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 63761 surrealdb before 310 algorithm downgrade via es512
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 © 2026 HOL DAO LLC. All rights reserved.

Back to active CVEs
Medium · CVSS 5.3CVE-2026-63761GHSA-FWG2-GR34-Q3W8

SurrealDB before 3.1.0 Algorithm Downgrade via ES512CVE-2026-63761

Answer in brief

CVE-2026-63761 records a Medium severity (CVSS 5.3) vulnerability in SurrealDB before 3.1.0 Algorithm Downgrade via ES512. The current sources do not mark it as known exploited. The current feed maps surrealdb/surrealdb (generic), surrealdb (rust). 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 20, 2026Updated Oct 8, 2026Source checked Oct 8, 2026First seen by HOL Jul 1, 2026Material review Oct 8, 2026
Upstream Advisory

Key facts

Risk
Medium · CVSS 5.3
Exploitation
Not marked as known exploited
Affected software
2 mapped packages or products
Fix availability
Available

Why this deserves its current priority

CVSS is 5.3. 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 surrealdb/surrealdb (generic), surrealdb (rust). Check affected ranges and fixed versions before updating.

Mapped affected packages and fixed versions
PackageAffected rangeFixed version
surrealdb/surrealdbgeneric>=0 <3.1.03.1.0
surrealdbrust<3.1.03.1.0

Recommended response

  1. 1Check inventory. Check lockfiles and deployed manifests for surrealdb/surrealdb, surrealdb.
  2. 2Review the reported fix. Update surrealdb/surrealdb to 3.1.0; surrealdb to 3.1.0 if you use the affected versions. Test the change in a non-production environment first.

Evidence timeline and material changes

  1. Published upstream

    Jul 20, 2026

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

    Oct 8, 2026

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

    Jul 1, 2026

Sources and claim methodology

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

SurrealDB before 3.1.0 silently substitutes the ES384 algorithm when a JWT access method is configured with ALGORITHM ES512 (DEFINE ACCESS ... TYPE JWT ALGORITHM ES512), because the underlying jsonwebtoken crate (v10.x) has no ES512 variant and the mapping defaults to ES384 without any error, warning, or log message. Users who supply the correct P-521 key for ES512 experience authentication handshake failures due to the curve mismatch with ES384 (which expects P-384), and tokens are rejected by external systems expecting genuine ES512 signatures. The flaw cannot be used to forge tokens or compromise data confidentiality or integrity, as ES384 remains cryptographically strong.

Quoted source text, attributed separately from HOL analysis.

Related CVEs

  • Obsidian Desktop < 1.14.0 RCE via Slides Plugin MarkdownSame generic ecosystem
  • Obsidian Desktop < 1.14.0 RCE via MathJax Safe Filter BypassSame generic ecosystem
  • mk-oracle: Local privilege escalation via malicious Oracle Instant ClientSame generic ecosystem
  • WordPress MainWP Child plugin <= 6.2.1 - Deserialization of untrusted data vulnerabilitySame generic ecosystem
  • HP Sure Click Kernel Buffer OverflowSame generic ecosystem
  • Zimbra Collaboration Suite EWS Extension Authorization Bypass via Crafted Composite Folder/Item IdentifierSame generic ecosystem

Record context

Vulnerability class
Missing Auth
EPSS
Not reported
CWE IDs
CWE-327
Source
CVE List V5
Source checked
Oct 8, 2026
References
6 linked sources
Open source record