CVE-2026-27794
Official description Straight from the sourceThe vendor's or NVD's own wording, published unedited. Authoritative, but often terse — it says what broke, rarely what to do.
NVD · uneditedLangGraph Checkpoint defines the base interface for LangGraph checkpointers. Prior to version 4.0.0, a Remote Code Execution vulnerability exists in LangGraph's caching layer when applications enable cache backends that inherit from `BaseCache` and opt nodes into caching via `CachePolicy`. Prior to `langgraph-checkpoint` 4.0.0, `BaseCache` defaults to `JsonPlusSerializer(pickle_fallback=True)`. When msgpack serialization fails, cached values can be deserialized via `pickle.loads(...)`. Caching is not enabled by default. Applications are affected only when the application explicitly enables a cache backend (for example by passing `cache=...` to `StateGraph.compile(...)` or otherwise configuring a `BaseCache` implementation), one or more nodes opt into caching via `CachePolicy`, and the attacker can write to the cache backend (for example a network-accessible Redis instance with weak/no auth, shared cache infrastructure reachable by other tenants/services, or a writable SQLite cache file). An attacker must be able to write attacker-controlled bytes into the cache backend such that the LangGraph process later reads and deserializes them. This typically requires write access to a networked cache (for example a network-accessible Redis instance with weak/no auth or shared cache infrastructure reachable by other tenants/services) or write access to local cache storage (for example a writable SQLite cache file via permissive file permissions or a shared writable volume). Because exploitation requires write access to the cache storage layer, this is a post-compromise / post-access escalation vector. LangGraph Checkpoint 4.0.0 patches the issue.
Technical summary Written by usOur analysis, written from the advisory, the CVSS vector and the affected-version data. It adds context the advisory leaves out, and never invents facts that are not in the source.
dbcve analysisThe application rebuilds objects from attacker-supplied serialized data, and the act of rebuilding can trigger dangerous code paths. In many runtimes this leads straight to remote code execution. The durable fix is to avoid deserializing untrusted input — or to use a strict, type-limited format with integrity checks.
General guidance for the deserialization of untrusted data class — the official description and references above are authoritative for this specific CVE. Want a bespoke review and a reviewed fix? Ask our team →
CVSS breakdown How the score is builtThe industry scoring standard. It rates how the flaw is reached, what it takes to exploit, and what an attacker gains — the score is derived from those, not the other way round.
From the vector- Attack vector
- Network
- Complexity
- High
- Privileges
- High
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:H/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
Remediation Closing itWhat it takes to close this. Where a vendor fix exists we point at it; where none exists we say so plainly, and can build one. Effort estimates are scoped from the advisory, not from your codebase.
dbcve · scopedlanggraph-checkpoint version 4.0.0 or later
- Identify all langgraph-related packages in use (e.g., langgraph, langgraph-checkpoint) by reviewing requirements.txt, pyproject.toml, or environment dependencies
- Upgrade langgraph-checkpoint to version 4.0.0 or later using pip: pip install langgraph-checkpoint>=4.0.0
- If using the langgraph package (which depends on langgraph-checkpoint), ensure it is also updated to a version that pulls in langgraph-checkpoint 4.0.0
- After upgrading, verify that existing StateGraph.compile(...) calls with cache=... parameters function correctly
- Test the application to ensure checkpoint and cache functionality works as expected with the new version
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-27794 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.
References Go to the primary sourcePrimary sources — vendor advisories, patches and trackers. Where our summary and a reference disagree, the reference wins.
Primary sourcesPractitioner notes
ContributedPeer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2026-27794 in production — separate from our analysis above.
The advisory tells you what broke. It rarely tells you what actually worked. If you’ve dealt with this one, that detail is what the next engineer is searching for.
- The version that genuinely resolved it — not the one the vendor claimed
- A config change or rule that shut the vector down
- A gotcha in the upgrade path that cost you an afternoon
No notes yet
Be the first to add a field note for this CVE — a mitigation you’ve verified, a version caveat, or a link to a working fix. Sign in above to contribute.
A place for practitioners to share what actually worked: a mitigation you’ve tested, a configuration change, a version- or environment-specific caveat, or a link to a verified patch. The most useful notes rise to the top as peers upvote them, so the signal stays high.
- Verified mitigations, workarounds, and config changes
- Version or environment caveats, and links to real fixes
- No weaponised exploit code, or anything meant to cause harm
- No spam, self-promotion, credentials, or personal data