CVE-2026-87975

MEDIUMPre-NVD 4.34.3
EchelonGraph scoreMEDIUM confidence

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

Score 4.3 from GitHub Security Advisory (severity: MODERATE) published 2026-10-06. A secondary CVSS source baseline 4.3; sources differ by 0.0.

Triggered by: GitHub Security Advisory CVSS
Sources: EPSS, GitHub Security Advisory, a secondary CVSS source

Also known asEUVD-2026-93396 (ENISA EUVD) · GHSA-x869-hccf-fv7r (GitHub Security Advisories)Source: ENISA EUVD

4.3EG
EchelonGraph verdictMonitorRemediate within your standard update timelines (the SSVC decision on this page).
  • Lower severity and no public exploit yet
CISA-KEV: Not listedEPSS PROB: 0.2%CVSS: 4.3Exploit: None knownExposed services: Not assessed

A fix is available — apply it.

An issue was discovered in Django 6.1 before 6.1.2, 6.0 before 6.0.9, and 5.2 before 5.2.18. django.forms.models.BaseModelFormSet.save_existing_objects() used the presence of a primary key on a submitted form's instance as evidence that the instance belonged to the formset's limiting queryset. An object outside that queryset is represented by a newly constructed instance whose primary key can still be populated from submitted data when the model's primary key is a field accepted by the form, such as a OneToOneField or parent link used as the primary key of an inline formset's model, or a natural or UUID primary key included in the form's fields. This allows an authenticated user permitted to submit such a formset to delete rows outside the limiting queryset, without any permission on the targeted object, via forged management-form data marking an out-of-queryset object for deletion. Models using the default AutoField primary key are not affected. Earlier, unsupported Django series (such as 5.1.x, 5.0.x, and 4.2.x) were not evaluated and may also be affected. Django would like to thank Seonggwon Yoon for reporting this issue.

CVSS v3
4.3
EG Score
4.3MEDIUMmedium confidence
EG Risk
19
EG Risk 19/100

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)
Severity43% × 45%
Impact severity (EG Severity): CVSS 4.3 of 10. Never the KEV-floored or EPSS-lifted EG Score.
Exploitation0.2% × 40%
FIRST EPSS: the 30-day exploitation probability when EchelonGraph scored this CVE.
Automatability0% × 15%
CISA's SSVC Automatable value: no (Vulnrichment).
SSVC (CISA's decision table, applied by EchelonGraph): Track at every mission impact level.
Exploitation none (CISA Vulnrichment) · Automatable no (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: A fix is available. Apply it within your standard update timelines.
EPSS PROB
0.2%
EPSS %ILE
13th
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 (4.3): severity, escalated by confirmed exploitation. This CVE's 4.3 is its impact severity (EG Severity), not escalated.

EG Severity
4.3 MEDIUMCVSS-B, impact only: no KEV listing, EPSS or EG-KEV tier raises it.GitHub Security Advisory CVSS
EG Likelihood
0.2% within 30 daysSource: FIRST EPSS (model v2026.06.15, score date 2026-11-10). 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 every mission impact level.CISA BOD 26-04: 60 days if the affected system is publicly exposed; Fix on system upgrade 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 every mission impact level.

A fix is available. Apply it within your standard update timelines.

Exploitation none (CISA Vulnrichment) · Automatable no (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)60 days if the affected system is publicly exposed; Fix on system upgrade if it is not.

The score's inputs: In CISA KEV no (CISA's KEV catalog) · Automatable no (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 6, 2026

Last Modified

October 6, 2026

Advisory Details (7)

Auto-updated Oct 6, 2026
Patch available. Sources: github_commit.
Web page

Django security releases issued: 6.1.2, 6.0.9, and 5.2.18 | Weblog | Django

https://www.djangoproject.com/weblog/2026/oct/06/security-releases/
GitHub commit

commit ff27883ca055 (django/django)

Fix landed in django/django commit ff27883ca055 — awaiting tagged release

https://github.com/django/django/commit/ff27883ca055aa9ab23015b50674a5b10dfe5a41
GitHub commit

commit b83ab92bc547 (django/django)

Fix landed in django/django commit b83ab92bc547 — awaiting tagged release

https://github.com/django/django/commit/b83ab92bc5474558b083a840ea4628b3261b2cfe
GitHub commit

commit cce6c57ed30e (django/django)

Fix landed in django/django commit cce6c57ed30e — awaiting tagged release

https://github.com/django/django/commit/cce6c57ed30ea83725f9d6abb2fe5ee932bab107
GitHub commit

commit 83cbd21be574 (django/django)

Fix landed in django/django commit 83cbd21be574 — awaiting tagged release

https://github.com/django/django/commit/83cbd21be57483e6b3eb6e4688a561c841aff75e
Web page
https://groups.google.com/g/django-announce
Web page

Archive of security issues | Django documentation | Django

https://docs.djangoproject.com/en/dev/releases/security/

Vendor Advisories for CVE-2026-87975(1)

These vendors published their own advisory mentioning this CVE — often with vendor-specific remediation steps + affected product lists not in NVD.

Affected Packages

(4 across 4 ecosystems)
Alpine:v3.24(1)
PackageVulnerable rangeFix by version rangeDependents
py3-django—
  • every version up to 5.2.18-r0: fixed in 5.2.18-r0
—
Debian:12(1)
PackageVulnerable rangeFix by version rangeDependents
python-django3:3.2.19-1 ... 3:3.2.25-0+deb12u5 (12 versions)
  • every version up to 3:3.2.25-0+deb12u6: fixed in 3:3.2.25-0+deb12u6
—
Debian:13(1)
PackageVulnerable rangeFix by version rangeDependents
python-django3:4.2.23-1 ... 3:6.1~rc1-1 (70 versions)
  • every version on: no fix on record
—
Debian:14(1)
PackageVulnerable rangeFix by version rangeDependents
python-django3:4.2.23-1 ... 3:5.2~rc1-1 (48 versions)
  • every version up to 3:5.2.18-1: fixed in 3:5.2.18-1
—

Weakness Classification(1)

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

Data Freshness Timeline

(refreshed 7× in last 7d / 34× 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 its CVE.org record (CNA or CISA ADP). 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). "EchelonGraph re-scored" is our own recompute of this CVE's score, not an update from a source, and is not counted in the refreshes above. Most recent first.

  1. 2026-11-12 16:35 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 13th percentile
  2. 2026-11-11 16:41 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 13th percentile
  3. 2026-11-11 08:06 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  4. 2026-11-11 08:05 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-x869-hccf-fv7r · GitHub severity MODERATE · GitHub CVSS 4.3
  5. 2026-11-10 16:45 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 13th percentile
  6. 2026-11-09 16:36 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 13th percentile
  7. 2026-11-08 16:41 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 13th percentile
  8. 2026-11-06 16:39 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 13th percentile
  9. 2026-11-05 16:39 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 13th percentile
  10. 2026-11-05 15:34 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  11. 2026-11-05 15:34 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-x869-hccf-fv7r · GitHub severity MODERATE · GitHub CVSS 4.3
  12. 2026-11-04 16:37 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 13th percentile
  13. 2026-11-04 02:01 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  14. 2026-11-04 02:01 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-x869-hccf-fv7r · GitHub severity MODERATE · GitHub CVSS 4.3
  15. 2026-11-03 16:49 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 13th percentile
  16. 2026-11-02 16:46 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 13th percentile
  17. 2026-11-01 16:35 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 13th percentile
  18. 2026-10-31 16:33 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 13th percentile
  19. 2026-10-30 16:35 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 13th percentile
  20. 2026-10-29 17:07 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  21. 2026-10-29 17:07 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-x869-hccf-fv7r · GitHub CVSS 4.3
  22. 2026-10-29 16:34 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 13th percentile
  23. 2026-10-28 16:33 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 13th percentile
  24. 2026-10-27 16:32 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 13th percentile
  25. 2026-10-26 16:32 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 13th percentile
Show 40 more
  1. 2026-10-25 16:34 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 13th percentile
  2. 2026-10-25 13:53 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  3. 2026-10-24 16:34 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 13th percentile
  4. 2026-10-23 16:32 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 13th percentile
  5. 2026-10-22 16:35 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 13th percentile
  6. 2026-10-22 12:34 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  7. 2026-10-22 12:34 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-x869-hccf-fv7r · GitHub CVSS 4.3
  8. 2026-10-21 16:34 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 13th percentile
  9. 2026-10-20 16:33 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 13th percentile
  10. 2026-10-19 16:33 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 13th percentile
  11. 2026-10-18 16:33 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 13th percentile
  12. 2026-10-18 03:03 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  13. 2026-10-17 16:35 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 13th percentile
  14. 2026-10-16 16:44 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 13th percentile
  15. 2026-10-15 16:33 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 13th percentile
  16. 2026-10-14 16:34 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 13th percentile
  17. 2026-10-13 16:35 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 13th percentile
  18. 2026-10-12 16:35 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 13th percentile
  19. 2026-10-12 14:49 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  20. 2026-10-11 20:34 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-x869-hccf-fv7r · GitHub CVSS 4.3
  21. 2026-10-11 19:15 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  22. 2026-10-11 16:32 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  23. 2026-10-11 13:49 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 13th percentile
  24. 2026-10-11 13:49 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  25. 2026-10-10 20:00 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 13th percentile
  26. 2026-10-10 19:26 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  27. 2026-10-10 19:26 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-x869-hccf-fv7r · GitHub CVSS 4.3
  28. 2026-10-09 20:07 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 13th percentile
  29. 2026-10-09 18:17 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  30. 2026-10-09 18:17 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-x869-hccf-fv7r · GitHub CVSS 4.3
  31. 2026-10-08 17:13 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 13th percentile
  32. 2026-10-08 17:09 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  33. 2026-10-08 17:09 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-x869-hccf-fv7r · GitHub CVSS 4.3
  34. 2026-10-07 23:48 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 13th percentile
  35. 2026-10-07 16:01 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  36. 2026-10-07 16:01 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-x869-hccf-fv7r · GitHub CVSS 4.3
  37. 2026-10-06 14:30 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  38. 2026-10-06 14:00 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  39. 2026-10-06 13:40 UTCEchelonGraph re-scoredFirst assessed: 4.3 MEDIUM
  40. 2026-10-06 13:39 UTCMITRE cvelistV5first tracked

Related CVEs(same product + same CWE)

Frequently asked(5)

What is CVE-2026-87975?
CVE-2026-87975 is a medium-severity vulnerability; its CVE record was published on October 6, 2026. An issue was discovered in Django 6.1 before 6.1.2, 6.0 before 6.0.9, and 5.2 before 5.2.18. django.forms.models.BaseModelFormSet.save_existing_objects() used the presence of a primary key on a submitted form's instance as evidence that the instance belonged to the formset's limiting queryset. An…
When was CVE-2026-87975 made public?
CVE-2026-87975 was made public on October 6, 2026: that is the date its CVE record's CNA, Django Software Foundation, gives for when the vulnerability was made public. The CVE record itself was published on October 6, 2026. EchelonGraph's copy of the record carries a last-modified date of October 6, 2026; the record at its source may have been updated since.
Is CVE-2026-87975 actively exploited?
CVE-2026-87975 is not currently on CISA's Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog. FIRST EPSS estimates a 0.2% probability of exploitation in the next 30 days (13th percentile of EPSS-scored CVEs).
What is the CVSS score of CVE-2026-87975?
CVE-2026-87975 has a CVSS base score of 4.3 (a secondary CVSS source that NVD displays; NVD's own analysis pending).
How do I remediate CVE-2026-87975?
A fix for CVE-2026-87975 is available: update to the fixed version the vendor names in its advisory. The vendor advisories EchelonGraph has for CVE-2026-87975 are linked in the Vendor Advisories panel on this page.

Dependency Blast Radius

See which npm, PyPI, Go, and Maven packages are affected by CVE-2026-87975

Explore →

Is Your Infrastructure Affected by CVE-2026-87975?

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

Book a Demo →Browse All CVEs