Vulnerabilities
All
My stack
Known exploited
Public exploit
Critical (9+)
Likely exploited (EPSS ≥ 50%)
Changed, 24 h
New, 24 h
Sort:
risk
modified
published
CVSS
EPSS
| CVE | CVSS | EPSS | Vendor, product | Description | Modified |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CVE-2025-68664exploit ×5 | 8.2 high | 43.0% | langchain, langchain_core | LangChain is a framework for building agents and LLM-powered applications. Prior to versions 0.3.81 and 1.2.5, a serialization injection vulnerability exists in LangChain's dumps() and dumpd() functions. The functions do not escape dictionaries with 'lc' keys when serializing free-form dictionaries. The 'lc' key is used internally by LangChain to mark serialized objects. When user-controlled data contains this key structure, it is treated as a legitimate LangChain object during deserialization rather than plain user data. This issue has been patched in versions 0.3.81 and 1.2.5. | 19 Oct |
| CVE-2025-68665 | 9.1 critical | 1.0% | langchain, langchain.js, langchain\/core | LangChain is a framework for building LLM-powered applications. Prior to @langchain/core versions 0.3.80 and 1.1.8, and prior to langchain versions 0.3.37 and 1.2.3, a serialization injection vulnerability exists in LangChain JS's toJSON() method (and subsequently when string-ifying objects using JSON.stringify(). The method did not escape objects with 'lc' keys when serializing free-form data in kwargs. The 'lc' key is used internally by LangChain to mark serialized objects. When user-controlled data contains this key structure, it is treated as a legitimate LangChain object during deserialization rather than plain user data. This issue has been patched in @langchain/core versions 0.3.80 and 1.1.8, and langchain versions 0.3.37 and 1.2.3 | 19 Oct |
| CVE-2026-40087 | 5.3 medium | 0.00% | langchain, langchain_core | LangChain is a framework for building agents and LLM-powered applications. Prior to 0.3.84 and 1.2.28, LangChain's f-string prompt-template validation was incomplete in two respects. First, some prompt template classes accepted f-string templates and formatted them without enforcing the same attribute-access validation as PromptTemplate. In particular, DictPromptTemplate and ImagePromptTemplate could accept templates containing attribute access or indexing expressions and subsequently evaluate those expressions during formatting. Second, f-string validation based on parsed top-level field names did not reject nested replacement fields inside format specifiers. In this pattern, the nested replacement field appears in the format specifier rather than in the top-level field name. As a result, earlier validation based on parsed field names did not reject the template even though Python formatting would still attempt to resolve the nested expression at runtime. This vulnerability is fixed in 0.3.84 and 1.2.28. | Sun 25 Oct |
3 of 3
Download these 3 as CSV · subscribe to this list.
EPSS scores: 2026-10-28. NVD cursor: 2026-10-29 00:22. The News page shows only notable CVEs (KEV, your stack, new criticals, EPSS over 50%, or active exploitation per SSVC); this table has all of them.