pypi package report

Is giskard-checks safe?

2 known vulnerabilities, worst severity MODERATE.

cvss
5.4

how bad it is if exploited, out of 10

epss
0.10%

chance of exploitation in the next 30 days

xyz score
not scored

CyberXYZ composite, out of 10

fig. 01 — GHSA-7xjm-g8f4-rp26, the advisory selected below

// advisories

GHSA-7xjm-g8f4-rp26

MODERATECVE-2026-40320

The ConformityCheck class in giskard-checks rendered the rule parameter through Jinja2's default Template() constructor. Because the rule string is silently interpreted as a Jinja2 template, a developer may not realize that template expressions embedded in rule definitions are evaluated at runtime. In a scenario where check definitions are loaded from an untrusted source (e.g. a shared project fil

Affected
<= 1.0.1b1
Fixed in
1.0.2b1
Weakness
CWE-1336
Published
2026-04-14
Source
github

GHSANVDMITREreferencereference

// dependencies

0 direct

Sign in for dependency paths and remediation

// ai model usage

No published models are known to use this package.

Checked 2026-09-22 at 00:49 UTC. The most recent advisory here was published 2026-04-14. Updated continuously from NVD, GHSA, OSV and CNA feeds.

Think a verdict here is wrong? Tell us — we respond within 2 business days.
Is giskard-checks safe? pypi package security report | CyberXYZ