Giskard has Unsandboxed Jinja2 Template Rendering in ConformityCheck
CVE-2026-40320GHSA-7xjm-g8f4-rp26
What to do
Vendor fix available. Upgrade each affected package to the fixed version on its release line (giskard-checks 1.0.2b1), redeploy, then verify what is actually installed.
This page has no inventory attached, so it cannot say whether you are affected. A vendor fix is not proof that your deployment is fixed.
Affected packages
PyPI giskard-checks
- Affected
- <= 1.0.1b1
- Fixed in
- 1.0.2b1
Sources
- Open Source Vulnerabilities (OSV.dev), including the GitHub Advisory Database
OSV record GHSA-7xjm-g8f4-rp26 lists affected ranges: PyPI giskard-checks >=0 <1.0.2b1 (fixed)
VerifiedObserved Structured OSV record; GitHub-reviewed advisory.
- GitHub Advisory Database and maintainer security advisories on GitHub
GitHub-reviewed advisory GHSA-7xjm-g8f4-rp26 lists affected ranges: PyPI giskard-checks >=0 <=1.0.1b1
VerifiedObserved Structured GitHub Advisory Database record (type=reviewed) from the GitHub REST API.
Severity and exploitation
- Exploitation
- No confirmed exploitation recorded. Patch Next marks exploitation only from CISA KEV.
- CVSS 4.0
- 5.4 · CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:P/PR:L/UI:P/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/SC:N/SI:N/SA:L · score source
- EPSS
- CVE-2026-40320: 0.14% estimated exploitation activity in the next 30 days; percentile 3.71 (FIRST EPSS, 2026-11-03). This is a model estimate, not proof of exploitation or customer exposure.
Source description
As published by the source; long descriptions are shortened.
Summary The ConformityCheck class in giskard-checks rendered the rule parameter through Jinja2's default Template() constructor. Because the rule string is silently interpreted as a Jinja2 template, a developer may not realize that template expressions embedded in rule definitions are evaluated at runtime. In a scenario where check definitions are loaded from an untrusted source (e.g. a shared project file or externally contributed configuration), this could lead to arbitrary code execution. giskard-checks is a local developer testing library with no network-facing service. Check definitions, including the rule parameter, are provided in application code or project configuration files and executed locally. Exploitation requires write access to a check definition and subsequent execution of the test suite by a developer. However, the implicit template evaluation of the rule parameter is not obvious from the API surface. This hidden behavior increases the likelihood of a developer…
Dates and revisions
- Published by the source
- Last modified by the source
- Source last checked
- Revision 3 · amended ·
Amended from ghsa record GHSA-7xjm-g8f4-rp26
- Revision 2 · amended ·
Reviewed OSV alias/range/CVSS4 correction; package source scopes and original publication preserved. No customer finding resolved.
- Revision 1 · created ·
Published from osv record GHSA-7xjm-g8f4-rp26
Agent brief
Preview the exact text before you copy it. Commands are read-only suggestions; review them before running anything.
# Patch Next advisory brief: CVE-2026-40320 Advisory: Giskard has Unsandboxed Jinja2 Template Rendering in ConformityCheck IDs: CVE-2026-40320, GHSA-7xjm-g8f4-rp26 Record: https://patchnext.com/advisories/cve-2026-40320 (revision 3, source checked 26 Oct 2026, 13:40 UTC) Inventory: none attached. This brief comes from a public page and does not say whether any deployment is affected. Severity: Medium (CVSS 5.4) Exploitation: no confirmed exploitation recorded. Patch Next confirms exploitation only from CISA KEV. Vendor response: Vendor fix available; fixed versions by package: giskard-checks 1.0.2b1. A vendor fix does not mean a deployment is fixed. ## Affected components - PyPI giskard-checks: affected <= 1.0.1b1; fixed in 1.0.2b1 ## Suggested inspection (read-only) - `python -m pip show giskard-checks`: prints the installed version. Run with the environment that serves production active. ## Supported action Upgrade each affected component to a fixed version on its release line. For a transitive dependency, upgrade the parent package or add an override or constraint, then regenerate the lockfile. Redeploy every environment that ran an affected version. ## Required regression checks - Run the test suite and a production build. - Exercise the features that depend on giskard-checks. - Repeat the inspection and confirm that only fixed versions remain installed. ## Rollback considerations - Keep the previous lockfile and deployment artifact. Rolling back reinstates the vulnerable version, so apply any documented mitigation while you fix forward. ## Unresolved questions - Which deployments run an affected version? - Exploitation status can change. Check again before lowering the priority. - Mark the work resolved only after the fixed version is verified in production. ## Sources - Verified: https://osv.dev/vulnerability/GHSA-7xjm-g8f4-rp26 (OSV record GHSA-7xjm-g8f4-rp26 lists affected ranges: PyPI giskard-checks >=0 <1.0.2b1 (fixed)) - Verified: https://github.com/advisories/GHSA-7xjm-g8f4-rp26 (GitHub-reviewed advisory GHSA-7xjm-g8f4-rp26 lists affected ranges: PyPI giskard-checks >=0 <=1.0.1b1) Commands are suggestions: review each one before running it.
Loading voting…