Skip to content

VercelAIAdapter trusts client-controlled `providerMetadata` to construct `UploadedFile` — S3/GCS confused deputy via provider metadata injection

Moderate
dsfaccini published GHSA-h7p7-w5gc-xj3w Jun 10, 2026

Package

pip pydantic-ai (pip)

Affected versions

>= 1.65.0, < 1.106.0
>= 2.0.0b1, < 2.0.0b6

Patched versions

1.106.0
2.0.0b6
pip pydantic-ai-slim (pip)
>= 1.65.0, < 1.106.0
>= 2.0.0b1, < 2.0.0b6
1.106.0
2.0.0b6

Description

Summary

A client that can submit message history to a Pydantic AI UI adapter can reference arbitrary files in the application's model-provider or cloud-storage account. The server forwards the reference to the model provider, which fetches it using the server's own credentials, allowing the client to read files it should not have access to.

Details

UI adapters reconstruct file parts from client-submitted message history and forward them to the model provider. File URL parts are validated against a scheme allowlist before being forwarded, but UploadedFile references — which point to a file by provider file ID or cloud-storage URI (e.g. s3://…, gs://…) — were forwarded without validation.

Because the provider resolves an UploadedFile using the server-side identity (IAM role, service account, or provider API key) rather than the client's, a client that crafts message history containing an attacker-chosen UploadedFile can cause the server to read objects belonging to its own account or to other tenants, given a referenceable identifier.

Impact

Applications that pass untrusted client-submitted message history to an agent through a UI adapter (such as the Vercel AI adapter). Exploitation requires the attacker to reference a valid file identifier; depending on how the application names objects, such identifiers are not always unguessable.

Patches

Upgrade to 1.106.0 (1.x) or 2.0.0b6 (the 2.x beta line), which validate UploadedFile references on client-submitted messages the same way file URLs are validated.

Workarounds

If you cannot upgrade, do not pass untrusted client-submitted message history to the agent, or strip UploadedFile parts from incoming messages before running the agent.

Severity

Moderate

CVSS overall score

This score calculates overall vulnerability severity from 0 to 10 and is based on the Common Vulnerability Scoring System (CVSS).
/ 10

CVSS v3 base metrics

Attack vector
Network
Attack complexity
High
Privileges required
None
User interaction
None
Scope
Changed
Confidentiality
High
Integrity
None
Availability
None

CVSS v3 base metrics

Attack vector: More severe the more the remote (logically and physically) an attacker can be in order to exploit the vulnerability.
Attack complexity: More severe for the least complex attacks.
Privileges required: More severe if no privileges are required.
User interaction: More severe when no user interaction is required.
Scope: More severe when a scope change occurs, e.g. one vulnerable component impacts resources in components beyond its security scope.
Confidentiality: More severe when loss of data confidentiality is highest, measuring the level of data access available to an unauthorized user.
Integrity: More severe when loss of data integrity is the highest, measuring the consequence of data modification possible by an unauthorized user.
Availability: More severe when the loss of impacted component availability is highest.
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:N/A:N

CVE ID

CVE-2026-54249

Weaknesses

Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF)

The web server receives a URL or similar request from an upstream component and retrieves the contents of this URL, but it does not sufficiently ensure that the request is being sent to the expected destination. Learn more on MITRE.

Credits