Your RSA-2048 keys break in 2030. Find every one of them before attackers do.
🐍
🐍 PyPI
Not in CISA KEV
HIGH severity

GHSA-7xjm-g8f4-rp26 giskard-checks

HIGH

GHSA-7xjm-g8f4-rp26 is a high-severity (CVSS 7.8) CWE-1336 vulnerability in giskard-checks. A fix is available for giskard-checks — see the affected versions and patch details below.

Giskard has Unsandboxed Jinja2 Template Rendering in ConformityCheck

Also known asCVE-2026-40320PYSEC-2026-2488
Published
Apr 14, 2026
Updated
Jul 13, 2026
Affected
1 pkg
Patched
1 / 1
Exploits
None indexed
Exploitation data as of Sep 21, 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-7xjm-g8f4-rp26.

EPSS Exploitation Probability

via FIRST.org ↗
0.1%probability of exploitation in next 30 days
Lower Risk0.00%
Lower risk than most CVEs4th percentile — riskier than 4% of all scored CVEsHighest risk

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.

How urgent is this, really

GHSA-7xjm-g8f4-rp26 plotted by exploitation likelihood (EPSS) against impact (CVSS). The shaded corner — EPSS 50%+ and CVSS 7.0+ — is where this CVE doesn't sit, though severity or exploitability alone can still warrant action.

Where this sits among everything scored

Of 377,636 CVEs with a current EPSS score, this one falls in the < 10% band (highlighted). Real counts from FIRST.org, not a sample — log-scaled since the landscape is heavily right-skewed.

Real-World Exposure

1 pkg affected
🐍giskard-checks

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

Summary

The ConformityCheck class in giskard-checks rendered the rule parameter through Jinja2's default Template() constructor. Because the rule string is silently interpreted as a Jinja2 template, a developer may not realize that template expressions embedded in rule definitions are evaluated at runtime. In a scenario where check definitions are loaded from an untrusted source (e.g. a shared project file or externally contributed configuration), this could lead to arbitrary code execution.

giskard-checks is a local developer testing library with no network-facing service. Check definitions, including the rule parameter, are provided in application code or project configuration files and executed locally. Exploitation requires write access to a check definition and subsequent execution of the test suite by a developer.

However, the implicit template evaluation of the rule parameter is not obvious from the API surface. This hidden behavior increases the likelihood of a developer inadvertently passing untrusted input to it when integrating the library into a larger system.

Affected Component

conformity.py, line 59:

from jinja2 import Template
...
formatted_rule = Template(self.rule).render(trace=trace)

Affected Versions

giskard-checks < 1.0.2b1

Patched Version

giskard-checks >= 1.0.2b1 (template parsing removed from rule evaluation entirely)

Remediation

Upgrade to giskard-checks >= 1.0.2b1. The template rendering has been removed from rule evaluation.

Credit

Giskard-AI thanks @dhabaleshwar for identifying the unsandboxed template usage.

Affected Packages

1 total 1 fixed
EcosystemPackageVulnerable rangeFix
🐍PyPIgiskard-checksall versions1.0.2b1pip install --upgrade 'giskard-checks==1.0.2b1'

Detection & mitigation playbook

Open-source dependency
  1. Detect

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

  2. Fix

    Update giskard-checks to 1.0.2b1 or later, then make sure no transitive (indirect) dependency still pins the vulnerable range — O3 confirms GHSA-7xjm-g8f4-rp26 is resolved across your whole dependency graph.

  3. 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.

  4. How O3 protects you

    O3 Security's impact-aware SCA analyses which vulnerable code paths your application actually calls, so a match like GHSA-7xjm-g8f4-rp26 can be triaged on real exposure rather than presence alone.

Tailored to GHSA-7xjm-g8f4-rp26. Runtime protection reduces exposure until a permanent patch is applied and verified — it complements patching, it doesn't replace it.

Frequently Asked Questions

## Summary The `ConformityCheck` class in `giskard-checks` rendered the `rule` parameter through Jinja2's default `Template()` constructor. Because the `rule` string is silently interpreted as a Jinja2 template, a developer may not realize that template expressions embedded in rule definitions are evaluated at runtime. In a scenario where check definitions are loaded from an untrusted source (e.g. a shared project file or externally contributed configuration), this could lead to arbitrary code execution. `giskard-checks` is a local developer testing library with no network-facing service. C
O3 Security · Impact-Aware SCA

Is GHSA-7xjm-g8f4-rp26 in your dependencies?

O3 Security finds GHSA-7xjm-g8f4-rp26 across PyPI dependencies, including transitive ones, and its impact-aware SCA ranks findings by whether your code actually calls the vulnerable path.

GHSA-7xjm-g8f4-rp26: RCE (High 7.8) | O3 Security