Pydantic AiApplication · Pydantic
CVE-2026-48782
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 · uneditedPydantic AI is a Python agent framework for building applications and workflows with Generative AI. In versions 1.56.0 through 1.101.0, 2.0.0b1, and 2.0.0b2, the cloud-metadata blocklist could be bypassed by encoding the metadata IP in an IPv6 transition form that the previous fix, CVE-2026-46678, did not decode, exposing cloud IAM short-term credentials. The previous remediation decoded only IPv4-mapped IPv6, 6to4, and the NAT64 well-known prefix, so the metadata guarantee did not hold for the remaining transition forms: IPv4-compatible IPv6 (::a.b.c.d), the NAT64 RFC 8215 local-use prefix (64:ff9b:1::/48), operator-chosen NAT64 prefixes, and ISATAP. The IPv6 wrapper is then delivered to the underlying IPv4 metadata endpoint. This occurs when an application using Pydantic AI opts a URL into force_download='allow-local' (which disables the default block on private/internal IPs) and runs on a network that actually routes the affected IPv6 transition forms: NAT64-configured networks (IPv6-only or dual-stack-with-NAT64 deployments, including some Kubernetes setups) for the NAT64 variants, or networks with an ISATAP tunnel for ISATAP. A standard dual-stack cloud VM or container does not route these forms and is not affected in practice. The IPv4-compatible and Teredo variants are deprecated and addressed as defense-in-depth. This is an incomplete fix of GHSA-cqp8-fcvh-x7r3 / CVE-2026-46678 (itself a follow-up to CVE-2026-25580). This issue has been fixed in version 2.0.0b3.
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 server can be induced to make requests to a URL an attacker controls, turning it into a proxy into internal networks and cloud metadata services. It's especially dangerous behind a trusted network boundary. The fix is strict allow-listing of destinations and blocking access to internal address ranges.
General guidance for the server-side request forgery (ssrf) class — the official description and references above are authoritative for this specific CVE. Want a bespoke review and a reviewed fix? Ask our team →
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
Pydantic AiApplication
>= 1.56.0, < 1.102.0= 2.0.0CVSS 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
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Changed
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:N/A:N
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 · scoped1.102.0
2.0.0b3
- Upgrade Pydantic AI to version 2.0.0b3 or later using your package manager (e.g., pip install pydantic-ai>=2.0.0b3)
- Verify the upgrade was successful by checking the installed version with `pip show pydantic-ai` or equivalent
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-2026-48782 — 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-2026-48782 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