CVE-2026-58203VulnerabilityPublished 13 Aug 2026Updated 4 Nov 2026

gptme · pydantic-settings: NestedSecretsSettingsSource follows symlinks outside secrets_dir, enabling local file read and

Affects gptmeSource GCVE Database

Compare

Authoritative record:CVE-2026-58203· Medium 5.3

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 5.3 Medium : upgrade to 0.31.0_13 when convenient.

Data as of 4 Nov 2026, 21:27 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

5.3Medium

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

EPSS: 0.1% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 8% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.
Patch: Available – fixed in 0.31.0_13

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

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

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

Attack Vector: Local: The vulnerable component is not bound to the network stack and the attacker’s path is via read/write/execute capabilities. Either: the attacker exploits the vulnerability by accessing the target system locally (e.g., keyboard, console), or remotely (e.g., SSH); or the attacker relies on User Interaction by another person to perform actions required to exploit the vulnerability (e.g., tricking a legitimate user into opening a malicious document).
Attack Complexity: Low: Specialized access conditions or extenuating circumstances do not exist. An attacker can expect repeatable success against the vulnerable component.
Privileges Required: Low: The attacker is authorized with (i.e., requires) privileges that provide basic user capabilities that could normally affect only settings and files owned by a user. Alternatively, an attacker with Low privileges may have the ability to cause an impact only to non-sensitive resources.
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: 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 impacted component.
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 on 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 6 Jul 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 4 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

Upgrade gptme to 0.31.0_13.

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
Homebrewgptme`pkg:brew/gptme`Other threats	Affected >=0.30.0 <0.31.0_13	Fixed in 0.31.0_13

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

AI-suggested

Upgrade to pydantic-settings version 0.31.0_13 or later, which fixes the issue by only descending into directories whose resolved paths remain within the configured secrets_dir, using a single cycle-safe iterator for size checking and loading, and skipping files outside secrets_dir as a defense in depth. If upgrading is not immediately possible, ensure the secrets_dir is fully controlled and not writable by untrusted users or components, or avoid using secrets_nested_subdir=True.

Description

The pydantic-settings library's NestedSecretsSettingsSource component has a vulnerability when used with secrets_nested_subdir=True. It follows symbolic links inside the configured secrets_dir that point outside this directory, allowing reading of files outside the intended secrets directory. This also bypasses the secrets_dir_max_size limit, enabling oversized files to be loaded. The issue arises from inconsistent directory traversal methods used for size checking and loading, and can be exploited if an attacker or lower-privileged component can place symlinks inside the secrets directory. The vulnerability is local and requires write access to the secrets directory. A fix is available in version 0.31.0_13.

Impact

Confidentiality is impacted because files outside the configured secrets_dir can be read into application settings if an attacker can place symlinks inside the secrets directory. The integrity and availability of the secrets_dir_max_size safeguard are compromised because the size limit can be bypassed, and cyclic symlinks can cause excessive resource consumption during loading. This vulnerability requires local write access to the secrets directory or a shared mount influenced by a lower-privileged component. There is no network reachability or remote exploitation implied by this vulnerability.

Summary

NestedSecretsSettingsSource in pydantic-settings reads secret values from files under a configured secrets_dir. When secrets_nested_subdir=True, it follows symlinked directories inside secrets_dir even if they point outside it. The size check uses Path.glob which does not follow symlinks, while the loader uses glob.iglob which does, causing a discrepancy. This allows reading files outside secrets_dir (CWE-22 / CWE-59) and bypasses the secrets_dir_max_size limit (CWE-400). Cyclic symlinks can also inflate resource usage. An attacker able to place symlinks inside secrets_dir can cause unintended local file reads and resource exhaustion. The vulnerability is not remotely exploitable by itself. The issue is fixed in pydantic-settings 0.31.0_13 by enforcing that only paths within secrets_dir are followed and using a consistent, cycle-safe iterator for size checking and loading.

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 4 Nov 2026, 20:34 UTC

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats