Policies Component Dynamic CodeInput Fields Bypass Custom Component Validation (CVE-2026-9135)
Published Last modified Sources: BSI, CVE.org
What is affected, what to do
IBM Langflow OSS 1.0.0 through 1.10.0 Langflow versions up to 1.9.2 (commit 94981c443d4918517b9e8163d70fc598dc33a32d) contain a code injection vulnerability in the Policies component's ToolGuard integration that bypasses the allow_custom_components=false security control. The vulnerability exists because the validation mechanism only checks the main component source code in node_template["code"]["value"] but fails to validate dynamic CodeInput fields that store generated ToolGuard Python files.
Update langflow to version 1.10.1, Langflow Desktop OSS to version 1.10.1.
- Affected
- IBM Langflow OSS
lte 1.0.0..1.10.0
- IBM Langflow OSS
Not sure whether and how you are affected? Ask a question about this vulnerability
Metrics
9.9
Priority
XIEM Effective CVSS: highest available CVSS rating from NVD and vendor data.
Source: NVD, CVSS v3
9.9
CVSS v3
Severity Critical on the scale from 0 to 10.
Source: BSI, CVE.org
0.8 %
EPSS score
Low — model estimates < 1% exploitation likelihood.
Source: FIRST EPSS, percentile 57.7
Show all metrics
- Severity
- Critical
Priority (0–325)
The priority score is a consolidated metric that condenses several individual signals into a single, action-guiding ranking: technical severity (CVSS), exploitation likelihood (EPSS), known-exploited status (KEV) and the context of the affected asset. The aim is to answer the only truly important question in vulnerability management: what first?
Read in glossary- 97.15 Methodology
Exploit maturity
An exploit is code or a technique that specifically uses a concrete vulnerability to force unintended behaviour — such as executing code or escalating privileges. It is the tool that turns a theoretical flaw into a practical attack.
Read in glossary- no public PoC known
XIEM Effective CVSS
XIEM® is the tiered managed-security operating model from NEOSEC and a registered trademark of NEOSEC GmbH. It extends classic SIEM — the central collection, normalisation and correlation of security-relevant events — with endpoint forensics, network visibility and deception technology, and consolidates them into three building tiers: Sentry, Orchestrate and Command.
Read in glossary- 9.9 Methodology
CVSS v3
CVSS is the globally established, open standard for assessing the technical severity of a vulnerability on a scale from 0 to 10. It describes how easily a flaw can be exploited and what damage it can cause — but not how likely its actual exploitation is. CVSS and the complementary EPSS deliberately answer different questions.
Read in glossary- 9.9
EPSS score
The EPSS score is the absolute model output for an individual vulnerability: the estimated probability of real-world exploitation within the next 30 days, expressed as a value between 0 and 1 (i.e. 0 % to 100 %). A score of 0.42 means „the model estimates a 42 % chance of real-world exploitation within 30 days“.
Read in glossary- 0.8 %
- Low — model estimates < 1% exploitation likelihood.
EPSS percentile
The EPSS percentile is the relative position of a vulnerability within all EPSS-scored CVEs, expressed as a value between 0 and 1. A percentile of 0.90 means „this CVE has a higher EPSS score than 90 % of all other scored CVEs“. Unlike the EPSS score, it is not a probability — but a positioning within a ranking.
Read in glossary- 57.7
- High — this CVE ranks above the median of all CVEs scored today (rank ≥ 36%).
KEV status
The KEV catalogue is a list maintained by the US authority CISA of vulnerabilities for which active exploitation in the wild has been confirmed. It answers not the question „how severe?“ but „is it already being attacked?“ — thereby sharply prioritising patching.
Read in glossary- —
- Published
CWE
CWE is a catalogue of typical weakness types in software and hardware — such as flawed input validation, unsafe memory handling or poor authentication. Where a CVE names a concrete vulnerability in a concrete product, a CWE describes the underlying class of defect.
Read in glossary- CWE-94
Detection rules
No NEOSEC detection rule is available for this vulnerability yet.
Classification under NIS2 and CRA
Rule-based classification from exploitation status and severity. It does not replace a case-by-case assessment.
NIS2
NIS2 is EU Directive (EU) 2022/2555 to raise the level of cybersecurity across the Union. It substantially broadens obligations compared with the first NIS directive: more sectors, mandatory risk management, staged reporting duties and personal accountability of senior management.
Read in glossary- High technical severity: assess and remediate the vulnerability in vulnerability handling under Art. 21(2)(e) NIS2 and document the decision.
CRA
The CRA is EU Regulation (EU) 2024/2847 setting horizontal cybersecurity requirements for „products with digital elements“ — from industrial controllers and software to connected consumer devices. For the first time manufacturers must ensure security across the entire product lifecycle, handle vulnerabilities and provide security updates.
Read in glossary- From 11.12.2027, Annex I Part II CRA requires manufacturers of affected products with digital elements to handle vulnerabilities without delay and provide security updates.
ISO/IEC 27001
ISO/IEC 27001 is the internationally leading standard for an information security management system (ISMS). It describes a risk-based, process-oriented framework to systematically plan, implement, review and improve information security.
Read in glossary- Control A.8.8, management of technical vulnerabilities: assess relevance to your systems, plan remediation and keep evidence.
Description
IBM Langflow OSS 1.0.0 through 1.10.0 Langflow versions up to 1.9.2 (commit 94981c443d4918517b9e8163d70fc598dc33a32d) contain a code injection vulnerability in the Policies component's ToolGuard integration that bypasses the allow_custom_components=false security control. The vulnerability exists because the validation mechanism only checks the main component source code in node_template["code"]["value"] but fails to validate dynamic CodeInput fields that store generated ToolGuard Python files. Attackers can embed malicious Python code in these unvalidated dynamic fields, which are persisted in Flow.data and later executed server-side when a guarded tool is invoked through the ToolGuard runtime. This allows authenticated users with flow creation privileges to achieve arbitrary Python code execution on the backend despite custom component restrictions. The vulnerability can be escalated through cross-tenant flow manipulation via the agentic MCP update_flow_component_field tool, which accepts attacker-controlled user_id parameters, enabling attackers to inject malicious code into victim users' flows. When combined with publicly accessible flows and specific misconfigurations (AUTO_LOGIN=true, NEW_USER_IS_ACTIVE=true), the attack can be conducted with reduced authentication requirements.
Source: BSI WID Portal, BSI CSAF, cvelistv5, NVD (NIST), CVE.org (MITRE)
Affected products
The following versions are affected. Older releases of the same product line are also vulnerable unless stated otherwise.
| Affected versions | Fixed in | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| IBM | Langflow OSS |
|
|
| langflow | langflow |
|
|
| IBM | Langflow Desktop OSS |
|
|
Vendors and products
Weakness classes (CWE)
CWE-94Improper Control of Generation of Code ('Code Injection')
Base
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.
Entry at MITRE CWE-94
References & sources
- ibm.comsupport/pages/node/7278920Vendor advisory, Patch, Vendor advisory
Changes to this CVE
Who changed this CVE and when: NVD (analysis, affected products, CVSS), the CVE publisher (CNA) and additional providers such as CISA (ADP).
Record modifiedCISA ADP
CISA assessment (SSVC): exploitation: none known, automatable: no
Show the original change
Individual changes of this event as published by NVD Type Action Before After SSVC assessment changed {"id":"CVE-2026-9135","role":"CISA Coordinator","options":[{"exploitation":"none"},{"automatable":"no"},{"technicalImpact":"total"}],"version":"2.0.3","timestamp":"2026-07-20T19:23:42.417231Z"}{"id":"CVE-2026-9135","role":"CISA Coordinator","options":[{"exploitation":"none"},{"automatable":"no"},{"technicalImpact":"total"}],"version":"2.0.3","timestamp":"2026-07-22T00:00:00+00:00"}Source identifier: 134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0
Initial analysis by NVDNVD
Newly listed as affected:- IBM Langflow OSS (1.0.0 – before 1.10.1)
New references:Show 2 original changes
Individual changes of this event as published by NVD Type Action Before After Product configuration added —AND OR *cpe:2.3:a:langflow:langflow:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:* versions from (including) 1.0.0 up to (excluding) 1.10.1 OR cpe:2.3:o:microsoft:windows:-:*:*:*:*:*:*:* cpe:2.3:o:linux:linux_kernel:-:*:*:*:*:*:*:* cpe:2.3:o:apple:macos:-:*:*:*:*:*:*:*Reference type added —IBM Corporation: https://www.ibm.com/support/pages/node/7278920 Types: Vendor AdvisorySource identifier: nvd@nist.gov
One NVD translation into another language is hidden.
Linked advisories
Embed badge
Show the severity and KEV status of this vulnerability on your site – with a link back here. The image is updated hourly.
<a href="https://intel.neosec.eu/en/cve/CVE-2026-9135"><img src="https://intel.neosec.eu/badge/cve/CVE-2026-9135.svg?lang=en" alt="CVE-2026-9135 – NEOSEC Intel" height="20"></a>