Evidence used
- No CISA KEV confirmation is currently recorded.
- A structured source references public exploit or proof-of-concept material.
- EPSS is 0.24% for the current model date.
BlackTreeCVE IntelligenceFull vulnerability report · 2026
CVE-2026-12252High confidence
Untrusted JAR Code Execution in Multiple Stanford Interface Classes in nltk/nltk
nltk · nltk/nltk
7.8HighCVSS 3.0
Patch only the product branches with a verified fix
Fix availability varies by productHigh technical severity with public exploit material referenced by a structured source; prioritise exposed affected systems while verifying vendor guidance. Verified remediation exists for at least one product or source, but 3 structured product or package states remain unresolved. Apply remediation only to the exact product branch confirmed by its source.
R
Open reassessment dashboard →Operational reassessment
Published severity in operational context
Published severityHigh→Operational priority:High, unchanged from published severity.unchanged
Compensating controls
- Apply the linked authoritative mitigation while planning the permanent fix.
- Restrict local access and enforce least privilege on affected hosts.
- Increase monitoring for the attack path and post-exploitation behaviour described in the report.
Verification
- Confirm that the asset runs nltk nltk/nltk and falls inside the recorded affected range.
- Recheck the vendor advisory before scheduling a change because no verified fixed version is currently retained.
- Validate exposure, authentication requirements and compensating controls in the actual environment.
- Reopen this reassessment when CVSS, KEV, EPSS, exploit evidence or remediation changes.
Remediation availability differs by product scope
Verified remediation exists for at least one product or source, but 3 structured product or package states remain unresolved. Apply remediation only to the exact product branch confirmed by its source.
- Red Hat Product Security: 1 affected or under-investigation product state without a fixed product state in the same current advisory
- Debian Security Tracker: 2 affected package states with no published fix
Distribution package intelligence
5 package statesRelease-specific package status
Debian, ubuntu findings are scoped to the named distribution, release and source package. An absent finding does not mean a package is unaffected.
Package result overrides the generic status
BlackTree has verified remediation for at least one product or source, but the relevant distribution still reports no fixed package for 2 affected package states shown here. Treat those rows as affected with no fix until that distribution publishes a fixed version.
Repository candidate not checked
A published vendor fix does not prove that a matching update is enabled and installable on a particular asset. Confirm the local package candidate before scheduling remediation.
| Distribution release | Source package | Vendor state | Fixed version | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Debian trixietrixie · source | nltk | Affected, no fix publishedDebian currently tracks this release as open. | Not published in this feed | Debian Security Tracker ↗Source updated 5 Oct 2026 |
| Debian bookwormbookworm · source | nltk | Affected, no fix publishedDebian currently tracks this release as open. | Not published in this feed | Debian Security Tracker ↗Source updated 5 Oct 2026 |
| Debian forkyforky · source | nltk | Vendor fix publishedDebian records a fixed source-package version for this release. | 3.10.3-1 | Debian Security Tracker ↗Source updated 5 Oct 2026 |
| Debian sidsid · source | nltk | Vendor fix publishedDebian records a fixed source-package version for this release. | 3.10.3-1 | Debian Security Tracker ↗Source updated 5 Oct 2026 |
| Ubuntu 24.04 LTSnoble · esm-apps | nltk | Under evaluationCanonical reports that the package might be affected and still needs evaluation or fixing. | Not published in this feed | Canonical Ubuntu Security ↗Source updated 5 Oct 2026 |
Open-source package ranges3 source-attributed ranges
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| PyPInltk | ECOSYSTEM: introduced 0; fixed 3.9.4 | 3.9.4 | OSV record ↗aggregator derived · 2 Oct 2026 |
| PyPInltk | ECOSYSTEM: introduced 0; fixed 3.9.4 | 3.9.4 | OSV record ↗source linked ecosystem record · 2 Oct 2026 |
| pipnltk | < 3.9.4 | 3.9.4 | GitHub advisory ↗github reviewed aggregator · 2 Oct 2026 |
Direct vendor intelligence
1 currentAuthoritative vendor CSAF and VEX advisories
Structured product status and remediation from the issuing vendor. Product-state explanations are always visible; large lists can be searched or downloaded.
CVE-2026-12252 · CSAF 2.0 · revision 3 · finalRed Hat Product Securitynltk: nltk: Arbitrary Code Execution via Untrusted JAR File Loading
The vendor explicitly identifies these products as affected by this CVE.
- openshift-lightspeed/lightspeed-service-api-rhel9 as a component of OpenShift Lightspeed
- Summary
- A flaw was found in the `nltk` library. Several Stanford interface classes within `nltk` are susceptible to arbitrary code execution. This vulnerability allows a local attacker to execute malicious code by providing an untrusted Java Archive (JAR) file, as the system lacks integrity verification for these files.
- Remediation
- To mitigate this issue, users should ensure that only trusted Java Archive (JAR) files are processed by the `nltk` Stanford interface classes. Avoid loading JAR files from untrusted sources, as this vulnerability allows for arbitrary code execution. Implement strict input validation and source verification for any JAR files used with `nltk` to prevent the execution of malicious code.
High technical severity with public exploit material referenced by a structured source; prioritise exposed affected systems while verifying vendor guidance. Verified remediation exists for at least one product or source, but 3 structured product or package states remain unresolved. Apply remediation only to the exact product branch confirmed by its source.
Fix availability varies by product01
What, why and how
In nltk/nltk versions 3.9.3 and earlier, five Stanford interface classes (StanfordPOSTagger, StanfordNERTagger, StanfordParser, StanfordDependencyParser, and StanfordNeuralDependencyParser) are vulnerable to untrusted JAR code execution. These classes accept user-controllable JAR paths and execute them via the `java()` function, which invokes `subprocess.Popen()` without integrity verification. This vulnerability is identical to CVE-2026-0848, which was fixed for StanfordSegmenter by adding SHA256 verification. However, the fix was not applied to these additional classes, leaving them susceptible to arbitrary code execution when loading untrusted JAR files.
What
In nltk/nltk versions 3.9.3 and earlier, five Stanford interface classes (StanfordPOSTagger, StanfordNERTagger, StanfordParser, StanfordDependencyParser, and StanfordNeuralDependencyParser) are vulnerable to untrusted JAR code execution. These classes accept user-controllable JAR paths and execute them via the `java()` function, which invokes `subprocess.Popen()` without integrity verification. This vulnerability is identical to CVE-2026-0848, which was fixed for StanfordSegmenter by adding SHA256 verification. However, the fix was not applied to these additional classes, leaving them susceptible to arbitrary code execution when loading untrusted JAR files.
Why
Untrusted data can cross into a code-evaluation path and be interpreted as executable instructions.
How
An attacker operating through local access may attempt exploitation without authentication after a user interaction. If successful, the issue may execute code or commands in the affected security context.
What
In nltk/nltk versions 3.9.3 and earlier, five Stanford interface classes (StanfordPOSTagger, StanfordNERTagger, StanfordParser, StanfordDependencyParser, and StanfordNeuralDependencyParser) are vulnerable to untrusted JAR code execution. These classes accept user-controllable JAR paths and execute them via the `java()` function, which invokes `subprocess.Popen()` without integrity verification. This vulnerability is identical to CVE-2026-0848, which was fixed for StanfordSegmenter by adding SHA256 verification. However, the fix was not applied to these additional classes, leaving them susceptible to arbitrary code execution when loading untrusted JAR files.
Why
Untrusted data can cross into a code-evaluation path and be interpreted as executable instructions.
How
An attacker operating through local access may attempt exploitation without authentication after a user interaction. If successful, the issue may execute code or commands in the affected security context.
02
Exploit reality and attack path
CVSS severity, EPSS forecast probability, public exploit material and CISA-confirmed exploitation are separate signals.
Observed exploitation No confirmed evidence
?
Confirmed exploitation and public exploit material are separate signals. Attacks can occur without public proof-of-concept or exploit code.No CISA KEV match was present at the last successful refresh. This means no confirmation from that source, not proof of no exploitation.
Public PoC / exploit material Reference recorded
?
Confirmed exploitation and public exploit material are separate signals. Attacks can occur without public proof-of-concept or exploit code.A structured CVE source labels at least one public reference as exploit material. BlackTree has not independently validated that it is safe, reliable or weaponised.
- Likely attack path
- local access → Improper Control of Generation of Code ('Code Injection') → execute code or commands in the affected security context
- Attack surface
- Local
- Privileges required
- None: unauthenticated exploitation is possible
- User interaction
- Required interaction required
- Attack complexity
- Low: no specialised conditions are recorded
- Security boundary
- Unchanged: impact remains within the vulnerable component's security authority
- Weakness
?
CWE means Common Weakness Enumeration: a standard category for the underlying weakness. - CWE-94 ↗
CWE-94: Improper Control of Generation of Code ('Code Injection'). The product constructs all or part of a code segment using externally-influenced input from an upstream component, but it does not neutralize or incorrectly neutralizes special elements that could modify the syntax or behavior of the intended code segment.
- CVSS vector
?
CVSS means Common Vulnerability Scoring System. The vector records the metric values used to calculate technical severity. CVSS:3.0/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:HCommon Vulnerability Scoring System 3.0: the compact vector below is decoded into plain language.
AVLocalAttack vector: The attacker needs local access to the vulnerable system.ACLowAttack complexity: No specialised conditions are required beyond attacker-controlled input.PRNonePrivileges required: The attacker does not need an account or existing privileges.UIRequiredUser interaction: Another user must perform an action for exploitation to succeed.SUnchangedScope: The security impact remains within the vulnerable component's authority.CHighConfidentiality impact: A successful attack can cause a major loss.IHighIntegrity impact: A successful attack can cause a major loss.AHighAvailability impact: A successful attack can cause a major loss.- Post-exploitation / living off the land
- After compromise, an attacker may use built-in shells, scripting engines, scheduled tasks and native network utilities for discovery, persistence or movement. This is a plausible LoTL path, not evidence that it has occurred for every attack.
03
Patch and workaround
Operational remediation based on structured source evidence.
- Status
?
Patch availability is based on structured fixed-version fields and authoritative update references. If no fix is verified, check the vendor advisory before making a change. - Fix availability varies by product
- Action
- Use the product-specific evidence above. Patch only products with a verified fixed release, and keep every affected or under-investigation state without a matching fix in the remediation queue.
- Workaround
- To mitigate this issue, users should ensure that only trusted Java Archive (JAR) files are processed by the `nltk` Stanford interface classes. Avoid loading JAR files from untrusted sources, as this vulnerability allows for arbitrary code execution. Implement strict input validation and source verification for any JAR files used with `nltk` to prevent the execution of malicious code.
04
Evidence and provenance
Published 4 Jul 2026 · Last source change 6 Jul 2026, 18:33 UTC · CWE-94 · Improper Control of Generation of Code ('Code Injection')
CVE recordCVE.org · 5.2
CVSS sourceCNA
EPSS source FIRST · tracked since 2026-08-14
?
The date BlackTree first stored a score for this CVE from the daily FIRST EPSS feed.European sourceENISA EUVD · EUVD-2026-41656
Product sourceVendor CSAF · Red Hat Product Security
Remediation sourceVendor CSAF · Red Hat Product Security
CWE sourceCNA
NVD statusNVD enriched
Core structured fields are present and their contributing authorities are shown above.
Material change intelligence
View recent updates ↗What changed after publication
No material field changes have been recorded since change tracking began. Routine source refreshes and cosmetic edits are intentionally excluded.
Technical terms and abbreviations used in this report
- CVE
- Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures: the public identifier for one disclosed vulnerability.
- CVSS
- Common Vulnerability Scoring System: a technical severity framework; it is not patching priority by itself.
- EPSS
- Exploit Prediction Scoring System: FIRST's estimate of the probability that exploitation activity will be observed in the next 30 days; it is a forecast, not confirmation.
- CWE
- Common Weakness Enumeration: the standard category describing the underlying software or hardware weakness.
- CNA
- CVE Numbering Authority: an organisation authorised to assign and publish CVE records.
- CISA ADP
- Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency Authorized Data Publisher: structured enrichment added to a CVE record.
- NVD
- National Vulnerability Database: NIST's enrichment service for CVE records.
- CERT / CSIRT
- A computer security incident response team that publishes warnings or coordinates incident response.
- PoC
- Proof of concept: public material that demonstrates or helps reproduce exploitation.
- CSAF
- Common Security Advisory Framework: a machine-readable format for security advisories.
- LoTL
- Living off the land: abuse of legitimate tools or system functions during an attack.