Skip to content

CVE-2026-54297

is CVE-2026-54297real, exploitable, or a false positive? Here's the community verdict.

signals

public sources

Exploited in wild
Not listed
CISA KEV
Base severity
7.5 High
CVSS
Exploitation prob.
0.3%
FIRST EPSS
Weakness
CWE-674
CWE

High CVSS base score, but low real-world exploitation probability (EPSS). Likely less urgent than the score implies.

baseline read

auto · not a community verdict

Real, but low real-world risk

A genuine vulnerability on paper, but EPSS shows little real-world exploitation — the base score may overstate urgency. This is not the same as a false positive.

Based on CVSS · FIRST EPSS

Confirm or dispute →

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H

Faraday is an HTTP client library abstraction layer that provides a common interface over many adapters. From 1.0.0 until 1.10.6 and 2.14.3, Faraday::NestedParamsEncoder, the default nested query parameter encoder/decoder in Faraday, decodes nested query strings without enforcing a maximum nesting depth. A crafted query string causes Faraday to build a deeply nested Ruby Hash structure. The internal dehash routine then recursively walks this attacker-controlled structure without a depth limit. At sufficient depth, Ruby raises an uncaught SystemStackError (stack level too deep), crashing the calling thread or worker. This can lead to denial of service in applications that pass attacker-controlled query strings to Faraday's nested query parsing or URL-building paths. This vulnerability is fixed in 1.10.6 and 2.14.3.

Published

Embed this verdict
TruePositive verdict for CVE-2026-54297
Markdown
[![TruePositive verdict](https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-54297/badge.svg)](https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-54297)
HTML
<a href="https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-54297"><img src="https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-54297/badge.svg" alt="TruePositive verdict for CVE-2026-54297"></a>

Live badge that updates automatically as the community verdict changes.

Community ground truth

Be the first practitioner to weigh in

So far this is only TruePositive's editorial baseline from public sources. Add your real-world verdict below — it becomes the signal the next person triaging this relies on.

🥇 The first 50 practitioners to contribute earn a Founding Contributor badge.

In your experience, is this finding real and exploitable?

0 verdicts
Not a real issue

No account needed. Anonymous verdicts post as an unverified signal. Log in to make yours verified and earn reputation.

Field notes & remediation

Verdicts are the quick signal. Notes are the evidence and fixes behind them.

No notes yet. Be the first to share what you saw, or a fix that worked.

    Add a field note or remediationoptional
    Note type

    What are you adding?

    Markdown supported · minimum 20 characters.

    Same weakness: CWE-674.