ctipilot.ch

LLM-fabricated CVE advisory wave (programmervuln/cveadvisory-)

trend · trend:llm-fabricated-cve-advisory-wave-2026-07

Batch of 55 fabricated vulnerability advisories published through a single newly created GitHub repository (programmervuln/cveadvisory-) in late July 2026. JFrog Security Research reproduction-tested six SQLite entries under AddressSanitizer and found none valid, assessing 54 of the 55 as completely fabricated with one real bug wrapped in unverified metadata; SQLite's maintainer reported the same wave independently on 2026-07-29. The records reached NVD, CISA ADP enrichment, GHSA, Red Hat, BSI CERT-Bund (WID-SEC-2026-2581, WID-SEC-2026-2604) and NCSC-NL (NCSC-2026-0268) before the two national CERTs withdrew their advisories on 2026-08-03 (JFrog Security Research, 2026-07-30; NCSC-NL and BSI CERT-Bund, 2026-08-03).

Aliases: LLM slop CVEs, AI slop CVEs, fake SQLite CVEs, slop CVEs

Coverage timeline
1
first 2026-08-04 → last 2026-08-04
Peak priority
high
1 high
Sources cited
6
5 hosts
Sections touched
1
research
Co-occurring entities
0
no co-occurrence
ATT&CK techniques
0
no mapped behavior yet

Hunting pivots

Affected products
GitHub Advisory DatabaseNIST National Vulnerability DatabaseSQLite

Story timeline

  1. 2026-08-04BSI and NCSC-NL withdraw SQLite advisories built on LLM-fabricated CVEs — and GitHub's advisory database was still serving one of them
    researchTwo national CERTs retract SQLite advisories because the CVEs describe bugs that do not exist, while the same records stay live downstream

Where this entity is cited

  • research1

Source distribution

  • wid.cert-bund.de2 (33%)
  • advisories.ncsc.nl1 (17%)
  • github.com1 (17%)
  • research.jfrog.com1 (17%)
  • sqlite.org1 (17%)

explore in graph

Entries about LLM-fabricated CVE advisory wave (programmervuln/cveadvisory-) (1)

2026-08-04 · view entry permalink →

HIGHNATOA1

BSI and NCSC-NL withdraw SQLite advisories built on LLM-fabricated CVEs — and GitHub's advisory database was still serving one of them

Two European national CERTs pulled published SQLite advisories on 2026-08-03 for the same reason: the vulnerabilities are not real. NCSC-NL revised NCSC-2026-0268 to version 1.01, struck through its own description, and gave the reason in one line — "CVE is door een LLM gehallucineerd" ("the CVE was hallucinated by an LLM") — noting the retracted advisory had covered CVE-2026-51302 as affecting Red Hat's SQLite (NCSC-NL, 2026-08-03). BSI CERT-Bund retitled WID-SEC-2026-2604 and WID-SEC-2026-2581 to "MELDUNG ZURÜCKGEZOGEN" ("advisory withdrawn") and removed their CVE references (BSI CERT-Bund, 2026-08-03; BSI CERT-Bund, 2026-08-03).

The underlying work is a reproduction audit rather than an opinion. JFrog cloned sqlite/sqlite at the claimed tags, compiled the official releases in isolated containers, and fed each advisory's proof-of-concept SQL verbatim into the binaries under AddressSanitizer. Nothing reproduced, and the code references dissolve on inspection: CVE-2026-51302's claimed use-after-free runs through exprComputeOperands(), a function that did not exist in SQLite 3.41 and was added mid-2025, while the function it says does the freeing, sqlite3ReleaseTempReg(), only recycles register indices into an array and performs no heap deallocation at all. CVE-2026-51303 claims a fix in 3.51.3, but "a diff between 3.51.2 and 3.51.3 shows absolutely no changes to src/expr.c". CVE-2026-51296 cites lines 3555 and 3575 of src/json.c when, JFrog notes, "In version 3.41.0, src/json.c is only 2706 lines long". CVE-2026-51297 references jsonBlobEdit(), absent from the claimed release; CVE-2026-51304 gives a single-argument signature for a function that requires a database handle; CVE-2026-51300 cites a comment and a memory allocation as the vulnerable lines (JFrog Security Research, 2026-07-30). SQLite's maintainer reported the same wave independently on 2026-07-29 (SQLite User Forum, 2026-07-29).

The propagation path is the part that matters operationally, because every hop in it is one a defender's own tooling trusts. A newly created GitHub repository published the advisories; MITRE's public submission form performs no identity verification; NVD flagged them critical and CISA's Authorized Data Publisher enrichment agreed; Red Hat initially scored CVE-2026-51302 at 10.0 before downgrading it to 7.6; from there the records reached GHSA and the two national-CERT advisory streams that European public-sector vulnerability management actually reads. JFrog's diagnosis is structural: "Because no step in today's system actually requires a proof-of-concept or bug reproduction, a plausible-sounding fake advisory can slide right through the pipeline and end up in GHSA, downstream databases, and enterprise scanners." Retraction does not travel the same path in reverse — this run fetched GHSA-4r76-5xh9-qj36 — a use-after-free claim against SQLite 3.41 carrying CVE-2026-51294, from the same batch but not among the six JFrog reproduction-tested — and found it still live and marked "Unreviewed" on 2026-08-04, after both CERTs had withdrawn (GitHub Advisory Database, 2026-07-30).

CVE is door een LLM gehallucineerd

NCSC-NL 2026-08-03

A broader audit of 55 advisories published by the same GitHub account revealed that 54 were completely fabricated, while one contained a real bug wrapped in unverified CVE metadata.

Because no step in today's system actually requires a proof-of-concept or bug reproduction, a plausible-sounding fake advisory can slide right through the pipeline and end up in GHSA, downstream databases, and enterprise scanners.

JFrog Security Research 2026-07-30
research04 Aug 04:46Zmulti-sourceOpen finding ↗