CVE-2026-31217
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 · uneditedThe _load_model() function in the neural_magic_training.py script of the optimate project in commit a6d302f912b481c94370811af6b11402f51d377f (2024-07-21) allows arbitrary code execution. When a user supplies a directory path via the --model command-line argument, the function reads a module.py file from that directory and executes its contents directly using Python's exec() function. This design does not validate or sanitize the file's content, allowing an attacker who controls the input directory to execute arbitrary Python code in the context of the process running the script.
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 · high confidenceThe _load_model() function in neural_magic_training.py reads a module.py file from a user-supplied directory path (via --model argument) and executes its contents using Python's exec() function without any validation or sanitization. This allows an attacker who controls the input directory to achieve arbitrary code execution in the context of the running process.
Verify against the referenced sources before acting — the references below are authoritative for this CVE, this summary is not.
Affected products & versions What the vendor confirmedThe version ranges the vendor confirmed as vulnerable. If your version sits inside a range here, treat yourself as exposed until you have upgraded.
NVD · CPE data= 2024-07-21CVSS 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
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/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.
-
Check Nebuly Optimate versionRun 'pip show nebuly-optimate' or check the package installation directory for version 2024-07-21Affected if The installed version is exactly 2024-07-21
-
Locate neural_magic_training.pySearch for the file in the Nebuly Optimate installation directory using 'find /path/to/nebuly -name neural_magic_training.py'Affected if The file exists and contains the _load_model() function using exec()
-
Verify the vulnerable exec() patternInspect the _load_model() function and confirm it uses exec() to execute module.py contents without validationAffected if The code reads module.py from user-supplied path and passes it directly to exec()
-
Check if --model argument is exposedRun 'python -m nebuly_optimate --help' or check CLI argument definitions for --modelAffected if The --model argument is available and accepts a directory path
You are affected if Nebuly Optamate version 2024-07-21 is installed AND the --model argument feature is enabled, allowing arbitrary directory paths to be provided for loading modules.
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 dataReplace the unsafe exec() call with a secure alternative such as importlib.util.spec_from_file_location() with restricted execution, or validate that the module.py contains only allowed/whitelisted code patterns before execution.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing4.0 h
- Review / QA3.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $5,408.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-31217 — 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-2026-31217 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