CVE Intelligence
Skip to main content
HIGH

CVE-2026-54030

CVE-2026-54030 — LibreChat: Missing Resource Parameter Validation in MCP OAuth Flow

LibreChat is an enhanced ChatGPT clone that supports multiple AI providers. Prior to 0.8.5, LibreChat's MCP OAuth implementation does not validate that the resource parameter from OAuth Protected Resource metadata (RFC 9728) matches the configured MCP server URL, allowing a malicious MCP server to steal access tokens intended for a legitimate server. This vulnerability is fixed in 0.8.5.

Published Updated Sources: cvelistV5, GitHub_M

Triage

Is it exploited, how likely is exploitation, what does it touch, and how severe do the scoring sources call it.

Exploitation

Unreported

no source claims exploitation

EPSS

0%

chance of exploitation in 30 days

Affects

danny avila

librechat

CVSS base

8

HIGH

CISA SSVC assessment

Three decision points CISA publishes for the CVEs it assesses · SSVC 2.0.3. A stakeholder decision, not a severity score.

CISA

Exploitation

PoC

none · proof-of-concept · active

Automatable

No

can an attacker script all four kill-chain steps

Technical impact

Total

partial · total control of the vulnerable component

Affected scope

The catalog records vendors and products as separate lists, not pairs, so which product belongs to which vendor is not something this page can say.

Vendors (1)

danny avila

Products (1)

librechat

Every base score collected

Sources score independently and disagree; each row says who scored it and under which version.

ScoreVersionSeverityExpl.ImpactSource
8CVSS 3.1HIGH——cvelistV5

Weakness & attack patterns

  • CWE-346

Attack patterns reported against this CVE. The ATT&CK techniques below are inferred from its weakness class.

  • T1557.002Adversary-in-the-Middle: ARP Cache Poisoning
  • T1584.002Compromise Infrastructure: DNS Server
  • T1134Access Token Manipulation

References

1 on the record

Elsewhere on this site

Not in any source we poll

Listed rather than left blank: an empty field and an unmeasured one look identical on screen, and only one is a reason to look elsewhere.

  • No confirmed IOCs, IP addresses, domains, file hashes, or malware artifacts supplied.
  • No organization-specific asset inventory, compensating-control status, or patch deployment evidence supplied.
  • No exploit packet captures, log samples, or incident case IDs supplied.