getzep CVE Vulnerabilities & Metrics

Focus on getzep vulnerabilities and metrics.

Last updated: 29 Mar 2026, 22:25 UTC

About getzep Security Exposure

This page consolidates all known Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures (CVEs) associated with getzep. We track both calendar-based metrics (using fixed periods) and rolling metrics (using gliding windows) to give you a comprehensive view of security trends and risk evolution. Use these insights to assess risk and plan your patching strategy.

For a broader perspective on cybersecurity threats, explore the comprehensive list of CVEs by vendor and product. Stay updated on critical vulnerabilities affecting major software and hardware providers.

Global CVE Overview

Total getzep CVEs: 1
Earliest CVE date: 12 Mar 2026, 19:16 UTC
Latest CVE date: 12 Mar 2026, 19:16 UTC

Latest CVE reference: CVE-2026-32247

Rolling Stats

30-day Count (Rolling): 1
365-day Count (Rolling): 1

Calendar-based Variation

Calendar-based Variation compares a fixed calendar period (e.g., this month versus the same month last year), while Rolling Growth Rate uses a continuous window (e.g., last 30 days versus the previous 30 days) to capture trends independent of calendar boundaries.

Variations & Growth

Month Variation (Calendar): 0%
Year Variation (Calendar): 0%

Month Growth Rate (30-day Rolling): 0.0%
Year Growth Rate (365-day Rolling): 0.0%

Monthly CVE Trends (current vs previous Year)

Annual CVE Trends (Last 20 Years)

Critical getzep CVEs (CVSS ≥ 9) Over 20 Years

CVSS Stats

Average CVSS: 0.0

Max CVSS: 0

Critical CVEs (≥9): 0

CVSS Range vs. Count

Range Count
0.0-3.9 1
4.0-6.9 0
7.0-8.9 0
9.0-10.0 0

CVSS Distribution Chart

Top 5 Highest CVSS getzep CVEs

These are the five CVEs with the highest CVSS scores for getzep, sorted by severity first and recency.

All CVEs for getzep

CVE-2026-32247 getzep vulnerability CVSS: 0 12 Mar 2026, 19:16 UTC

Graphiti is a framework for building and querying temporal context graphs for AI agents. Graphiti versions before 0.28.2 contained a Cypher injection vulnerability in shared search-filter construction for non-Kuzu backends. Attacker-controlled label values supplied through SearchFilters.node_labels were concatenated directly into Cypher label expressions without validation. In MCP deployments, this was exploitable not only through direct untrusted access to the Graphiti MCP server, but also through prompt injection against an LLM client that could be induced to call search_nodes with attacker-controlled entity_types values. The MCP server mapped entity_types to SearchFilters.node_labels, which then reached the vulnerable Cypher construction path. Affected backends included Neo4j, FalkorDB, and Neptune. Kuzu was not affected by the label-injection issue because it used parameterized label handling rather than string-interpolated Cypher labels. This issue was mitigated in 0.28.2.