CVE-2026-6991
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 · uneditedA vulnerability was determined in colinhacks Zod up to 4.3.6. The impacted element is an unknown function of the file packages/zod/src/v4/core/regexes.ts of the component CUID Data Type Handler. Executing a manipulation can lead to sql injection. The attack can be launched remotely. The exploit has been publicly disclosed and may be utilized. The vendor was contacted early about this disclosure but did not respond in any way.
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 · low confidenceSQL injection vulnerability in Zod's CUID data type validation handler (regexes.ts), allowing remote attackers to inject malicious SQL through CUID input validation in applications using Zod schemas.
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
- Low
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- Low
- Integrity
- Low
- Availability
- Low
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L
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 Zod dependency in your projectCheck your package.json file for the 'zod' dependency and note the installed version. Run 'npm list zod' or 'yarn list zod' to see the exact version.Affected if Zod is listed as a dependency in your project
-
Locate CUID validation usage in your codebaseSearch your codebase for usages of zod's CUID type, such as 'z.cuid()' or 'z.cuid2()', particularly in schema definitions that handle user input.Affected if Your application uses Zod schemas with CUID validation for fields that accept user input
-
Trace CUID input to database operationsReview data flow from CUID fields in your Zod schemas to any database queries. Look for patterns where the CUID value is interpolated directly into SQL queries without parameterization.Affected if CUID values from Zod validation are used in raw SQL queries without proper parameterization
-
Inspect the regexes.ts file in your Zod installationLocate the Zod package in node_modules and examine the regexes.ts file. Check if the CUID validation logic processes input without sanitization before passing to database operations.Affected if The CUID validation handler does not sanitize input before database use
Your environment is affected if you use Zod with CUID validation on user input that flows to raw SQL queries without parameterized binding.
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 dataSince vendor did not respond, implement input sanitization before CUID fields, consider upgrading to newer Zod version if available, or implement additional validation layers between user input and database queries.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing4.0 h
- Review / QA2.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $5,120.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-6991 — 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-2026-6991 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