HOL LogoGuard

Explore HOL

  • HOL home
  • AI agent registry
  • AI plugins
  • Open standards
  • HOL members

Guard product

  • Guard overviewLocal security and control for AI agents and the tools they use.
  • FeaturesRuntime protection, policy routing, review, and evidence.

Explore Guard

  • Product previewWalk through Guard surfaces in read-only demo mode.
  • ComparisonCompare Guard with native controls and AI security vendors.

AI tools

  • All AI toolsEvery supported AI tool and how Guard applies policy to it.
  • Codex
  • Claude Code
  • Cursor
  • Antigravity CLI
  • OpenCode
  • Hermes
  • OpenClaw
  • GitHub Copilot CLI
  • Antigravity
  • Kimi
  • Grok
  • Pi / Oh My Pi
  • Zcode

Extensions

  • All extensionsBrowse command and MCP coverage with owners and stated limits.
  • Command coverageShell command protection across clouds, databases, backups, and packages.
  • MCP server coverageSee how Guard maps risk state across MCP tools and servers.
  • Core safetyThe safety floor listings that ship with Guard.
  • Data and resilienceBackup and storage command protection.
  • Cloud and infrastructureAWS, Azure, GCP, Kubernetes, and more.

Security

  • AI security hubSecurity research, advisories, and agent safety coverage.
  • AI tool securitySecurity profiles for each supported coding agent.
  • Safe labsHands-on attack simulations with safe boundaries.
  • Redacted warningsReal blocked actions with sensitive details removed.
  • AdvisoriesCoordinated disclosure reports for AI tooling.
  • Active CVEsSearch active CVEs affecting AI tooling.

Learn

  • Security guidesPractical guides for securing AI agent workflows.
  • DocsInstall, configure, and operate Guard with confidence.
  • ResearchPublished security research, benchmarks, and methodology.

Community

  • ReleasesVersion history, shipped changes and upgrade notes.
  • ContributorsThe people and contributions behind HOL Guard.
  • AffiliatesShare Guard with your audience and earn from referrals.
  • SponsorKeep agent security open: sponsor a project, place a banner, or fund a security initiative.
PricingEnterpriseOpen AppInstall Guard
  1. Guard
  2. Security
  3. CVEs
  4. CVE 2026 55514 vllm denial of service via prompt embeds on m
HOL Guard

Public security guidance for teams protecting AI harnesses, MCP servers, skills, prompts, and local tool execution.

Install Guard

AI Security

  • Prompt injection
  • MCP security
  • OWASP MCP mapping
  • Supply chain

Resources

  • Trust packet
  • Harness setup
  • Redacted warnings
  • Safe labs

Product

  • Install Guard
  • Pricing
  • Open dashboard
Guard
  • Guard Overview
  • Releases
  • Contributors
  • Install Guard
  • Pricing
Docs
  • Documentation Index
  • Developer Hub
  • API Reference
  • Root OpenAPI
  • Registry OpenAPI
  • Run in Postman
  • Standards
  • Submit ERC-8004 Contract
  • Feature Your Agent
Best Plugins
  • Browse Plugins
  • Plugin Launches
  • Best Claude Plugins
  • Best Codex Plugins
  • Best Grok Plugins
  • Best Kimi Plugins
  • Best DeepSeek Plugins
  • Best Antigravity Plugins
  • Best MCP Servers
  • Best Cursor Plugins
  • Best OpenCode Plugins
Best Agents
  • Best ERC-8004 Agents
  • Best Virtuals Agents
  • Best MCP Servers
  • Best A2A Agents
  • Best x402 Payable
  • All Categories
Community
  • Telegram
  • X
More
  • About HOL
  • Contact
  • Blog
  • GitHub
  • Privacy
  • Terms of Service
Settings

Copyright ยฉ 2026 HOL DAO LLC. All rights reserved.

Back to active CVEs
High ยท CVSS 7.1CVE-2026-55514GHSA-33CG-GXV8-3P8G

vLLM denial of service via prompt embeds on M-RoPE modelsCVE-2026-55514

Answer in brief

CVE-2026-55514 records a High severity (CVSS 7.1) vulnerability in vLLM denial of service via prompt embeds on M-RoPE models. The current sources do not mark it as known exploited. The current feed maps vllm (pypi). Check affected ranges and fixed versions before updating.

Analysis pending evidence review

HOL Guard separates source facts from reviewed analysis. See the methodology.

Published Jul 6, 2026Updated Aug 24, 2026Source checked Oct 10, 2026First seen by HOL Jul 6, 2026Material review Aug 24, 2026
Upstream Advisory

Key facts

Risk
High ยท CVSS 7.1
Exploitation
Not marked as known exploited
Affected software
1 mapped package or product
Fix availability
Available

Why this deserves its current priority

CVSS is 7.1. The current sources do not mark it as known exploited. Treat this as a source-backed prioritization signal, not a statement about your environment.

Analysis status

Analysis pending evidence review

Factual feed record only; HOL analysis is not approved for indexing. Read the methodology.

Affected scope and exposure questions

The current feed maps vllm (pypi). Check affected ranges and fixed versions before updating.

Mapped affected packages and fixed versions
PackageAffected rangeFixed version
vllmpypi>=0.12.0 <0.24.00.24.0

Recommended response

  1. 1Check inventory. Check lockfiles and deployed manifests for vllm.
  2. 2Review the reported fix. Update vllm to 0.24.0 if you use the affected versions. Test the change in a non-production environment first.

Evidence timeline and material changes

  1. Published upstream

    Jul 6, 2026

    Evidence: source:osv:source_dates:source-dates:record
  2. Source modified

    Aug 24, 2026

    Evidence: source:osv:source_dates:source-dates:record
  3. First seen by HOL

    Jul 6, 2026

Sources and claim methodology

  • GitHub security advisorygithub.com
  • GitHub security advisorygithub.com
  • GitHub security advisorygithub.com
  • GitHub security advisorygithub.com
  • GitHub security advisorygithub.com
  • GitHub security advisorygithub.com
  • NVD vulnerability recordnvd.nist.gov
Upstream source description

### Summary _Short summary of the problem. Make the impact and severity as clear as possible. For example: An unsafe deserialization vulnerability allows any unauthenticated user to execute arbitrary code on the server._ Sending a pure prompt embeds payload in a `/v1/completions` request with a model using M-RoPE causes the EngineCore to fail an assertion and fatally crash, shutting down the entire server application. Any remote user who is authorized to make a `/v1/completions` endpoint can trivially make such a request and induce a crash. ### Details _Give all details on the vulnerability. Pointing to the incriminated source code is very helpful for the maintainer._ In commit [56669c1](https://github.com/vllm-project/vllm/commit/56669c1f293d5c53b6a19ddf2f78802fa9fff2c2), a simple assert intended to be a type-narrowing assert was added to the `_init_mrope_positions` method in `GPUModelRunner` (the offending line on main at the time of writing: https://github.com/vllm-project/vllm/blob/2d481f8a946ee0521872af0f098674a8ee01ce4a/vllm/v1/worker/gpu_model_runner.py#L1588-L1607). ```python assert req_state.prompt_token_ids is not None, ( "M-RoPE requires prompt_token_ids to be available." ) ``` This type narrowing assert is to prevent mypy errors later in the function because `None` is not a valid type for `mrope_model.get_mrope_input_positions`. Unfortunately, this assertion is not always true. `/v1/completions` requests that specify `prompt=None` and `prompt_embeds=<not none>` will indeed create a CachedRequestState where `prompt_token_ids` is `None`. This triggers the assertion, which in turn crashes the EngineCore and the Server application. ``` (EngineCore pid=351) ERROR 06-11 00:48:03 [core.py:1167] File "/usr/local/lib/python3.12/dist-packages/vllm/v1/worker/gpu_model_runner.py", line 3997, in execute_model (EngineCore pid=351) ERROR 06-11 00:48:03 [core.py:1167] deferred_state_corrections_fn = self._update_states(scheduler_output) (EngineCore pid=351) ERROR 06-11 00:48:03 [core.py:1167] ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ (EngineCore pid=351) ERROR 06-11 00:48:03 [core.py:1167] File "/usr/local/lib/python3.12/dist-packages/vllm/v1/worker/gpu_model_runner.py", line 1239, in _update_states (EngineCore pid=351) ERROR 06-11 00:48:03 [core.py:1167] self._init_mrope_positions(req_state) (EngineCore pid=351) ERROR 06-11 00:48:03 [core.py:1167] File "/usr/local/lib/python3.12/dist-packages/vllm/v1/worker/gpu_model_runner.py", line 1582, in _init_mrope_positions (EngineCore pid=351) ERROR 06-11 00:48:03 [core.py:1167] assert req_state.prompt_token_ids is not None, ( (EngineCore pid=351) ERROR 06-11 00:48:03 [core.py:1167] ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ (EngineCore pid=351) ERROR 06-11 00:48:03 [core.py:1167] AssertionError: M-RoPE requires prompt_token_ids to be available. (APIServer pid=1) ERROR 06-11 00:48:03 [async_llm.py:704] AsyncLLM output_handler failed. (APIServer pid=1) ERROR 06-11 00:48:03 [async_llm.py:704] Traceback (most recent call last): (APIServer pid=1) ERROR 06-11 00:48:03 [async_llm.py:704] File "/usr/local/lib/python3.12/dist-packages/vllm/v1/engine/async_llm.py", line 660, in output_handler (APIServer pid=1) ERROR 06-11 00:48:03 [async_llm.py:704] outputs = await engine_core.get_output_async() (APIServer pid=1) ERROR 06-11 00:48:03 [async_llm.py:704] ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ (APIServer pid=1) ERROR 06-11 00:48:03 [async_llm.py:704] File "/usr/local/lib/python3.12/dist-packages/vllm/v1/engine/core_client.py", line 1030, in get_output_async (APIServer pid=1) ERROR 06-11 00:48:03 [async_llm.py:704] raise self._format_exception(outputs) from None (APIServer pid=1) ERROR 06-11 00:48:03 [async_llm.py:704] vllm.v1.engine.exceptions.EngineDeadError: EngineCore encountered an issue. See stack trace (above) for the root cause. ``` All requests using the `/v1/chat/completions` endpoints will have text/`prompt_token_ids` parts (corresponding to the chat template), and `prompt_embeds` parts are handled as mm_features. This method (rightly) filters out those `prompt_embeds` content parts as they are treated as text positions. A sufficient solution to type narrowing here without raising a fatal assertion is to instead replace the assertion with a using dummy token ids: ```python def _init_mrope_positions(self, req_state: CachedRequestState): model = self.get_model() assert supports_mrope(model), "M-RoPE support is not implemented." mrope_model = cast(SupportsMRoPE, model) # Filter out prompt_embeds modality (text-only position info) mrope_features = [ f for f in req_state.mm_features if f.modality != "prompt_embeds" ] # Handle both token_ids and embeddings-only inputs if req_state.prompt_token_ids is not None: input_tokens = req_state.prompt_token_ids elif req_state.prompt_embeds is not None: # For text-only embeddings, dummy token IDs are safe since # get_mrope_input_positions only uses len(input_tokens) when mm_features is empty seq_len = req_state.prompt_embeds.shape[0] input_tokens = list(range(seq_len)) # Verify no mm_features remain (should be true after prompt_embeds filter) assert len(mrope_features) == 0, ( "M-RoPE with prompt_embeds-only input should have no multimodal features" ) else: raise ValueError( "M-RoPE requires either prompt_token_ids or prompt_embeds." ) req_state.mrope_positions, req_state.mrope_position_delta = ( mrope_model.get_mrope_input_positions( input_tokens, mrope_features, ) ) ``` Technically, in isolation, this method still crashes in the case where `req_state.prompt_token_ids is None and req_state.mm_features`, so the solution above still leaves that potential vector open. As far as can be determined, however, such a `req_state` is impossible in the first place in online mode, because it would require a `/v1/completions` request with `prompt_embeds` AND multimodal features, but the `/v1/completions` request schema does not expose multimodal inputs in any discernible way. Today, those are the only two endpoints with `prompt_embeds` support. When in offline mode, it *is technically* possible to directly create an `EngineCoreRequest` that has `prompt_embeds and not prompt_token_ids and mm_features`, and pass that to `LLM.generate`. That would trigger this same assertion, and no validation would prevent that combination. It is strongly suspected, though, that this combination would be undefined in any model that support M-RoPE, because it would not be possible to determine which token positions correspond to `mm_features`. The proposed solution above would end up not setting `req_state.mrope_positions` and `req_state.mrope_position_delta` in this scenario, which could result in undefined behavior. `prompt_embeds` is far more familiar here than M-RoPE, and it is understood that each model that supports it is responsible for defining its own `get_mrope_input_positions` which have varying implementations. There is insufficient knowledge to be prescriptive in how the two features should interact in the offline case, other than possibly raising a validation error earlier on preventing that combination (which would emulate the current assertion behavior). Regardless, in offline mode, the chances of a remote user being able to exploit this are slim-to-nil compared to the online case which is incredibly straightforward. ### Impact _What kind of vulnerability is it? Who is impacted?_ - Denial of Service caused by an incorrect assertion inside of the `GPUModelRunner` which causes a fatal EngineCore exception - Any configuration with `--enable-prompt-embeds` and M-RoPE-supported model is vulnerable - The attack is extremely easy from the remote attacker's perspective (copying the official `prompt_embeds` online mode docs examples almost-verbatim, accounting for model-name and connection details, of course, will induce a guaranteed shutdown)

Quoted source text, attributed separately from HOL analysis.

Record context

Vulnerability class
Deserialization
EPSS
Not reported
CWE IDs
CWE-617
Source
OSV
Source checked
Oct 10, 2026
References
7 linked sources
Open source record