Evidence used
- No CISA KEV confirmation is currently recorded.
- Exploitation requires an existing local or physical foothold with privileges.
- EPSS is 0.13% for the current model date.
BlackTreeCVE Intelligencemasci · banks
Official source article: GitHub GHSA-556J-VV39-8RQV ↗. Check the applicable product and release in the original source.
High technical severity; prioritise exposed affected systems while verifying vendor guidance.
These OSV and GitHub advisory ranges apply only to the named package and ecosystem. A listed fixed version is not a universal product patch or proof that an update is installed.
| Ecosystem and package | Affected range | First fixed version | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| PyPIbanks | ECOSYSTEM: introduced 0; fixed 2.5.1 | 2.5.1 | OSV record ↗aggregator derived · 8 Oct 2026 |
| pipbanks | <= 2.5.0 | 2.5.1 | GitHub advisory ↗upstream repository advisory · 8 Oct 2026 |
High technical severity; prioritise exposed affected systems while verifying vendor guidance.
Patch availableBanks generates meaningful LLM prompts using a simple template language. Prior to 2.5.1, Banks DirectoryPromptRegistry does not reject symbolic links for index.json or discovered and existing .jinja prompt files. In an application where untrusted users can influence a prompt directory, DirectoryPromptRegistry._scan() and DirectoryPromptRegistry.get() can follow a link outside the registry root and disclose a file, while DirectoryPromptRegistry.set(), DirectoryPromptRegistry._save(), and DirectoryPromptRegistry._load() can read or overwrite an external link target. The issue requires attacker influence over the registry directory or its extracted contents. This issue is fixed in version 2.5.1.
Banks generates meaningful LLM prompts using a simple template language. Prior to 2.5.1, Banks DirectoryPromptRegistry does not reject symbolic links for index.json or discovered and existing .jinja prompt files. In an application where untrusted users can influence a prompt directory, DirectoryPromptRegistry._scan() and DirectoryPromptRegistry.get() can follow a link outside the registry root and disclose a file, while DirectoryPromptRegistry.set(), DirectoryPromptRegistry._save(), and DirectoryPromptRegistry._load() can read or overwrite an external link target. The issue requires attacker influence over the registry directory or its extracted contents. This issue is fixed in version 2.5.1.
Attacker-controlled path data is not constrained to the intended directory before the application accesses a file.
An attacker operating through local access may attempt exploitation with low privileges. If successful, the issue may cause the confidentiality, integrity or availability impact described by the vendor.
Banks generates meaningful LLM prompts using a simple template language. Prior to 2.5.1, Banks DirectoryPromptRegistry does not reject symbolic links for index.json or discovered and existing .jinja prompt files. In an application where untrusted users can influence a prompt directory, DirectoryPromptRegistry._scan() and DirectoryPromptRegistry.get() can follow a link outside the registry root and disclose a file, while DirectoryPromptRegistry.set(), DirectoryPromptRegistry._save(), and DirectoryPromptRegistry._load() can read or overwrite an external link target. The issue requires attacker influence over the registry directory or its extracted contents. This issue is fixed in version 2.5.1.
Attacker-controlled path data is not constrained to the intended directory before the application accesses a file.
An attacker operating through local access may attempt exploitation with low privileges. If successful, the issue may cause the confidentiality, integrity or availability impact described by the vendor.
CVSS severity, EPSS forecast probability, public exploit material and CISA-confirmed exploitation are separate signals.
No CISA KEV match was present at the last successful refresh. This means no confirmation from that source, not proof of no exploitation.
No exploit-tagged reference or CISA SSVC proof-of-concept state is currently recorded. Research may still exist outside the structured feeds.
CWE-22: Improper Limitation of a Pathname to a Restricted Directory ('Path Traversal'). The product uses external input to construct a pathname that is intended to identify a file or directory that is located underneath a restricted parent directory, but the product does not properly neutralize special elements within the pathname that can cause the pathname to resolve to a location that is outside of the restricted directory.
CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:P/PR:L/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:L/SC:N/SI:N/SA:NCommon Vulnerability Scoring System 4.0: the compact vector below is decoded into plain language.
Operational remediation based on structured source evidence.
Published 8 Oct 2026 · Last source change 9 Oct 2026, 15:13 UTC · CWE-22 · Improper Limitation of a Pathname to a Restricted Directory ('Path Traversal')
Core structured fields are present and their contributing authorities are shown above.