VulnerabilityPublished 27 May 2026

CVE-2026-44483: airjp73 rvf · Prototype Pollution

Affects airjp73 rvfSource CVE Database V5

Compare

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 8.2 High : upgrade to 7.0.2 or 6.0.4 soon.

Data as of 30 Oct 2026, 11:52 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

8.2High

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

EPSS: 0.3% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 29% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.
Patch: Available – fixed in 7.0.2, 6.0.4

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

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: None
User Interaction: None
Scope: Unchanged
Confidentiality: None
Integrity: High
Availability: Low

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

Attack Vector: Network: The vulnerable component is bound to the network stack and the set of possible attackers extends beyond the other options listed, 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: Specialized access conditions or extenuating circumstances do not exist. An attacker can expect repeatable success against the vulnerable component.
Privileges Required: None: The attacker is unauthorized prior to attack, and therefore does not require any access to settings or files to carry out an attack.
User Interaction: None: The vulnerable system can be exploited without any interaction from any user.
Scope: Unchanged: An exploited vulnerability can only affect resources managed by the same security authority. In this case, the vulnerable component and the impacted component are either the same, or both are managed by the same security authority.
Confidentiality: None: There is no loss of confidentiality within the impacted component.
Integrity: High: There is a total loss of integrity, or a complete loss of protection. For example, the attacker is able to modify any/all files protected by the impacted component. Alternatively, only some files can be modified, but malicious modification would present a direct, serious consequence to the impacted component.
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 impacted component 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 impacted component.

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v3.1 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 27 May 2026
Detectable: no evidence on record.
No public nuclei template indexed
Weaponized: no evidence on record.
No public exploit code indexed in Metasploit or Exploit-DB
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), the Metasploit, Exploit-DB and nuclei-templates index as of 30 Oct 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

Upgrade rvf and set-get to 7.0.2 or 6.0.4.

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
airjp73rvf	Affected >=7.0.0 <7.0.2	Fixed in 7.0.2
airjp73rvf	Affected >=6.0.0 <6.0.4	Fixed in 6.0.4
@rvfset-get	Affected >=7.0.0 <7.0.2	Fixed in 7.0.2
@rvfset-get	Affected >=6.0.0 <6.0.4	Fixed in 6.0.4

AI-suggested

This vulnerability is fixed in airjp73 rvf versions 6.0.4 and 7.0.2. Users should upgrade to these or later versions to remediate the issue. Until upgraded, avoid accepting untrusted form data through affected endpoints or implement custom validation to block prototype pollution keys. Patch status is not explicitly confirmed in the advisory, so check vendor sources for the latest remediation guidance.

Description

RVF (formerly Remix Validated Form) provides easy form validation and state management for React. From 6.0.0 to before 6.0.4 and 7.0.2, setPath in @rvf/set-get (used by @rvf/core to flatten incoming form data into a nested object) does not block the keys __proto__, constructor, or prototype when walking a path. Because field names in submitted form data are passed directly to setPath via preprocessFormData (and through parseFormData / validate), an attacker who can submit a form to a Remix / React Router app using the library can set arbitrary properties on Object.prototype of the running server process. This is a default-reachable prototype pollution primitive: no special configuration is required. Any endpoint that accepts a form via parseFormData or runs a validator created with createValidator is affected. This vulnerability is fixed in 6.0.4 and 7.0.2.

Impact

Successful exploitation allows an attacker to modify Object.prototype properties on the server process, which can lead to server-side application logic manipulation or other unintended behavior. The CVSS score of 8.2 (high severity) reflects the network attack vector, low attack complexity, no privileges or user interaction required, and impact on integrity and availability. There is no indication of confidentiality impact. No known exploits in the wild have been reported at this time.

CWE-1321Improperly Controlled Modification of Object Prototype Attributes (Prototype Pollution) (opens in a new tab)
Variant weakness
The product receives input from an upstream component that specifies attributes that are to be initialized or updated in an object, but it does not properly control modifications of attributes of the object prototype.
Implementation
By freezing the object prototype first (for example, Object.freeze(Object.prototype)), modification of the prototype becomes impossible.
Architecture and Design
By blocking modifications of attributes that resolve to object prototype, such as proto or prototype, this weakness can be mitigated.
Implementation · Input Validation
When handling untrusted objects, validating using a schema can be used.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Mass Assignment (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V5.1.2 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Accessing Functionality Not Properly Constrained by ACLs (opens in a new tab)
Exploiting Incorrectly Configured Access Control Security Levels (opens in a new tab)
Manipulating User-Controlled Variables (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).

References

github.com/airjp73/rvf/security/advisories/GHSA-c567-44rc-m5hq (opens in a new tab)

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 27 May 2026, 16:48 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-1321

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats