Evidence used
- No CISA KEV confirmation is currently recorded.
- A structured source references public exploit or proof-of-concept material.
- EPSS is 0.91% for the current model date.
BlackTreeCVE IntelligenceFull vulnerability report · 2026
CVE-2026-27953High confidence
ormar has a Pydantic Validation Bypass via Kwargs Injection in Model Constructor
ormar-orm · ormar
Official source article: GitHub GHSA-F964-WHRQ-44H8 ↗. Check the applicable product and release in the original source.
7.1HighCVSS 3.1
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 1 structured product or package state 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:Critical, raised one band.upgradedsince 20 Mar 2026
Compensating controls
- Validate the affected product branch and deploy the verified fixed release.
- Restrict the affected network interface to trusted sources where business-safe.
- Increase monitoring for the attack path and post-exploitation behaviour described in the report.
Verification
- Confirm that the asset runs ormar-orm ormar and falls inside the recorded affected range.
- Verify the installed build against the product-specific fixed version after deployment.
- 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 1 structured product or package state remain unresolved. Apply remediation only to the exact product branch confirmed by its source.
- Debian Security Tracker: 1 affected package state with no published fix
Distribution package intelligence
4 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 1 affected package state 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 bookwormbookworm · source | ormar | Affected, no fix publishedDebian currently tracks this release as open. | Not published in this feed | Debian Security Tracker ↗Source updated 6 Oct 2026 |
| Debian forkyforky · source | ormar | Vendor fix publishedDebian records a fixed source-package version for this release. | 0.23.1-1 | Debian Security Tracker ↗Source updated 6 Oct 2026 |
| Debian sidsid · source | ormar | Vendor fix publishedDebian records a fixed source-package version for this release. | 0.23.1-1 | Debian Security Tracker ↗Source updated 6 Oct 2026 |
| Ubuntu 24.04 LTSnoble · standard archive | ormar | 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 ranges1 source-attributed range
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| pipormar | <= 0.23.0 | 0.23.1 | GitHub advisory ↗upstream repository advisory · 20 Mar 2026 |
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 1 structured product or package state remain unresolved. Apply remediation only to the exact product branch confirmed by its source.
Fix availability varies by product01
What, why and how
ormar is a async mini ORM for Python. Versions 0.23.0 and below are vulnerable to Pydantic validation bypass through the model constructor, allowing any unauthenticated user to skip all field validation by injecting "__pk_only__": true into a JSON request body. By injecting "__pk_only__": true into a JSON request body, an unauthenticated attacker can skip all field validation and persist unvalidated data directly to the database. A secondary __excluded__ parameter injection uses the same pattern to selectively nullify arbitrary model fields (e.g., email or role) during construction. This affects ormar's canonical FastAPI integration pattern recommended in its official documentation, enabling privilege escalation, data integrity violations, and business logic bypass in any application using ormar.Model directly as a request body parameter. This issue has been fixed in version 0.23.1.
What
ormar is a async mini ORM for Python. Versions 0.23.0 and below are vulnerable to Pydantic validation bypass through the model constructor, allowing any unauthenticated user to skip all field validation by injecting "__pk_only__": true into a JSON request body. By injecting "__pk_only__": true into a JSON request body, an unauthenticated attacker can skip all field validation and persist unvalidated data directly to the database. A secondary __excluded__ parameter injection uses the same pattern to selectively nullify arbitrary model fields (e.g., email or role) during construction. This affects ormar's canonical FastAPI integration pattern recommended in its official documentation, enabling privilege escalation, data integrity violations, and business logic bypass in any application using ormar.Model directly as a request body parameter. This issue has been fixed in version 0.23.1.
Why
The product receives input from an upstream component that specifies multiple attributes, properties, or fields that are to be initialized or updated in an object, but it does not properly control which attributes can be modified.
How
An attacker operating through a network path may attempt exploitation with low privileges. If successful, the issue may gain additional privileges.
What
ormar is a async mini ORM for Python. Versions 0.23.0 and below are vulnerable to Pydantic validation bypass through the model constructor, allowing any unauthenticated user to skip all field validation by injecting "__pk_only__": true into a JSON request body. By injecting "__pk_only__": true into a JSON request body, an unauthenticated attacker can skip all field validation and persist unvalidated data directly to the database. A secondary __excluded__ parameter injection uses the same pattern to selectively nullify arbitrary model fields (e.g., email or role) during construction. This affects ormar's canonical FastAPI integration pattern recommended in its official documentation, enabling privilege escalation, data integrity violations, and business logic bypass in any application using ormar.Model directly as a request body parameter. This issue has been fixed in version 0.23.1.
Why
The product receives input from an upstream component that specifies multiple attributes, properties, or fields that are to be initialized or updated in an object, but it does not properly control which attributes can be modified.
How
An attacker operating through a network path may attempt exploitation with low privileges. If successful, the issue may gain additional privileges.
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
- a network path → Improperly Controlled Modification of Dynamically-Determined Object Attributes → gain additional privileges
- Attack surface
- Network
- Privileges required
- Low: a basic authenticated account is required
- User interaction
- None
- 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-915 ↗
CWE-915: Improperly Controlled Modification of Dynamically-Determined Object Attributes. The product receives input from an upstream component that specifies multiple attributes, properties, or fields that are to be initialized or updated in an object, but it does not properly control which attributes can be modified.
- CVSS vector
?
CVSS means Common Vulnerability Scoring System. The vector records the metric values used to calculate technical severity. CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:LCommon Vulnerability Scoring System 3.1: the compact vector below is decoded into plain language.
AVNetworkAttack vector: The vulnerable component can be reached over a network.ACLowAttack complexity: No specialised conditions are required beyond attacker-controlled input.PRLowPrivileges required: The attacker needs basic user-level privileges.UINoneUser interaction: No action by another user is required.SUnchangedScope: The security impact remains within the vulnerable component's authority.CNoneConfidentiality impact: No direct loss is represented by this metric.IHighIntegrity impact: A successful attack can cause a major loss.ALowAvailability impact: A successful attack can cause a limited loss.- Post-exploitation / living off the land
- No specific living-off-the-land technique is confirmed in the structured sources. Monitor normal administration tools for activity inconsistent with the affected service's baseline.
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
- Affected
- ormar: < 0.23.1
- Fixed
- 0.23.1.
- 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
- No verified workaround is recorded. If business-safe, reduce exposure to the affected interface and allow only trusted sources until authoritative guidance is available.
04
Evidence and provenance
Published 19 Mar 2026 · Last source change 20 Mar 2026, 18:10 UTC · CWE-915 · Improperly Controlled Modification of Dynamically-Determined Object Attributes
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-2026-13198
Product sourceCNA
Remediation sourceCVE/CNA references
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.