CVE-2026-116372

HIGHPre-NVD 7.77.7
EchelonGraph scoreMEDIUM confidence

“—” beside the score: it is equal to the CVSS score beside it.

This high-severity CVE scores 7.7 under a secondary CVSS source (NVD's own analysis pending). EPSS exploit probability: 0.4% (30th percentile of EPSS-scored CVEs). No GitHub Security Advisory CVSS is on record for this CVE.

Triggered by: Headline CVSS from a secondary CVSS source
Sources: EPSS, a secondary CVSS source

Also known asEUVD-2026-109666 (ENISA EUVD) · GHSA-85gw-r975-r63j (GitHub Security Advisories)Source: ENISA EUVD

7.7EG
EchelonGraph verdictPlan mitigationThe upstream fix is not in a release yet: until the release ships, restrict network exposure of the affected system or apply the vendor's mitigation on your normal schedule at low or medium mission impact and sooner than that at high, then apply it (the SSVC decision on this page).
  • High severity, but no confirmed exploitation yet
CISA-KEV: Not listedEPSS PROB: 0.4%CVSS: 7.7Exploit: None knownExposed services: Not assessed

An upstream fix is merged but not yet released — mitigate (WAF / firewall / segmentation) until the release ships, then apply it.

MISP mispguard is a security filtering proxy that inspects and blocks MISP feed responses based on configured rules. The process_feed_response method in src/mispguard.py was responsible for evaluating feed responses before they reached the MISP instance. The original logic only explicitly handled the case where the HTTP status code was not 200 by passing the response through without filtering, on the assumption that non-200 responses would not carry ingestible event data. However, HTTP 2xx status codes other than 200 (such as 201 Created, 203 Non-Authoritative Information, and 206 Partial Content) were also passed through unfiltered. Because MISP may still ingest content from these responses, a malicious or compromised feed host could return a 203 or 206 status code with arbitrary content, effectively bypassing all of mispguard's filtering rules. This allowed unfiltered or malicious feed data to be ingested into the MISP instance, undermining the security controls that mispguard is designed to enforce. The vulnerability requires the attacker to control or compromise a feed endpoint configured in the MISP instance. No authentication or user interaction is required beyond the feed polling mechanism already in place.

CVSS
7.7
EG Score
7.7HIGHmedium confidence
EG Risk
50
EG Risk 50/100

EG Risk is EchelonGraph's 0–100 priority score. It fuses impact severity (EG Severity, the CVSS base score, never the KEV-floored or EPSS-lifted EG Score) with real-world exploitation and automatability, under weights EchelonGraph set by hand, so you can rank equal-severity CVEs and fix the most dangerous first. Higher = act sooner.

How it’s computed (value × EchelonGraph’s weight)
Severity77% × 45%
Impact severity (EG Severity): CVSS 7.7 of 10. Never the KEV-floored or EPSS-lifted EG Score.
Exploitation0.4% × 40%
FIRST EPSS: the 30-day exploitation probability when EchelonGraph scored this CVE.
Automatability100% × 15%
CISA's SSVC Automatable value: yes (Vulnrichment).
SSVC (CISA's decision table, applied by EchelonGraph): Track at low or medium mission impact; Attend at high (mission-essential systems).
Exploitation none (CISA Vulnrichment) · Automatable yes (CISA Vulnrichment) · Technical impact partial (CISA Vulnrichment). All three are CISA's SSVC values (Vulnrichment). EchelonGraph applied CISA's decision table to them; CISA publishes SSVC inputs and the table, not a decision for each CVE.
Action: An upstream fix is merged but not yet in a tagged release. Until the release ships, restrict network exposure of the affected system or apply the vendor's mitigation on your normal schedule at low or medium mission impact and sooner than that at high, then apply it.
EPSS PROB
0.4%
EPSS %ILE
30th
KEV
Not listed

What the EG score is made of (scorer v4.0: the three questions the 0–10 score mixes, published apart · methodology)

The EG score (7.7): severity, escalated by confirmed exploitation. This CVE's 7.7 is its impact severity (EG Severity), not escalated.

EG Severity
7.7 HIGHCVSS-B, impact only: no KEV listing, EPSS or EG-KEV tier raises it.a secondary CVSS source
EG Likelihood
0.4% within 30 daysSource: FIRST EPSS (model v2026.06.15, score date 2026-11-10). FIRST's exploitation probability, not an EchelonGraph model.
Confirmed exploitation
None on record (CISA KEV, EG-KEV Tier 1)Reported apart from the likelihood: an observed fact, not a probability.
EG Priority
SSVC Track at medium mission impactTrack at low or medium mission impact; Attend at high (mission-essential systems).CISA BOD 26-04: 14 days if the affected system is publicly exposed; 60 days if it is not.No released fix is confirmed on this page, but CISA's timeline does not wait for a fix's release: it starts when an agency identifies the flaw on an asset and updates the CDM Agency and Federal Dashboard, and the directive counts patching, decommissioning the system or another action as remediation. Until a fixed release is applied, mitigate as this page's verdict says.Each input and its source, and whom BOD 26-04 binds: the SSVC and BOD 26-04 blocks below.

SSVC (CISA's decision table, applied by EchelonGraph)Track at low or medium mission impact; Attend at high (mission-essential systems).

An upstream fix is merged but not yet in a tagged release. Until the release ships, restrict network exposure of the affected system or apply the vendor's mitigation on your normal schedule at low or medium mission impact and sooner than that at high, then apply it.

Exploitation none (CISA Vulnrichment) · Automatable yes (CISA Vulnrichment) · Technical impact partial (CISA Vulnrichment). All three are CISA's SSVC values (Vulnrichment). EchelonGraph applied CISA's decision table to them; CISA publishes SSVC inputs and the table, not a decision for each CVE. Mission impact is CISA's Mission & Well-being decision point, and only you can judge it. CISA's table makes it high when Mission Prevalence is Essential — the vulnerable component "directly provides capabilities that constitute at least one MEF for at least one entity" (MEF: mission essential function) — or when Public Well-Being Impact is Irreversible: "multiple fatalities are likely", the cyber-physical system "is likely lost or destroyed", "extreme or serious externalities" are imposed on other parties, or social systems such as elections or the financial grid "are destabilized and potentially collapse". CISA's decision table

BOD 26-04 (CISA's remediation timeline, Table 1)14 days if the affected system is publicly exposed; 60 days if it is not.

No released fix is confirmed on this page, but CISA's timeline does not wait for a fix's release: it starts when an agency identifies the flaw on an asset and updates the CDM Agency and Federal Dashboard, and the directive counts patching, decommissioning the system or another action as remediation. Until a fixed release is applied, mitigate as this page's verdict says.

The score's inputs: In CISA KEV no (CISA's KEV catalog) · Automatable yes (CISA Vulnrichment) · Technical impact partial (CISA Vulnrichment). Whether your system is publicly exposed is yours to answer. BOD 26-04 binds US Federal Civilian Executive Branch agencies; for anyone else it is CISA's published timeline, a reference rather than an obligation. The directive · how EchelonGraph applies it

Published

October 26, 2026

Last Modified

November 2, 2026

Advisory Details (1)

Auto-updated Oct 26, 2026
Upstream fix merged — awaiting tagged release. Sources: github_commit.
GitHub commit

commit b5f606a4e57a (MISP/misp-guard)

Fix landed in MISP/misp-guard commit b5f606a4e57a — awaiting tagged release

https://github.com/MISP/misp-guard/commit/b5f606a4e57a49cc4dbf9b3ef0c6ddd19f866735

Vendor Advisories for CVE-2026-116372(1)

These vendors published their own advisory mentioning this CVE — often with vendor-specific remediation steps + affected product lists not in NVD.

Weakness Classification(1)

MITRE Common Weakness Enumeration — the root-cause categories this CVE belongs to.

Data Freshness Timeline

(refreshed 9× in last 7d / 27× in last 30d)

Each row is a time one of our pipelines fetched, updated or re-scored this CVE. For example, "NVD update" means NVD published or revised its analysis for this CVE; "MITRE cvelistV5" means we ingested or refreshed its CVE.org record (CNA or CISA ADP). An arrow marks a change the record states ("CVSS → 9.1"); EPSS and GHSA rows show the values recorded at that time, not what changed (EPSS values are rounded; hover one for the exact figures). "EchelonGraph re-scored" is our own recompute of this CVE's score, not an update from a source, and is not counted in the refreshes above. Most recent first.

  1. 2026-11-12 16:33 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 30th percentile
  2. 2026-11-11 16:38 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 30th percentile
  3. 2026-11-11 03:40 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-85gw-r975-r63j · GitHub severity HIGH
  4. 2026-11-10 18:55 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  5. 2026-11-10 18:55 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-85gw-r975-r63j · GitHub severity HIGH
  6. 2026-11-10 16:42 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 30th percentile
  7. 2026-11-09 16:34 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 30th percentile
  8. 2026-11-08 16:38 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 30th percentile
  9. 2026-11-07 16:38 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 30th percentile
  10. 2026-11-06 16:36 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 30th percentile
  11. 2026-11-05 16:36 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 30th percentile
  12. 2026-11-04 16:34 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 30th percentile
  13. 2026-11-03 20:09 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  14. 2026-11-03 20:09 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-85gw-r975-r63j · GitHub severity HIGH
  15. 2026-11-03 16:46 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 30th percentile
  16. 2026-11-02 19:27 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  17. 2026-11-02 19:27 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-85gw-r975-r63j · GitHub severity HIGH
  18. 2026-11-02 18:28 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  19. 2026-11-02 18:28 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-85gw-r975-r63j · GitHub severity HIGH
  20. 2026-11-02 16:44 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 30th percentile
  21. 2026-11-01 16:33 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 30th percentile
  22. 2026-10-31 16:32 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 30th percentile
  23. 2026-10-30 16:33 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 30th percentile
  24. 2026-10-29 16:32 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 30th percentile
  25. 2026-10-28 16:31 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 29th percentile
Show 10 more
  1. 2026-10-27 20:45 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  2. 2026-10-27 20:45 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-85gw-r975-r63j · GitHub severity HIGH
  3. 2026-10-27 16:31 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 29th percentile
  4. 2026-10-26 17:32 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  5. 2026-10-26 17:31 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-85gw-r975-r63j · GitHub severity HIGH
  6. 2026-10-26 16:30 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 29th percentile
  7. 2026-10-26 10:01 UTCENISA EUVD ID recordedEUVD-2026-109666 · Source: ENISA EUVD
  8. 2026-10-26 09:26 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  9. 2026-10-26 09:00 UTCEchelonGraph re-scoredFirst assessed: 7.7 HIGH
  10. 2026-10-26 09:00 UTCMITRE cvelistV5first tracked

Frequently asked(5)

What is CVE-2026-116372?
CVE-2026-116372 is a high-severity vulnerability; its CVE record was published on October 26, 2026. MISP mispguard is a security filtering proxy that inspects and blocks MISP feed responses based on configured rules. The process_feed_response method in src/mispguard.py was responsible for evaluating feed responses before they reached the MISP instance. The original logic only explicitly handled…
When was the CVE record for CVE-2026-116372 published?
The CVE record for CVE-2026-116372 was published on October 26, 2026. That is the record's publication date; the vulnerability itself may have been made public earlier. EchelonGraph's copy of the record carries a last-modified date of November 2, 2026; the record at its source may have been updated since.
Is CVE-2026-116372 actively exploited?
CVE-2026-116372 is not currently on CISA's Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog. FIRST EPSS estimates a 0.4% probability of exploitation in the next 30 days (30th percentile of EPSS-scored CVEs).
What is the CVSS score of CVE-2026-116372?
CVE-2026-116372 has a CVSS base score of 7.7 (a secondary CVSS source that NVD displays; NVD's own analysis pending).
How do I remediate CVE-2026-116372?
An upstream fix for CVE-2026-116372 has been merged but is not yet in a tagged release. Until it ships, restrict network exposure of the affected system or apply the vendor's mitigation, then update to the release that contains the fix. The vendor advisories EchelonGraph has for CVE-2026-116372 are linked in the Vendor Advisories panel on this page.

Dependency Blast Radius

Explore the affected products and dependency analysis for CVE-2026-116372

Explore →

Is Your Infrastructure Affected by CVE-2026-116372?

EchelonGraph automatically scans your cloud infrastructure and maps CVE exposure using blast radius analysis.