How severe is GHSA-cj8g-prcm-mfg5?

No CVSS score has been assigned to GHSA-cj8g-prcm-mfg5 yet. Review the advisory details and affected package list to assess your exposure.

Which packages are affected by GHSA-cj8g-prcm-mfg5?

GHSA-cj8g-prcm-mfg5 affects the following packages: @hulumi/baseline (npm). Ecosystems affected: npm.

How do I fix GHSA-cj8g-prcm-mfg5?

Update @hulumi/baseline to 1.4.0 or later, then make sure no transitive (indirect) dependency still pins the vulnerable range — O3 confirms GHSA-cj8g-prcm-mfg5 is resolved across your whole dependency graph.

How do I detect GHSA-cj8g-prcm-mfg5 in my npm dependencies?

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

How do I mitigate GHSA-cj8g-prcm-mfg5 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.

Is GHSA-cj8g-prcm-mfg5 actively exploited in the wild?

No public exploit code has been indexed for GHSA-cj8g-prcm-mfg5 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-cj8g-prcm-mfg5?

GHSA-cj8g-prcm-mfg5 has an EPSS (Exploit Prediction Scoring System) score of 0.5%, placing it in the 38th 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-cj8g-prcm-mfg5?

GHSA-cj8g-prcm-mfg5 is classified as CWE-693 (CWE-693). This weakness type describe the underlying flaw category, which helps determine the potential impact and the right class of mitigation.

When was GHSA-cj8g-prcm-mfg5 published, and has it been updated?

GHSA-cj8g-prcm-mfg5 was published on June 10, 2026 and was last updated on September 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.

📦 npm

Not in CISA KEV

@hulumi/baseline: AccountFoundation reuse paths silently downgrade GuardDuty / Security Hub postureGHSA-cj8g-prcm-mfg5

Fix: kerberosmansour/hulumi#178

GHSA-cj8g-prcm-mfg5 is a CWE-693 vulnerability in @hulumi/baseline. A fix is available for @hulumi/baseline — see the affected versions and patch details below.

Also known asCVE-2026-48037

Published

Jun 10, 2026

Updated

Sep 10, 2026

Affected

1 pkg

Patched

1 / 1

Exploits

None indexed

Exploitation data as of Oct 23, 2026 · OSV.dev, NVD, FIRST.org (EPSS)

Exploitation Status

No confirmed exploitation observed yet

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-cj8g-prcm-mfg5.

EPSS Exploitation Probability

via FIRST.org ↗

0.5%probability of exploitation in next 30 days

Lower Risk0.00%

Lower risk than most CVEs38th percentile — riskier than 38% of all scored CVEsHighest risk

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

Real-World Exposure

1 pkg affected

How broadly this vulnerability is actually deployed: weekly install volume shows current usage, and reverse-dependency count shows how many other packages break if it stays unpatched.

1other npm packages depend on this — each one inherits the vulnerability until it's patched upstream

@hulumi/baselinenpm

41downloads / week

Description

Affected: @hulumi/baseline < 1.4.0 — Fixed in: 1.4.0 — Severity: Medium — CWE-693 (Protection Mechanism Failure)

Summary

AccountFoundation can either create AWS detective services (GuardDuty for threat detection, Security Hub for compliance dashboards) or reuse pre-existing ones via opt-in flags. The reuse paths just imported the existing resources and reported success — they never checked whether the existing services were actually doing their job.

GuardDuty reuse. If the existing detector was suspended, or set to the slower 6-hour publishing cadence instead of the baseline 15-minute one, or otherwise misconfigured — Hulumi never noticed. The deployment succeeded with a misleadingly-positive guardDutyDetectorId output as if the baseline were active.
Security Hub reuse. Although the account import was read-only, Hulumi unconditionally created the CIS / NIST StandardsSubscription resources with default delete behaviour. Pulumi then treated those subscriptions as its own — a later pulumi destroy of the stack would call BatchDisableStandards, unsubscribing the account from CIS / NIST compliance monitoring even on accounts that had those subscriptions before Hulumi ever ran.

Impact

Consumers using AccountFoundation's reuse mode could:

ship deployments that appeared to enable a detective baseline but actually weren't (case 1), or
accidentally turn off CIS / NIST compliance monitoring on an existing account just by destroying a Hulumi stack (case 2 — no malicious intent needed; a normal stack teardown was enough).

Patches

Upgrade to @hulumi/[email protected].

GuardDuty reuse now asserts the imported detector is ENABLED with findingPublishingFrequency: FIFTEEN_MINUTES. Wrong posture fails the deploy at preview time.
Security Hub reuse creates the CIS / NIST StandardsSubscription resources with retainOnDelete: true, so destroying a reused stack no longer unsubscribes the account.

Net-new (non-reuse) deployments are unchanged.

Workarounds

Don't reuse pre-existing detective services with AccountFoundation before upgrading. If reuse is unavoidable, manually verify detector posture out-of-band.

Resources

PR #178 (Cluster G); regression tests in packages/baseline/tests/guardduty-reuse-posture.test.ts and packages/baseline/tests/securityhub-reuse-retain.test.ts.

Affected Packages

1 total 1 fixed

Ecosystem	Package	Vulnerable range	Fix
📦npm	`@hulumi/baseline`	all versions	1.4.0`npm install @hulumi/baseline@1.4.0`

Detection & mitigation playbook

Open-source dependency

Detect
Scan your dependency tree (package-lock.json, pnpm-lock.yaml, requirements.txt, go.sum, etc.) for @hulumi/baseline, including transitive dependencies — a direct dependency you never call can still pull in a vulnerable version.
Fix
Update @hulumi/baseline to 1.4.0 or later, then make sure no transitive (indirect) dependency still pins the vulnerable range — O3 confirms GHSA-cj8g-prcm-mfg5 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.

Frequently Asked Questions

**Affected:** `@hulumi/baseline` `< 1.4.0` — **Fixed in:** `1.4.0` — **Severity:** Medium — **CWE-693 (Protection Mechanism Failure)** #### Summary `AccountFoundation` can either create AWS detective services (GuardDuty for threat detection, Security Hub for compliance dashboards) or reuse pre-existing ones via opt-in flags. The reuse paths just imported the existing resources and reported success — they never checked whether the existing services were actually doing their job. 1. **GuardDuty reuse.** If the existing detector was suspended, or set to the slower 6-hour publishing cadence ins

O3 Security · Impact-Aware SCA

Is GHSA-cj8g-prcm-mfg5 in your dependencies?

Find it across npm, including transitive dependencies.

Scan my dependencies How O3 SCA works