How severe is GHSA-c7ph-f7jm-xv4w?

No CVSS score has been assigned to GHSA-c7ph-f7jm-xv4w yet. Review the advisory details and affected package list to assess your exposure.

Which packages are affected by GHSA-c7ph-f7jm-xv4w?

GHSA-c7ph-f7jm-xv4w affects the following packages: pgp (crates.io). Ecosystems affected: crates.io.

How do I fix GHSA-c7ph-f7jm-xv4w?

Update pgp to 0.19.0 or later, then make sure no transitive (indirect) dependency still pins the vulnerable range — O3 confirms GHSA-c7ph-f7jm-xv4w is resolved across your whole dependency graph.

How do I detect GHSA-c7ph-f7jm-xv4w in my crates.io dependencies?

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

How do I mitigate GHSA-c7ph-f7jm-xv4w 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-c7ph-f7jm-xv4w?

O3 Security's impact-aware SCA analyses which vulnerable code paths your application actually calls, so a match like GHSA-c7ph-f7jm-xv4w can be triaged on real exposure rather than presence alone.

Is GHSA-c7ph-f7jm-xv4w actively exploited in the wild?

No public exploit code has been indexed for GHSA-c7ph-f7jm-xv4w 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.

When was GHSA-c7ph-f7jm-xv4w published, and has it been updated?

GHSA-c7ph-f7jm-xv4w was published on February 13, 2026 and was last updated on February 22, 2026. Advisory data evolves as severity scores, affected ranges, and exploit intelligence are revised — always check the latest version of the advisory before acting.

🦀 crates.io

Not in CISA KEV

GHSA-c7ph-f7jm-xv4w — pgp

GHSA-c7ph-f7jm-xv4w is a security vulnerability in pgp. A fix is available for pgp — see the affected versions and patch details below.

rPGP's integrity protection of encrypted data was not always checked

Published

Feb 13, 2026

Updated

Feb 22, 2026

Affected

1 pkg

Patched

1 / 1

Exploits

None indexed

Exploitation data as of Feb 22, 2026 · OSV.dev, FIRST.org (EPSS)

Real-World Exposure

1 pkg affected

🦀pgp

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

Description

Summary

For some messages, rPGP returned incorrectly decrypted data without signaling that integrity protection was invalid.

Details

When decrypting SEIPD (Symmetrically Encrypted and Integrity Protected Data Packet), rPGP previously did not under all circumstances report the absence of valid integrity protection to callers of the library.

Impact

While the resulting invalid decryption output is not attacker controlled, its contents may be a security concern if an attacker can gain access to it.

Attribution

Discovered internally in the course of rPGP development work.

Affected Packages

1 total 1 fixed

Ecosystem	Package	Vulnerable range	Fix
🦀crates.io	`pgp`	≥ 0.16.0-alpha.0&&< 0.19.0	0.19.0`cargo update -p pgp --precise 0.19.0`

Detection & mitigation playbook

Open-source dependency

Detect
Scan your dependency tree (package-lock.json, pnpm-lock.yaml, requirements.txt, go.sum, etc.) for pgp, including transitive dependencies — a direct dependency you never call can still pull in a vulnerable version.
Fix
Update pgp to 0.19.0 or later, then make sure no transitive (indirect) dependency still pins the vulnerable range — O3 confirms GHSA-c7ph-f7jm-xv4w 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 Security's impact-aware SCA analyses which vulnerable code paths your application actually calls, so a match like GHSA-c7ph-f7jm-xv4w can be triaged on real exposure rather than presence alone.

Tailored to GHSA-c7ph-f7jm-xv4w. Runtime protection reduces exposure until a permanent patch is applied and verified — it complements patching, it doesn't replace it.

Frequently Asked Questions

### Summary For some messages, rPGP returned incorrectly decrypted data without signaling that integrity protection was invalid. ### Details When decrypting SEIPD (Symmetrically Encrypted and Integrity Protected Data Packet), rPGP previously did not under all circumstances report the absence of valid integrity protection to callers of the library. ### Impact While the resulting invalid decryption output is not attacker controlled, its contents may be a security concern if an attacker can gain access to it. ### Attribution Discovered internally in the course of rPGP development work.

O3 Security · Impact-Aware SCA

Is GHSA-c7ph-f7jm-xv4w in your dependencies?

O3 Security finds GHSA-c7ph-f7jm-xv4w across crates.io dependencies, including transitive ones, and its impact-aware SCA ranks findings by whether your code actually calls the vulnerable path.

Scan my dependencies How O3 SCA works