CVE Intelligence
Medium Insecure deserialization

CVE-2026-83557 — jackson-databind omits java.lang.Comparable from DefaultBaseTypeLimitingValidator's unsafe base types

DefaultBaseTypeLimitingValidator is the PolymorphicTypeValidator applied automatically whenever @JsonTypeInfo is used without an explicitly configured custom validator. It denies polymorphic resolution only for a fixed set of "unsafe base types", and its isSafeSubType method returns true unconditionally for every base type outside that set. java.lang.Comparable was absent from the list despite being implemented by a very large fraction of JDK and application classes, comparable in breadth to java.io.Serializable, which is on the list for that reason. An application declaring an @JsonTypeInfo-annotated property or class with Comparable as its base type, and no custom PolymorphicTypeValidator, will accept a type identifier for essentially any class implementing Comparable. This yields an attacker-controlled object instantiation primitive; a demonstrated case constructs a java.io.File for an arbitrary attacker-chosen path, which becomes path-traversal-adjacent if the application subsequently calls path-sensitive methods on the value. No class implementing Comparable has been identified that yields code execution through deserialization alone. Global Default Typing via activateDefaultTyping is not affected, because that method structurally requires an explicit PolymorphicTypeValidator argument. This affects com.fasterxml.jackson.core:jackson-databind from 2.11.0 before 2.18.10, from 2.19.0 before 2.21.6, and from 2.22.0 before 2.22.2, and tools.jackson.core:jackson-databind from 3.0.0 before 3.1.6 and from 3.2.0 before 3.2.2. Users should upgrade to 2.18.10, 2.21.6, 2.22.2, 3.1.6, or 3.2.2.

Published Sep 1, 2026 · Updated Oct 15, 2026 · Sources: NIST National Vulnerability Database, CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP · CNA: HeroDevs

Who exploits it and how urgent it is

A 0–100 score combining confirmed exploitation, ransomware and APT use, public exploits, EPSS and severity.

No exploitation signal in the sources consulted so far.
How the score was calculated
  • EPSS 0.7% (30-day exploitation probability)+8
  • Technical severity (medium)+3
  • CISA SSVC: exploitation "poc"+5

The score orders the patch queue; it does not replace your asset context (internet exposure, criticality, compensating controls).

Triage

Is it exploited, how likely is exploitation, what does it touch, and how severe do the sources call it.

Exploitation
Not confirmed
Not in CISA KEV — an absence of record, not proof it is unexploited.
EPSS FIRST
0.72%
ahead of 53% of scored CVEs · Oct 15, 2026
Affects
Fasterxml
Jackson-databind
CVSS base
5.6
Medium · 2 source(s)

CISA SSVC assessment CISA

Three decision points CISA publishes for the CVEs it assesses (SSVC 2.0.3). A stakeholder decision, not a severity score.

Exploitation
Proof of concept
none · proof-of-concept · active
Automatable
No
can an attacker script the kill-chain steps
Technical impact
Partial
partial · total control of the vulnerable component

Remediation

Fixes and mitigations documented by the sources — linked to the original advisory.

No fix documented by the sources we poll. That does not mean none exists: check the vendor advisory.

First 24 hours

Ordered from the record’s own fields — exposure first, because you cannot patch what you have not found. A rule-generated starting point.

  1. Identify exposed assets running the affected vendor/product/version combinations (Fasterxml Jackson-databind).
  2. The attack is network-based and needs no privileges: restrict exposure (ACLs, VPN, WAF) until patched.
  3. No fix documented in the sources: reduce exposure and monitor the vendor advisory.
  4. Search available logs for exploit probes matching the vulnerability class (insecure deserialization), errors and authentication anomalies.

Affected scope

Vendor, product and versions as the sources word them.

VendorProductVersionsStatusSource
Fasterxml Jackson-databind ≥ 2.11.0 and < 2.18.10≥ 2.19.0 and < 2.21.6≥ 2.22.0 and < 2.22.2≥ 3.0.0 and < 3.1.6≥ 3.2.0 and < 3.2.2 Vulnerable CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP

Attack characteristics

The CVSS vector, decoded. It describes the attack, not your exposure to it.

Attack vector
Network
Attack complexity
High
Privileges required
None
User interaction
None
Scope
Unchanged
Confidentiality
Low
Integrity
Low
Availability
Low

Every base score collected

Sources score independently and may disagree; each row says who scored it and under which version.

ScoreVersionSeverityExpl.ImpactScored by
5.6 CVSS 3.1 Medium 2.2 3.4 36c7be3b-2937-45df-85ea-ca7133ea542c via NIST National Vulnerability Database
5.6 CVSS 3.1 Medium — — HeroDevs via CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L (score shown at the top: 36c7be3b-2937-45df-85ea-ca7133ea542c)

Weakness MITRE

Weakness class according to MITRE’s CWE catalog.

CWE-502 · Deserialization of Untrusted Data

Other CVEs with this weakness →

Detection

Read off the CVSS vector and the weakness class. Starting points, not tested rules.

  • Prioritize edge telemetry for the network-reachable component (proxy, WAF, IDS/IPS).
  • Monitor serialized objects in requests and unexpected processes spawned by the runtime.
web/proxy/WAF logsnetwork IDS/IPSendpoint telemetry (EDR)application logs

Timeline

What happened to this CVE, newest first.

  • 2026
  • Affected products added · fasterxml/jackson-databind
    Oct 15, 2026 · CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP
  • SSVC assessment updated
    Oct 15, 2026 · CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP
  • Record published
    Oct 15, 2026
  • CVSS changed · 5.6
    Oct 15, 2026 · NIST National Vulnerability Database
  • Source status changed · → Awaiting Analysis
    Oct 15, 2026 · NIST National Vulnerability Database
  • Record created in this database
    Oct 15, 2026 · NIST National Vulnerability Database
  • CVE published
    Sep 1, 2026 · HeroDevs

Source activity

Repeated readings are counted rather than listed.

  • 1× Official description updated · Oct 15, 2026 – Oct 15, 2026

References

4 on the record

Elsewhere on this site

Fasterxml
every CVE for this vendor
Insecure deserialization
same class
CWE-502
other pages naming this weakness

Related CVEs (same products)

  • CVE-2026-91777 jackson-databind: quadratic forward-reference completion in Collection and Map deserializers 23d
  • CVE-2026-91776 jackson-databind: unbounded growth of the type id cache in TypeDeserializerBase retains every unknown raw type ID 23d
  • CVE-2026-68497 jackson-databind: unbounded numeric parse in Duration and XMLGregorianCalendar deserialization allows CPU denial of service Sep 11, 2026
  • CVE-2026-19032 jackson-databind resolves attacker-controlled URI schemes when deserializing java.nio.file.Path Sep 1, 2026
  • CVE-2026-59889 jackson-databind: @JsonView ypassed for @JsonUnwrapped container properties on deserialization Jul 14, 2026
  • CVE-2026-59888 jackson-databind: @JsonIgnore on a Record property is bypassed with a PropertyNamingStrategy Jul 14, 2026

Not in any source we poll

Listed rather than left blank: an empty field and an unmeasured one look identical on screen, and only one is a reason to look elsewhere.

  • No fixed version, patch or mitigation documented.
  • No confirmed IOCs, IP addresses, domains, file hashes, or malware artifacts supplied.
  • No organization-specific asset inventory, compensating-control status, or patch deployment evidence supplied.
  • No exploit packet captures, log samples, or incident case IDs supplied.

Answered from this record

Text assembled only from the fields above — no additional claims.

What should defenders know first?

CVE-2026-83557 is "jackson-databind omits java.lang.Comparable from DefaultBaseTypeLimitingValidator's unsafe base types", rated Medium. It affects Jackson-databind (Fasterxml); versions are in the scope table. It is not in CISA KEV, which does not rule out exploitation. CVSS 5.6 describes technical severity. EPSS 0.72% estimates the probability of exploitation in 30 days; neither replaces your asset context. First verify whether exposed or business-critical assets run the affected versions, apply vendor fixes or mitigations, and preserve logs for review.

Comments

Moderated technical discussion. Read the community guidelines.

No comments yet.

Sign in or create an account to comment and suggest corrections.