CVE-2026-44209
Applications that pass user-supplied strings as the template argument to Prompt() are vulnerable to Server-Side Template Injection (SSTI), which can lead to Remote Code Execution (RCE) on the host system.
Does this matter?
High impact if exploited, but EPSS currently rates exploitation as unlikely (0.42%). Schedule it in the normal patch cycle and watch for a rise in EPSS or a public exploit.
Description
Banks generates meaningful LLM prompts using a template language that makes sense. Prior to 2.4.2, banks uses jinja2.Environment() (unsandboxed) to render prompt templates. Applications that pass user-supplied strings as the template argument to Prompt() are vulnerable to Server-Side Template Injection (SSTI), which can lead to Remote Code Execution (RCE) on the host system. This vulnerability is fixed in 2.4.2.
- CVSS 3.1
- 7.5 HIGHCVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
- EPSS
- 0.42% probability · 36th percentile
- CISA KEV
- Not listed
- Weakness
- CWE-1336, CWE-917
- Source
- security-advisories@github.com
References
- https://github.com/masci/banks/pull/74
- https://github.com/masci/banks/security/advisories/GHSA-gphh-9q3h-jgpp
- https://access.redhat.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-44209
- https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2481713
- https://github.com/masci/banks/security/advisories/GHSA-gphh-9q3h-jgpp
- https://security.access.redhat.com/data/csaf/v2/vex/2026/cve-2026-44209.json
Source: NVD record, EPSS from FIRST.org, KEV from CISA. Refreshed daily.