CVE-2026-107353

MEDIUMPre-NVD 6.56.5
EchelonGraph scoreMEDIUM confidence

“—” beside the score: it is equal to the CVSS score beside it.

This medium-severity CVE scores 6.5 under a secondary CVSS source (NVD's own analysis pending). EPSS exploit probability: 0.3% (20th percentile of EPSS-scored CVEs). No GitHub Security Advisory CVSS is on record for this CVE.

Triggered by: Headline CVSS from a secondary CVSS source
Sources: EPSS, a secondary CVSS source

Also known asEUVD-2026-94579 (ENISA EUVD)Source: ENISA EUVD

6.5EG
EchelonGraph verdictMonitorRemediate within your standard update timelines at low or medium mission impact and sooner than that at high (the SSVC decision on this page).
  • Lower severity and no public exploit yet
CISA-KEV: Not listedEPSS PROB: 0.3%CVSS: 6.5Exploit: None knownExposed services: Not assessed

Upgrade to traverse 0.6.12 or later, or, on older release lines, to 0.5.3, 0.4.7, or 0.3.10 (from the CVE record's solution, Harborist) — apply it.

traverse (npm) versions 0.3.6 through 0.3.9, 0.4.0 through 0.4.6, 0.5.0 through 0.5.2, and 0.6.0 through 0.6.11 allow prototype pollution through set(). When the path passed to set() crosses a primitive value, the next path segment is resolved on that primitive's built-in prototype, so an application that passes an untrusted path to set() lets an attacker add or overwrite properties of String.prototype, Number.prototype, or Boolean.prototype using plain JSON data, for example traverse({ name: 'bob' }).set(['name', '__proto__', 'polluted'], 'yes'). Object.prototype was reachable only with a non-data path segment, such as an object whose toString returns a different value on each call, or through a Proxy that accepts an assignment without storing it. This is fixed in 0.3.10, 0.4.7, 0.5.3, and 0.6.12.

CVSS v3
6.5
EG Score
6.5MEDIUMmedium confidence
EG Risk
44
EG Risk 44/100

EG Risk is EchelonGraph's 0–100 priority score. It fuses impact severity (EG Severity, the CVSS base score, never the KEV-floored or EPSS-lifted EG Score) with real-world exploitation and automatability, under weights EchelonGraph set by hand, so you can rank equal-severity CVEs and fix the most dangerous first. Higher = act sooner.

How it’s computed (value × EchelonGraph’s weight)
Severity65% × 45%
Impact severity (EG Severity): CVSS 6.5 of 10. Never the KEV-floored or EPSS-lifted EG Score.
Exploitation0.3% × 40%
FIRST EPSS: the 30-day exploitation probability when EchelonGraph scored this CVE.
Automatability100% × 15%
CISA's SSVC Automatable value: yes (Vulnrichment).
SSVC (CISA's decision table, applied by EchelonGraph): Track at low or medium mission impact; Attend at high (mission-essential systems).
Exploitation none (CISA Vulnrichment) · Automatable yes (CISA Vulnrichment) · Technical impact partial (CISA Vulnrichment). All three are CISA's SSVC values (Vulnrichment). EchelonGraph applied CISA's decision table to them; CISA publishes SSVC inputs and the table, not a decision for each CVE.
Action: Upgrade to traverse 0.6.12 or later, or, on older release lines, to 0.5.3, 0.4.7, or 0.3.10 (from the CVE record's solution, Harborist). Apply it within your standard update timelines at low or medium mission impact and sooner than that at high.
EPSS PROB
0.3%
EPSS %ILE
20th
KEV
Not listed

What the EG score is made of (scorer v4.0: the three questions the 0–10 score mixes, published apart · methodology)

The EG score (6.5): severity, escalated by confirmed exploitation. This CVE's 6.5 is its impact severity (EG Severity), not escalated.

EG Severity
6.5 MEDIUMCVSS-B, impact only: no KEV listing, EPSS or EG-KEV tier raises it.a secondary CVSS source · CVSS v3.0 or v3.1
EG Likelihood
0.3% within 30 daysSource: FIRST EPSS (model v2026.06.15, score date 2026-10-28). FIRST's exploitation probability, not an EchelonGraph model.
Confirmed exploitation
None on record (CISA KEV, EG-KEV Tier 1)Reported apart from the likelihood: an observed fact, not a probability.
EG Priority
SSVC Track at medium mission impactTrack at low or medium mission impact; Attend at high (mission-essential systems).CISA BOD 26-04: 14 days if the affected system is publicly exposed; 60 days if it is not.Each input and its source, and whom BOD 26-04 binds: the SSVC and BOD 26-04 blocks below.

SSVC (CISA's decision table, applied by EchelonGraph)Track at low or medium mission impact; Attend at high (mission-essential systems).

Upgrade to traverse 0.6.12 or later, or, on older release lines, to 0.5.3, 0.4.7, or 0.3.10 (from the CVE record's solution, Harborist). Apply it within your standard update timelines at low or medium mission impact and sooner than that at high.

Exploitation none (CISA Vulnrichment) · Automatable yes (CISA Vulnrichment) · Technical impact partial (CISA Vulnrichment). All three are CISA's SSVC values (Vulnrichment). EchelonGraph applied CISA's decision table to them; CISA publishes SSVC inputs and the table, not a decision for each CVE. Mission impact is CISA's Mission & Well-being decision point, and only you can judge it. CISA's table makes it high when Mission Prevalence is Essential — the vulnerable component "directly provides capabilities that constitute at least one MEF for at least one entity" (MEF: mission essential function) — or when Public Well-Being Impact is Irreversible: "multiple fatalities are likely", the cyber-physical system "is likely lost or destroyed", "extreme or serious externalities" are imposed on other parties, or social systems such as elections or the financial grid "are destabilized and potentially collapse". CISA's decision table

BOD 26-04 (CISA's remediation timeline, Table 1)14 days if the affected system is publicly exposed; 60 days if it is not.

The score's inputs: In CISA KEV no (CISA's KEV catalog) · Automatable yes (CISA Vulnrichment) · Technical impact partial (CISA Vulnrichment). Whether your system is publicly exposed is yours to answer. BOD 26-04 binds US Federal Civilian Executive Branch agencies; for anyone else it is CISA's published timeline, a reference rather than an obligation. The directive · how EchelonGraph applies it

Published

October 7, 2026

Last Modified

October 8, 2026

Advisory Details (3)

Auto-updated Oct 7, 2026
Fix named in the CVE record's solution (Harborist). Sources: github, github_commit.
GitHub commit

commit 37a9ebd103d2 (ljharb/js-traverse)

Fix landed in ljharb/js-traverse commit 37a9ebd103d2 — awaiting tagged release

https://github.com/ljharb/js-traverse/commit/37a9ebd103d2a259c824c29cdcc3f0dfe1acffce
GitHub commit

commit 81ccab43e379 (ljharb/js-traverse)

Fix landed in ljharb/js-traverse commit 81ccab43e379 — awaiting tagged release

https://github.com/ljharb/js-traverse/commit/81ccab43e379cf42eb2a5f689630f7f79b3d71b8
GitHub advisoryMentions a patch (unverified)

traverse: set() can write to built-in prototypes via an untrusted path · Advisory · ljharb/js-traverse · GitHub

Affected: 0.6.12, 0.5.3, 0.4.7, and 0.3.10.

https://github.com/ljharb/js-traverse/security/advisories/GHSA-rj28-8w7x-jmqc

Affected Packages

(3 across 3 ecosystems)
Debian:12(1)
PackageVulnerable rangeFix by version rangeDependents
node-traverse0.6.7+~0.6.32-1
  • every version on: no fix on record
—
Debian:13(1)
PackageVulnerable rangeFix by version rangeDependents
node-traverse0.6.7+~0.6.32-1
  • every version on: no fix on record
—
Debian:14(1)
PackageVulnerable rangeFix by version rangeDependents
node-traverse0.6.7+~0.6.32-1
  • every version on: no fix on record
—

Weakness Classification(1)

MITRE Common Weakness Enumeration — the root-cause categories this CVE belongs to.

Data Freshness Timeline

(refreshed 7× in last 7d / 39× in last 30d)

Each row is a time one of our pipelines fetched, updated or re-scored this CVE. For example, "NVD update" means NVD published or revised its analysis for this CVE; "MITRE cvelistV5" means we ingested or refreshed it from the CNA feed. An arrow marks a change the record states ("CVSS v3 → 9.1"); EPSS and GHSA rows show the values recorded at that time, not what changed (EPSS values are rounded; hover one for the exact figures). Most recent first.

  1. 2026-10-31 16:31 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.3% · 20th percentile
  2. 2026-10-30 16:33 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.3% · 20th percentile
  3. 2026-10-29 16:32 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.3% · 20th percentile
  4. 2026-10-29 14:56 UTCEG score recompute
  5. 2026-10-28 16:31 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.3% · 20th percentile
  6. 2026-10-27 16:31 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.3% · 20th percentile
  7. 2026-10-26 16:30 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.3% · 20th percentile
  8. 2026-10-25 16:32 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.3% · 20th percentile
  9. 2026-10-25 14:54 UTCEG score recompute
  10. 2026-10-24 16:32 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.3% · 19th percentile
  11. 2026-10-23 16:31 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.3% · 19th percentile
  12. 2026-10-23 08:44 UTCEG score recompute
  13. 2026-10-22 16:33 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.3% · 19th percentile
  14. 2026-10-21 16:32 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.3% · 19th percentile
  15. 2026-10-20 16:32 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.3% · 19th percentile
  16. 2026-10-19 16:31 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.3% · 19th percentile
  17. 2026-10-18 16:31 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.3% · 19th percentile
  18. 2026-10-18 05:07 UTCEG score recompute
  19. 2026-10-17 16:33 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.3% · 19th percentile
  20. 2026-10-16 16:40 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.3% · 19th percentile
  21. 2026-10-15 16:31 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.3% · 19th percentile
  22. 2026-10-14 16:32 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.3% · 19th percentile
  23. 2026-10-13 16:33 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.3% · 18th percentile
  24. 2026-10-12 16:38 UTCEG score recompute
  25. 2026-10-12 16:33 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.3% · 18th percentile
Show 14 more
  1. 2026-10-11 20:14 UTCEG score recompute
  2. 2026-10-11 18:26 UTCEG score recompute
  3. 2026-10-11 15:00 UTCEG score recompute
  4. 2026-10-11 13:47 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.3% · 18th percentile
  5. 2026-10-10 19:59 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.3% · 18th percentile
  6. 2026-10-10 17:29 UTCEG score recompute
  7. 2026-10-09 20:06 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.3% · 18th percentile
  8. 2026-10-08 19:34 UTCEG score recompute
  9. 2026-10-08 17:11 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.3% · 18th percentile
  10. 2026-10-07 21:25 UTCEG score recompute
  11. 2026-10-07 20:47 UTCEG score recompute
  12. 2026-10-07 20:22 UTCEG score recompute
  13. 2026-10-07 19:43 UTCEG score recomputeFirst assessed: 6.5 MEDIUM
  14. 2026-10-07 19:41 UTCMITRE cvelistV5first tracked

Frequently asked(5)

What is CVE-2026-107353?
CVE-2026-107353 is a medium-severity vulnerability; its CVE record was published on October 7, 2026. traverse (npm) versions 0.3.6 through 0.3.9, 0.4.0 through 0.4.6, 0.5.0 through 0.5.2, and 0.6.0 through 0.6.11 allow prototype pollution through set(). When the path passed to set() crosses a primitive value, the next path segment is resolved on that primitive's built-in prototype, so an…
When was the CVE record for CVE-2026-107353 published?
The CVE record for CVE-2026-107353 was published on October 7, 2026. That is the record's publication date; the vulnerability itself may have been made public earlier. EchelonGraph's copy of the record carries a last-modified date of October 8, 2026; the record at its source may have been updated since.
Is CVE-2026-107353 actively exploited?
CVE-2026-107353 is not currently on CISA's Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog. FIRST EPSS estimates a 0.3% probability of exploitation in the next 30 days (20th percentile of EPSS-scored CVEs).
What is the CVSS score of CVE-2026-107353?
CVE-2026-107353 has a CVSS base score of 6.5 (a secondary CVSS source that NVD displays; NVD's own analysis pending).
How do I remediate CVE-2026-107353?
The CVE record's solution for CVE-2026-107353, written by its CNA Harborist, names the fix: "Upgrade to traverse 0.6.12 or later, or, on older release lines, to 0.5.3, 0.4.7, or 0.3.10."

Dependency Blast Radius

See which npm, PyPI, Go, and Maven packages are affected by CVE-2026-107353

Explore →

Is Your Infrastructure Affected by CVE-2026-107353?

EchelonGraph automatically scans your cloud infrastructure and maps CVE exposure using blast radius analysis.