CVE-2026-54037
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 · uneditedLibreChat is an enhanced ChatGPT clone that supports multiple AI providers. Prior to 0.8.4-rc1, the fix for CVE-2025-7105 added forkIpLimiter and forkUserLimiter rate limiters to POST /api/convos/fork to prevent rapid-fire conversation duplication. However, the POST /api/convos/duplicate endpoint — which is in the same file and performs the exact same expensive database operations — was not given any rate limiter. An authenticated user can bypass the CVE-2025-7105 fix by using /duplicate instead of /fork to exhaust server resources. This vulnerability is fixed in 0.8.4-rc1.
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 allocates memory, connections, or handles in response to a request without enforcing any cap, so a modest amount of malicious traffic exhausts the resource and denies service to everyone else. The fix is enforcing quotas, limits, and timeouts on what any single request or client can consume.
General guidance for the resource allocation without limits 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<= 0.8.3CVSS 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
- Low
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- None
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/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 · scoped0.8.4-rc1
- 1. Identify current Librechat installation and verify version is <= 0.8.3
- 2. Create a full backup of the Librechat installation including database and configuration files
- 3. Upgrade Librechat to version 0.8.4-rc1 or later by following the project's upgrade instructions (typically: npm install or pulling latest Docker image)
- 4. Verify the upgrade was successful and the new version is running
- 5. Confirm the rate limiter has been applied to the POST /api/convos/duplicate endpoint
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-2026-54037 — 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-2026-54037 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