>= 1.88.0, < 1.107.1
  • ==>= 2.0.0b1, < 2.5.0
pydantic-ai-slim
  • ==>= 1.88.0, < 1.107.1
  • ==>= 2.0.0b1, < 2.5.0

Matching in nixpkgs

Package maintainers