VulnerabilityPublished 27 Mar 2026

CVE-2026-4965: letta · Eval Injection

Affects lettaSource CVE Database V5

Compare

Mentioned vulnerabilities

CVE-2025-6101

Public exploit available · CVSS 6.9 Medium.

Data as of 30 Oct 2026, 11:52 UTC

CVSS 4.0 base score

6.9Medium

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

EPSS: 0.6% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 49% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/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: None
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: None: The vulnerable system can be exploited without interaction from any human user, other than the attacker.
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 27 Mar 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 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

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
letta-ailetta	Affected =0.16.4	Fixed in–
PyPIletta-ai/letta`pkg:pypi/letta-ai/letta`Other threats	Affected =0.16.4	Fixed in–

CPE configurations (1)

cpe:2.3:a:letta:letta:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*

Check your own hosts for these packages with threat-finder (opens in a new tab), our free open-source scanner.

AI-suggested

Immediately restrict network exposure of systems running letta 0.16.4 to trusted internal networks only, preventing remote access from untrusted sources.
Conduct thorough code reviews focusing on dynamic code evaluation areas, especially the resolve_type function, to implement additional sanitization and validation of directives before evaluation.
Employ runtime application self-protection (RASP) or behavior monitoring tools to detect anomalous code execution patterns indicative of exploitation attempts.
Isolate AI development and deployment environments using containerization or sandboxing to limit potential damage from exploitation.
Monitor public vulnerability databases and letta-ai project repositories for updates or patches addressing this issue, and apply them promptly once available.
Consider temporary mitigation by disabling or limiting features that rely on dynamic code evaluation if feasible.
Implement strict input validation and use allowlists for any user-supplied data that could influence code evaluation.
Educate development teams about the risks of dynamic code evaluation and encourage secure coding practices to prevent similar issues in future versions.

Description

A vulnerability was detected in letta-ai letta 0.16.4. This issue affects the function resolve_type of the file letta/functions/ast_parsers.py of the component Incomplete Fix CVE-2025-6101. Performing a manipulation results in improper neutralization of directives in dynamically evaluated code. The attack can be initiated remotely. The exploit is now public and may be used. The vendor was contacted early about this disclosure but did not respond in any way.

Impact

The vulnerability allows remote attackers to manipulate dynamically evaluated code, which can lead to partial compromise of confidentiality, integrity, and availability of affected systems. Attackers could inject malicious directives that alter program behavior, potentially leading to unauthorized data access, code execution, or disruption of services. Since the flaw exists in a core function responsible for parsing and resolving types in the AI framework, exploitation could undermine the trustworthiness of AI models or applications built on letta. Organizations relying on letta for AI development or deployment may face risks including intellectual property theft, data breaches, or operational downtime. The absence of vendor response and patch increases exposure time, raising the likelihood of exploitation as the exploit is publicly available. The medium severity rating indicates that while the impact is significant, it may not lead to full system compromise without additional conditions. However, the ease of remote exploitation without authentication makes this a notable threat for organizations with internet-facing instances of letta or those integrating it into critical workflows.

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…