How severe is GHSA-2g59-m95p-pgfq?

GHSA-2g59-m95p-pgfq has a CVSS score of 7.7/10, rated HIGH. Immediate patching is strongly recommended.

Which packages are affected by GHSA-2g59-m95p-pgfq?

GHSA-2g59-m95p-pgfq affects the following packages: chainlit (PyPI). Ecosystems affected: PyPI.

How do I fix GHSA-2g59-m95p-pgfq?

Update chainlit to 2.9.4 or later, then make sure no transitive (indirect) dependency still pins the vulnerable range — O3 confirms GHSA-2g59-m95p-pgfq is resolved across your whole dependency graph.

How do I detect GHSA-2g59-m95p-pgfq in my PyPI dependencies?

Scan your dependency tree (package-lock.json, pnpm-lock.yaml, requirements.txt, go.sum, etc.) for chainlit. O3's reachability analysis confirms whether the vulnerable code path is actually invoked in your application, so you act on real exposure instead of every transitive match.

How do I mitigate GHSA-2g59-m95p-pgfq if there is no patch (or I can't update yet)?

If you can't upgrade right away: gate or disable the affected feature, validate untrusted input at the boundary, and avoid passing attacker-controlled data into the vulnerable path. O3's runtime protection blocks exploitation in production as an interim safeguard until the upgrade lands.

How does O3 Security protect against GHSA-2g59-m95p-pgfq?

O3 pinpoints whether GHSA-2g59-m95p-pgfq is reachable in your code and exactly where to fix it, then blocks exploitation in production at runtime until the patched version is deployed.

Is GHSA-2g59-m95p-pgfq actively exploited in the wild?

No public exploit code has been indexed for GHSA-2g59-m95p-pgfq yet. This does not mean the vulnerability cannot be exploited — absence of public exploits does not imply safety. Apply the recommended fix and use O3 Security to monitor your exposure.

What is the EPSS score for GHSA-2g59-m95p-pgfq?

GHSA-2g59-m95p-pgfq has an EPSS (Exploit Prediction Scoring System) score of 4.4%, placing it in the 90th percentile of all CVEs. EPSS is maintained by FIRST.org and estimates the probability that a vulnerability will be exploited in the wild within the next 30 days. This score indicates relatively lower exploitation probability, though the CVSS severity should still guide your patching priority.

What type of vulnerability is GHSA-2g59-m95p-pgfq?

GHSA-2g59-m95p-pgfq is classified as Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) (CWE-918). This weakness type describe the underlying flaw category, which helps determine the potential impact and the right class of mitigation. This is a high-impact weakness class that often enables remote code execution or data exposure.

When was GHSA-2g59-m95p-pgfq published, and has it been updated?

GHSA-2g59-m95p-pgfq was published on January 20, 2026 and was last updated on February 3, 2026. Advisory data evolves as severity scores, affected ranges, and exploit intelligence are revised — always check the latest version of the advisory before acting.

GHSA-2g59-m95p-pgfq: chainlit Server-Side Request Forgery (High…

EPSS Exploitation Probability

via FIRST.org ↗

4.4%probability of exploitation in next 30 days

Lower Risk90th percentile+4.39%

EPSS (Exploit Prediction Scoring System) is a daily probability model maintained by FIRST.org. It estimates the likelihood a CVE will be exploited in production environments within the next 30 days, derived from real-world threat intelligence signals.

Blast Radius

1 pkg affected

🐍chainlit

Real-time download stats are indexed for npm and PyPI packages. This vulnerability affects PyPI packages — download data is not available via public APIs for these ecosystems.

Description

Chainlit versions prior to 2.9.4 contain a server-side request forgery (SSRF) vulnerability in the /project/element update flow when configured with the SQLAlchemy data layer backend. An authenticated client can provide a user-controlled url value in an Element, which is fetched by the SQLAlchemy element creation logic using an outbound HTTP GET request. This allows an attacker to make arbitrary HTTP requests from the Chainlit server to internal network services or cloud metadata endpoints and store the retrieved responses via the configured storage provider.

Affected Packages

1 total 1 fixed

Ecosystem	Package	Vulnerable range	Fix
🐍PyPI	`chainlit`	all versions	2.9.4

Detection & mitigation playbook

Open-source dependency

Detect
Scan your dependency tree (package-lock.json, pnpm-lock.yaml, requirements.txt, go.sum, etc.) for chainlit. O3's reachability analysis confirms whether the vulnerable code path is actually invoked in your application, so you act on real exposure instead of every transitive match.
Fix
Update chainlit to 2.9.4 or later, then make sure no transitive (indirect) dependency still pins the vulnerable range — O3 confirms GHSA-2g59-m95p-pgfq is resolved across your whole dependency graph.
Workarounds
If you can't upgrade right away: gate or disable the affected feature, validate untrusted input at the boundary, and avoid passing attacker-controlled data into the vulnerable path. O3's runtime protection blocks exploitation in production as an interim safeguard until the upgrade lands.
How O3 protects you
O3 pinpoints whether GHSA-2g59-m95p-pgfq is reachable in your code and exactly where to fix it, then blocks exploitation in production at runtime until the patched version is deployed.

Tailored to GHSA-2g59-m95p-pgfq. Runtime protection reduces exposure until a permanent patch is applied and verified — it complements patching, it doesn't replace it.

Frequently Asked Questions

Chainlit versions prior to 2.9.4 contain a server-side request forgery (SSRF) vulnerability in the /project/element update flow when configured with the SQLAlchemy data layer backend. An authenticated client can provide a user-controlled url value in an Element, which is fetched by the SQLAlchemy element creation logic using an outbound HTTP GET request. This allows an attacker to make arbitrary HTTP requests from the Chainlit server to internal network services or cloud metadata endpoints and store the retrieved responses via the configured storage provider.

O3 Security · Impact-Aware SCA

Is GHSA-2g59-m95p-pgfq in your dependencies?

O3 detects GHSA-2g59-m95p-pgfq across PyPI dependencies and uses function-level reachability to confirm whether the vulnerable code path is actually reachable — not just present. No false positives.

Scan my dependencies How O3 SCA works

GHSA-2g59-m95p-pgfq