AI Threat Alert
CVE-2026-100651
MEDIUMvLLM before 0.29.0 fails to enforce decoder prompt-length validation on the disaggregated serving endpoint /inference/v1/generate. When the request contains a 'features' (multimodal) payload, vllm/entrypoints/serve/disagg/serving.py builds a multimodal EngineInput directly from the caller-supplied...
Full CISO analysis pending enrichment.
How severe is it?
What is the attack surface?
What should I do?
No patch available
Monitor for updates. Consider compensating controls or temporary mitigations.
Which compliance frameworks are affected?
Compliance analysis pending. Sign in for full compliance mapping when available.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is CVE-2026-100651?
vLLM before 0.29.0 fails to enforce decoder prompt-length validation on the disaggregated serving endpoint /inference/v1/generate. When the request contains a 'features' (multimodal) payload, vllm/entrypoints/serve/disagg/serving.py builds a multimodal EngineInput directly from the caller-supplied token_ids, and GenerateRequest.token_ids (vllm/entrypoints/serve/disagg/protocol.py) is not checked against model_config.max_model_len. For multimodal processors that report skip_prompt_length_check=True (for example Nemotron Parse, Whisper, and FireRedLID), InputProcessor._validate_prompt_len() returns immediately for both encoder and decoder prompts, so an overlong prompt becomes an EngineCoreRequest and reaches the worker input-batch copy into a fixed max_model_len-wide NumPy row. A client able to reach the endpoint on an affected model configuration can therefore submit an overlong token_ids list to trigger a worker failure and denial of service. Fixed in 0.29.0.
Is CVE-2026-100651 actively exploited?
No confirmed active exploitation of CVE-2026-100651 has been reported, but organizations should still patch proactively.
How to fix CVE-2026-100651?
No patch is currently available. Monitor vendor advisories for updates.
What is the CVSS score for CVE-2026-100651?
CVE-2026-100651 has a CVSS v3.1 base score of 6.5 (MEDIUM).
What are the technical details?
Original Advisory
vLLM before 0.29.0 fails to enforce decoder prompt-length validation on the disaggregated serving endpoint /inference/v1/generate. When the request contains a 'features' (multimodal) payload, vllm/entrypoints/serve/disagg/serving.py builds a multimodal EngineInput directly from the caller-supplied token_ids, and GenerateRequest.token_ids (vllm/entrypoints/serve/disagg/protocol.py) is not checked against model_config.max_model_len. For multimodal processors that report skip_prompt_length_check=True (for example Nemotron Parse, Whisper, and FireRedLID), InputProcessor._validate_prompt_len() returns immediately for both encoder and decoder prompts, so an overlong prompt becomes an EngineCoreRequest and reaches the worker input-batch copy into a fixed max_model_len-wide NumPy row. A client able to reach the endpoint on an affected model configuration can therefore submit an overlong token_ids list to trigger a worker failure and denial of service. Fixed in 0.29.0.
Weaknesses (CWE)
CWE-400 — Uncontrolled Resource Consumption: The product does not properly control the allocation and maintenance of a limited resource.
- [Architecture and Design] Design throttling mechanisms into the system architecture. The best protection is to limit the amount of resources that an unauthorized user can cause to be expended. A strong authentication and access control model will help prevent such attacks from occurring in the first place. The login application should be protected against DoS attacks as much as possible. Limiting the database access, perhaps by caching result sets, can help minimize the resources expended. To further limit the potential for a DoS attack, consider tracking the rate of requests received from users and blocking requests that exceed a defined rate threshold.
- [Architecture and Design] Mitigation of resource exhaustion attacks requires that the target system either: The first of these solutions is an issue in itself though, since it may allow attackers to prevent the use of the system by a particular valid user. If the attacker impersonates the valid user, they may be able to prevent the user from accessing the server in question. The second solution is simply difficult to effectively institute -- and even when properly done, it does not provide a full solution. It simply makes the attack require more resources on the part of the attacker. recognizes the attack and denies that user further access for a given amount of time, or uniformly throttles all requests in order to make it more difficult to consume resources more quickly than they can again be freed.
Source: MITRE CWE corpus.
CVSS Vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H