CVE-2026-27794
LangGraph: BaseCache Deserialization of Untrusted Data may lead to Remote Code Execution
No known exploitation. EPSS puts it in the 60th percentile. A vendor fix is available.
What to do
The vendor has published a fix. Version details are below where the sources state them.
What it is
From the CVE record
LangGraph Checkpoint defines the base interface for LangGraph checkpointers. Prior to version 4.0.0, a Remote Code Execution vulnerability exists in LangGraph's caching layer when applications enable cache backends that inherit from `BaseCache` and opt nodes into caching via `CachePolicy`. Prior to `langgraph-checkpoint` 4.0.0, `BaseCache` defaults to `JsonPlusSerializer(pickle_fallback=True)`. When msgpack serialization fails, cached values can be deserialized via `pickle.loads(...)`. Caching is not enabled by default. Applications are affected only when the application explicitly enables a cache backend (for example by passing `cache=...` to `StateGraph.compile(...)` or otherwise configuring a `BaseCache` implementation), one or more nodes opt into caching via `CachePolicy`, and the attacker can write to the cache backend (for example a network-accessible Redis instance with weak/no auth, shared cache infrastructure reachable by other tenants/services, or a writable SQLite cache file). An attacker must be able to write attacker-controlled bytes into the cache backend such that the LangGraph process later reads and deserializes them. This typically requires write access to a networked cache (for example a network-accessible Redis instance with weak/no auth or shared cache infrastructure reachable by other tenants/services) or write access to local cache storage (for example a writable SQLite cache file via permissive file permissions or a shared writable volume). Because exploitation requires write access to the cache storage layer, this is a post-compromise / post-access escalation vector. LangGraph Checkpoint 4.0.0 patches the issue.
In plain language
No plain-language summary for this CVE yet.
Exploitation
Where each signal puts this CVE on the scale from published to confirmed exploited.
- CISA KEV
Not in the catalog. CISA has not confirmed exploitation.
- Public exploits
No public exploit or proof of concept found in the sources we track.
- EPSS
1.0% chance of exploitation activity in the next 30 days, which ranks it in the 60th percentile of scored CVEs.
Exploit Prediction Scoring System, FIRST.org. A probability, not a confirmation.
Lifecycle
5 events over 2 days, from the signal feeds we watch.
- Patch availablerecord updated
- Publishedweakness classified, att&ck mapped
Affected products
Technical detail
CVSS 3.1 vector
Open in the CVSS calculatorCVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:H/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
Scored 6.6 by NVD.
How it is reached
- Attack Vector NetworkExploitable remotely over the network without any special conditions
- Attack Complexity HighRequires specific conditions like a race condition or non-default configuration
- Privileges Required HighRequires admin or elevated privileges
- User Interaction NoneNo user interaction needed — fully automated exploitation
Scope
- Scope UnchangedImpact is limited to the vulnerable component itself
Impact if exploited
- Confidentiality HighTotal information disclosure — all data in the component is compromised
- Integrity HighTotal loss of integrity — attacker can modify any data in the component
- Availability HighTotal denial of service — the component is completely unavailable
Weaknesses
ATT&CK techniques
Mapped from the weaknesses above (CWE to ATT&CK), not observed in attacks.
Sources
Watch the software you run.
My Stack ranks new CVEs for your products by real-world exploitation, so the next serious one reaches you without reading every advisory.
We'll flag the next CVE, public exploit or patch for Langgraph-checkpoint, not every advisory.
A free account adds
- The full version matrix and every affected product
- Exploit links, proofs of concept and Metasploit modules
- Email alerts for the products you watch
- The same data over REST API, MCP and CLI