CVE-2026-30350
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 · uneditedAn issue in the /store/items/search endpoint of Agent Protocol server commit e9a89f allows attackers to cause a Denial of Service (DoS) via a crafted POST request.
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 analysis · moderate confidenceA denial of service vulnerability exists in the /store/items/search endpoint of Agent Protocol server (commit e9a89f). Attackers can send crafted POST requests to trigger resource exhaustion, causing the service to become unavailable. The search endpoint likely lacks proper input validation, resource limits, or rate limiting controls.
Verify against the referenced sources before acting — the references below are authoritative for this CVE, this summary is not.
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
- Low
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- None
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
Am I affected? How to checkSteps we derive from the advisory and the affected-version data, so you can decide whether this CVE reaches your setup. They are a guide, not a scan — your own configuration is the authority.
dbcve checksWork through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.
-
Identify if Agent Protocol server is runningCheck running processes or container images for the Agent Protocol server (agent-protocol). Look for the service name or process associated with the agent-protocol project.Affected if The server is running and exposing the /store/items/search endpoint
-
Confirm the /store/items/search endpoint existsReview your API documentation, route definitions, or endpoint configurations to verify the /store/items/search endpoint is defined and accessible.Affected if The endpoint is exposed and accepts POST requests
-
Check the installed version or commitQuery the server for its version information, or inspect the source code/repository to determine if the commit hash matches e9a89f or is prior to it.Affected if The installed version is at commit e9a89f or older with the vulnerable code path
-
Verify if rate limiting is configured on the search endpointInspect your web server, API gateway, or application configuration for rate limiting rules applied to the /store/items/search endpoint.Affected if No rate limiting is configured or enforced on the endpoint
-
Check for input validation on search parametersReview the server configuration or code for any input validation, bounds checking, or query length limits applied to the search endpoint parameters.Affected if No input validation or parameter limits are configured for the endpoint
A user is affected if they are running an Agent Protocol server at or before commit e9a89f with the /store/items/search endpoint exposed and no rate limiting or input validation configured on that endpoint.
Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.
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.
From vendor dataImplement input validation and bounds checking on search parameters, add rate limiting to prevent abuse, and fix the underlying code path that allows the crafted request to consume excessive resources.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing6.0 h
- Review / QA4.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $6,176.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-30350 — 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-2026-30350 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