How severe is GHSA-3hch-x692-6qj3?

GHSA-3hch-x692-6qj3 has a CVSS score of 8.8/10, rated HIGH. Immediate patching is strongly recommended.

Which packages are affected by GHSA-3hch-x692-6qj3?

GHSA-3hch-x692-6qj3 affects the following packages: gpustack (PyPI). Ecosystems affected: PyPI.

How do I fix GHSA-3hch-x692-6qj3?

Update gpustack to 2.2.2 or later, then make sure no transitive (indirect) dependency still pins the vulnerable range — O3 confirms GHSA-3hch-x692-6qj3 is resolved across your whole dependency graph.

How do I detect GHSA-3hch-x692-6qj3 in my PyPI dependencies?

Scan your dependency tree (package-lock.json, pnpm-lock.yaml, requirements.txt, go.sum, etc.) for gpustack, including transitive dependencies — a direct dependency you never call can still pull in a vulnerable version.

How do I mitigate GHSA-3hch-x692-6qj3 if there is no patch (or I can't update yet)?

Put an independent control in front of the weakness: restrict the affected endpoint or interface to trusted networks, require an additional authentication factor or proxy-level check, and invalidate existing sessions and credentials in case the flaw has already been used.

Is GHSA-3hch-x692-6qj3 actively exploited in the wild?

No public exploit code has been indexed for GHSA-3hch-x692-6qj3 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-3hch-x692-6qj3?

GHSA-3hch-x692-6qj3 has an EPSS (Exploit Prediction Scoring System) score of 0.4%, placing it in the 30th 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-3hch-x692-6qj3?

GHSA-3hch-x692-6qj3 is classified as CWE-639 (CWE-639), CWE-862 (CWE-862). These weakness types describe the underlying flaw category, which helps determine the potential impact and the right class of mitigation.

When was GHSA-3hch-x692-6qj3 published, and has it been updated?

GHSA-3hch-x692-6qj3 was published on November 10, 2026 and was last updated on November 10, 2026. Advisory data evolves as severity scores, affected ranges, and exploit intelligence are revised — always check the latest version of the advisory before acting.

🐍

🐍 PyPI

Not in CISA KEV

HIGH severity

GPUStack: Missing authorization on several cluster and resource endpoints allows cross-user access and cluster takeoverGHSA-3hch-x692-6qj3

HIGHFix: gpustack/gpustack#5911

GHSA-3hch-x692-6qj3 is a high-severity (CVSS 8.8) CWE-639 vulnerability in gpustack. A fix is available for gpustack — see the affected versions and patch details below.

Also known asCVE-2026-103002

Published

Nov 10, 2026

Updated

Nov 10, 2026

Affected

1 pkg

Patched

1 / 1

Exploits

None indexed

Exploitation data as of Nov 10, 2026 · OSV.dev, NVD, FIRST.org (EPSS)

Exploitation Status

No confirmed exploitation observed yet

A successful exploit gives an attacker total control of the affected component, not partial access.
CISA’s own triage has not observed active exploitation or public proof-of-concept code for this CVE as of its last assessment.

Exploitation and automatability from CISA’s SSVC triage for GHSA-3hch-x692-6qj3.

EPSS Exploitation Probability

via FIRST.org ↗

0.4%probability of exploitation in next 30 days

Lower Risk0.00%

Lower risk than most CVEs30th percentile — riskier than 30% of all scored CVEsHighest risk

Probability of exploitation in the next 30 days, from FIRST.org EPSS.

How urgent is this, really

Where this sits among everything scored

Real-World Exposure

1 pkg affected

🐍gpustack

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

Impact

An authenticated non-administrative user could access a Kubernetes cluster they are not authorized to access through GPUStack's Kubernetes API proxy.

The cluster_apiserver_proxy handler did not perform a resource-level authorization check before forwarding requests to the selected cluster. Requests were forwarded through a worker using its Kubernetes ServiceAccount credentials.

Depending on the permissions granted to that ServiceAccount, an attacker could read sensitive Kubernetes resources, create or modify workloads, or delete resources and disrupt services. Creating attacker-controlled workloads could result in code execution in the target cluster.

Exploitation requires a Kubernetes-provider cluster with a reachable worker. The operations available to the attacker are limited by the worker's ServiceAccount permissions.

Patches

Fixed in gpustack v2.2.2.

Workarounds

Restrict access to the GPUStack instance to trusted administrator accounts until upgrading.

Affected Packages

1 total 1 fixed

Ecosystem	Package	Vulnerable range	Fix
🐍PyPI	`gpustack`	≥ 2.2.0&&< 2.2.2	2.2.2`pip install --upgrade 'gpustack==2.2.2'`

Detection & mitigation playbook

Open-source dependency

Detect
Scan your dependency tree (package-lock.json, pnpm-lock.yaml, requirements.txt, go.sum, etc.) for gpustack, including transitive dependencies — a direct dependency you never call can still pull in a vulnerable version.
Fix
Update gpustack to 2.2.2 or later, then make sure no transitive (indirect) dependency still pins the vulnerable range — O3 confirms GHSA-3hch-x692-6qj3 is resolved across your whole dependency graph.
Workarounds
Put an independent control in front of the weakness: restrict the affected endpoint or interface to trusted networks, require an additional authentication factor or proxy-level check, and invalidate existing sessions and credentials in case the flaw has already been used.

Fixing This On Your OS

If you run this on a Linux distribution, patch through your package manager against the distro's own security advisory below — it tracks the exact backported fix for your release, which can ship on a different timeline (and sometimes a different severity) than the upstream project.

Red HatImportant

This vulnerability is rated as Important rather than Critical because exploitation requires valid user authentication and a reachable worker node, though successful attacks permit complete cluster workload manipulation and code execution. GPUStack is not included or supported in Red Hat Enterprise Linux or Red Hat…

Workaround published by Red Hat

Mitigation for this issue is either not available or the currently available options do not meet the Red Hat Product Security criteria comprising ease of use and deployment, applicability to widespread installation base, or stability. --- CME Mitigation Guidance (2026-11-06) --- Disclaimer: The following mitigation solutions are provided as a courtesy, pending the application of an official patch. This content was generated utilizing AI tools in conjunction with data from https://cmetaxonomy.org. Customers are advised to independently evaluate and test these temporary mitigations within their own infrastructure. The highest-value action is to enforce tenant scoping and resource-level…

Source: Red Hat security advisory for GHSA-3hch-x692-6qj3 (CC BY 4.0)

Frequently Asked Questions

### Impact An authenticated non-administrative user could access a Kubernetes cluster they are not authorized to access through GPUStack's Kubernetes API proxy. The `cluster_apiserver_proxy` handler did not perform a resource-level authorization check before forwarding requests to the selected cluster. Requests were forwarded through a worker using its Kubernetes ServiceAccount credentials. Depending on the permissions granted to that ServiceAccount, an attacker could read sensitive Kubernetes resources, create or modify workloads, or delete resources and disrupt services. Creating attacker