lmdeploy: Hardcoded trust_remote_code=True is an implicit unsafe remote-code load path with no user opt-out

Exploitation

No confirmed exploitation recorded. Patch Next marks exploitation only from CISA KEV.

CVSS

7.8 · CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H

EPSS

• CVE-2026-46517: 0.16% estimated exploitation activity in the next 30 days; percentile 5.51 (FIRST EPSS, 2026-11-03). This is a model estimate, not proof of exploitation or customer exposure.

As published by the source; long descriptions are shortened.

📋 Reframing (2026-05-02): implicit unsafe remote-code path, not "supply-chain" The accurate description of this vulnerability is: "getmodelarch and related helpers hardcode trustremotecode=True with no opt-out, creating an implicit unsafe remote-code load path on every model fetch." What this report does NOT claim: It is NOT a network-attack RCE — the user supplies the model reference; LMDeploy honors it. It is NOT a "supply chain" CVE in the classical sense (where a benign upstream is compromised) — the user explicitly types the repo name. What this report DOES claim: Other inference frameworks (vLLM, TGI, Hugging Face transformers itself) all expose --trust-remote-code as opt-in so that users who consciously load known-safe repos can opt in, while users following a tutorial cannot accidentally execute attacker Python by typing a wrong repo name. LMDeploy's hardcoded True is an implicit trust-boundary override that violates HF Transformers' default-secure stance…

Published by the source

21 May 2026, 19:33 UTC

Last modified by the source

15 Sep 2026, 05:15 UTC

Source last checked

26 Oct 2026, 13:50 UTC

1. Revision 2 · amended · 26 Oct 2026

   Amended from ghsa record GHSA-9xq9-36w5-q796

2. Revision 1 · created · 24 Oct 2026

   Published from osv record GHSA-9xq9-36w5-q796

Preview the exact text before you copy it. Commands are read-only suggestions; review them before running anything.

# Patch Next advisory brief: CVE-2026-46517

Advisory: lmdeploy: Hardcoded trust_remote_code=True is an implicit unsafe remote-code load path with no user opt-out
IDs: CVE-2026-46517, GHSA-9xq9-36w5-q796
Record: https://patchnext.com/advisories/cve-2026-46517 (revision 2, source checked 26 Oct 2026, 13:50 UTC)
Inventory: none attached. This brief comes from a public page and does not say whether any deployment is affected.
Severity: High (CVSS 7.8)
Exploitation: no confirmed exploitation recorded. Patch Next confirms exploitation only from CISA KEV.
Vendor response: Vendor fix available; fixed versions by package: lmdeploy 0.13.0. A vendor fix does not mean a deployment is fixed.

## Affected components
- PyPI lmdeploy: affected <= 0.12.3; fixed in 0.13.0

## Suggested inspection (read-only)
- `python -m pip show lmdeploy`: 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 lmdeploy.
- 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-9xq9-36w5-q796 (OSV record GHSA-9xq9-36w5-q796 lists affected ranges: PyPI lmdeploy >=0 <0.13.0 (fixed))
- Verified: https://github.com/advisories/GHSA-9xq9-36w5-q796 (GitHub-reviewed advisory GHSA-9xq9-36w5-q796 lists affected ranges: PyPI lmdeploy >=0 <=0.12.3)

Commands are suggestions: review each one before running it.