VulnerabilityPublished 9 Nov 2026

CVE-2026-124589: lxtGH OMG-Seg · Path Traversal

Affects lxtGH OMG-SegSource CVE Database V5

Compare

Public exploit available · CVSS 5.3 Medium.

Data as of 9 Nov 2026, 10:35 UTC

CVSS 4.0 base score

5.3Medium

How severe the flaw is on the 0–10 CVSS scale.

Thin evidence

One scorer or none

CVSS scores by source
CNA (VulDB)	CVSS 4.0	5.3
CNA (VulDB)	CVSS 3.1	6.3
CNA (VulDB)	CVSS 3.0	6.3
CNA (VulDB)	CVSS 2.0	7.5

CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:P/VC:L/VI:L/VA:L/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:P

Base metrics

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Attack Requirements: None
Privileges Required: None
User Interaction: Passive
Vulnerable system confidentiality: Low
Vulnerable system integrity: Low
Vulnerable system availability: Low
Subsequent system confidentiality: None
Subsequent system integrity: None
Subsequent system availability: None

Threat metrics

Exploit Maturity: POC

Bold values are the worst case: easiest to exploit or largest impact.

Attack Vector: Network: The vulnerable system is bound to the network stack and the set of possible attackers extends beyond the other options listed below, up to and including the entire Internet. Such a vulnerability is often termed “remotely exploitable” and can be thought of as an attack being exploitable at the protocol level one or more network hops away (e.g., across one or more routers).
Attack Complexity: Low: The attacker must take no measurable action to exploit the vulnerability. The attack requires no target-specific circumvention to exploit the vulnerability. An attacker can expect repeatable success against the vulnerable system.
Attack Requirements: None: The successful attack does not depend on the deployment and execution conditions of the vulnerable system. The attacker can expect to be able to reach the vulnerability and execute the exploit under all or most instances of the vulnerability.
Privileges Required: None: The attacker is unauthorized prior to attack, and therefore does not require any access to settings or files of the vulnerable system to carry out an attack.
User Interaction: Passive: Successful exploitation of this vulnerability requires limited interaction by the targeted user with the vulnerable system and the attacker’s payload. These interactions would be considered involuntary and do not require that the user actively subvert protections built into the vulnerable system.
Vulnerable system confidentiality: Low: There is some loss of confidentiality. Access to some restricted information is obtained, but the attacker does not have control over what information is obtained, or the amount or kind of loss is limited. The information disclosure does not cause a direct, serious loss to the Vulnerable System.
Vulnerable system integrity: Low: Modification of data is possible, but the attacker does not have control over the consequence of a modification, or the amount of modification is limited. The data modification does not have a direct, serious impact to the Vulnerable System.
Vulnerable system availability: Low: Performance is reduced or there are interruptions in resource availability. Even if repeated exploitation of the vulnerability is possible, the attacker does not have the ability to completely deny service to legitimate users. The resources in the Vulnerable System are either partially available all of the time, or fully available only some of the time, but overall there is no direct, serious consequence to the Vulnerable System.
Subsequent system confidentiality: None: There is no loss of confidentiality within the Subsequent System or all confidentiality impact is constrained to the Vulnerable System.
Subsequent system integrity: None: There is no loss of integrity within the Subsequent System or all integrity impact is constrained to the Vulnerable System.
Subsequent system availability: None: There is no impact to availability within the Subsequent System or all availability impact is constrained to the Vulnerable System.
Exploit Maturity: POC: Based on threat intelligence sources each of the following must apply: · Proof-of-concept is publicly available · No knowledge of reported attempts to exploit this vulnerability · No knowledge of publicly available solutions used to simplify attempts to exploit the vulnerability

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v4.0 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 9 Nov 2026
Detectable: no evidence on record.
No public nuclei template indexed
Weaponized: evidence found.
CVSS exploit maturity: proof of concept public
Exploited in the wildExploited: no evidence on record.
Not in CISA KEV and no source reports exploitation
Observed by OffSeq MirageSeen by Mirage: no evidence on record.
No attack traffic recorded by OffSeq Mirage sensors

A missing step is not evidence of safety. Sources: cve.org (opens in a new tab), CVSS vector, the Metasploit, Exploit-DB and nuclei-templates index as of 8 Nov 2026.

Disclosed: The CVE record is public on cve.org. Its publication is t = 0.
Detectable: A public nuclei template can find exposed instances, for defenders and attackers alike.
Weaponized: A Metasploit exploit module or Exploit-DB entry exists (Metasploit scanner modules do not count), or CISA SSVC or the CVSS exploit maturity reports a public proof of concept.
Exploited in the wild: CISA KEV lists it, CISA SSVC rates exploitation active, or a source reports attacks.
Observed by OffSeq Mirage: OffSeq Mirage honeypot sensors recorded attack traffic for this CVE, or found exposed hosts without attack traffic.

Moments are spaced evenly, not to scale; a dashed line marks a gap of six months or more. Deltas count from t = 0. Sources that give only a date (CISA KEV, Exploit-DB, or a time of exactly 00:00Z) read “same day” rather than hours. Metasploit modules carry the flaw’s disclosure date, not their release date, and nuclei templates carry no date, so both appear above but not on the timeline.

What to do

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
lxtGHOMG-Seg	Affected =f3b26b609bae919760cd3ccf09c36179bb8624a0	Fixed in–

CPE configurations (1)

cpe:2.3:a:lxtgh:omg-seg:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*

AI-suggested

Users should exercise caution when deploying OMG-Seg and consider restricting access to the vulnerable function or environment until a patch is released. Monitoring for updates from the project is recommended. Since public exploit code exists, proactive mitigation is advised.

Description

CVE-2026-124589 is a path traversal vulnerability in the lxtGH OMG-Seg project affecting the function load_state_dict_into_model in the MoE Shard Checkpoint Loader component. The vulnerability arises from manipulation of the weight_map argument, allowing remote attackers to perform path traversal. The project does not use versioning, so affected versions cannot be precisely identified. Public exploit code is available. No patch or vendor response has been reported yet.

Impact

Successful exploitation allows remote attackers to perform path traversal, potentially accessing or manipulating unauthorized files on the system where OMG-Seg is deployed. This could lead to information disclosure or further compromise depending on the environment and usage context. The CVSS 4.0 score is 5.3 (medium severity), reflecting network attack vector, low complexity, no privileges required, and partial impact on confidentiality, integrity, and availability.

Summary

A path traversal weakness exists in lxtGH OMG-Seg up to commit f3b26b609bae919760cd3ccf09c36179bb8624a0, specifically in the load_state_dict_into_model function within omg_llava/xtuner/utils/handle_moe_load_and_save.py. Manipulating the weight_map argument can lead to unauthorized file path access. The vulnerability can be exploited remotely. The project lacks versioning, so exact affected versions are unknown. The issue was reported early but remains unaddressed. Public exploit code is available, increasing risk.

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…