Skip to content

JupyterLab has an Extension Manager API/GUI Policy Discrepancy, allowing 3rd party (malicious) extensions install via POST request

High severity GitHub Reviewed Published Apr 30, 2026 in jupyterlab/jupyterlab • Updated May 21, 2026

Package

pip jupyterlab (pip)

Affected versions

>= 4.0.0, <= 4.5.6

Patched versions

4.5.7

Description

The allow-list of extensions that can be installed from PyPI Extension Manager (allowed_extensions_uris) is not correctly enforced by JupyterLab prior to 4.5.7. The PyPI Extension Manager was not contained to packages listed on the default PyPI index.

This has security implications for deployments that:

  • have allow-listed specific extensions with aim to prevent users from installing packages
  • have the kernel and terminals disabled or delegated to remote hosts (thus no access to install packages in the single-user server environment)
  • have multi-tenant deployments that is not configured for untrusted users (as per documented on JupyterHub https://jupyterhub.readthedocs.io/en/5.2.1/explanation/websecurity.html)
  • have the (default) PyPI Extension Manager enabled

Impact

An authenticated attacker - such as a student in a shared JupyterHub environment or a user in a multi-tenant JupyterLab deployment - can escalate their privileges. This might allow for data exfiltration, lateral movement within the network, and persistent compromise of the server infrastructure.

Patches

JupyterLab v4.5.7 contains the patch.

Users of applications that depend on JupyterLab, such as Notebook v7+, should update jupyterlab package too.

Workarounds

Switch to read-only extension manager by adding the following command line option:

--LabApp.extension_manager=readonly

or the following traitlet:

c.LabApp.extension_manager = 'readonly'

You can confirm that the read-only manager is in use from GUI:

image

Note: configuration of a PyPI proxy with allow-listed packages is not sufficient to protect from this vulnerability.

References

References

@krassowski krassowski published to jupyterlab/jupyterlab Apr 30, 2026
Published to the GitHub Advisory Database May 5, 2026
Reviewed May 5, 2026
Published by the National Vulnerability Database May 13, 2026
Last updated May 21, 2026

Severity

High

CVSS overall score

This score calculates overall vulnerability severity from 0 to 10 and is based on the Common Vulnerability Scoring System (CVSS).
/ 10

CVSS v3 base metrics

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

CVSS v3 base metrics

Attack vector: More severe the more the remote (logically and physically) an attacker can be in order to exploit the vulnerability.
Attack complexity: More severe for the least complex attacks.
Privileges required: More severe if no privileges are required.
User interaction: More severe when no user interaction is required.
Scope: More severe when a scope change occurs, e.g. one vulnerable component impacts resources in components beyond its security scope.
Confidentiality: More severe when loss of data confidentiality is highest, measuring the level of data access available to an unauthorized user.
Integrity: More severe when loss of data integrity is the highest, measuring the consequence of data modification possible by an unauthorized user.
Availability: More severe when the loss of impacted component availability is highest.
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H

EPSS score

Exploit Prediction Scoring System (EPSS)

This score estimates the probability of this vulnerability being exploited within the next 30 days. Data provided by FIRST.
(9th percentile)

Weaknesses

Improper Input Validation

The product receives input or data, but it does not validate or incorrectly validates that the input has the properties that are required to process the data safely and correctly. Learn more on MITRE.

Improper Neutralization of Argument Delimiters in a Command ('Argument Injection')

The product constructs a string for a command to be executed by a separate component in another control sphere, but it does not properly delimit the intended arguments, options, or switches within that command string. Learn more on MITRE.

Client-Side Enforcement of Server-Side Security

The product is composed of a server that relies on the client to implement a mechanism that is intended to protect the server. Learn more on MITRE.

CVE ID

CVE-2026-42266

GHSA ID

GHSA-37w4-hwhx-4rc4

Source code

Credits

Loading Checking history
See something to contribute? Suggest improvements for this vulnerability.