CVE-2026-116592

HIGHPre-NVD 7.47.4
EchelonGraph scoreMEDIUM confidence

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

This high-severity CVE scores 7.4 under a secondary CVSS source (NVD's own analysis pending). EPSS exploit probability: 0.2% (4th 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-2026-118180 (ENISA EUVD)Source: ENISA EUVD

7.4EG
EchelonGraph verdictPlan a fixRemediate within your standard update timelines (the SSVC decision on this page).
  • High severity, but no confirmed exploitation yet
CISA-KEV: Not listedEPSS PROB: 0.2%CVSS: 7.4Exploit: None knownExposed services: Not assessed

A fix is available — apply it.

undici is an HTTP client for Node.js. In versions 7.30.1 and 8.12.2 through 8.12.3, when an originless Agent composes the redirect and shared cache interceptors, undici decides whether to store the final response under the original request key by inspecting only the final redirect hop, which bypasses the earlier fix for CVE-2026-109829 that compared only the initial and final origins. A redirect that bounces through an untrusted origin and returns to the trusted origin is still cached under the trusted key, an intermediate hop's Vary is dropped so a response that varies on Authorization or Cookie can be served to a different user, and an intermediate hop's no-cache or default-uncacheable status is ignored so a non-storable redirect is laundered into a cacheable entry. An attacker who controls a redirect target from a trusted URL can poison the cached entry for that URL or have a private, per-user response served to a later caller. The issue is fixed in undici 7.30.2 and 8.12.4, and users should upgrade to one of those versions or later. As a workaround, compose the interceptors as cache then redirect, use per-origin dispatchers and cache stores, or disable shared caching on redirect-capable requests.

CVSS v3
7.4
EG Score
7.4HIGHmedium confidence
EG Risk
33
EG Risk 33/100

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)
Severity74% × 45%
Impact severity (EG Severity): CVSS 7.4 of 10. Never the KEV-floored or EPSS-lifted EG Score.
Exploitation0.2% × 40%
FIRST EPSS: the 30-day exploitation probability when EchelonGraph scored this CVE.
Automatability0% × 15%
CISA's SSVC Automatable value: no (Vulnrichment).
SSVC (CISA's decision table, applied by EchelonGraph): Track at low or medium mission impact; Track* at high (mission-essential systems).
Exploitation none (CISA Vulnrichment) · Automatable no (CISA Vulnrichment) · Technical impact total (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: A fix is available. Apply it within your standard update timelines.
EPSS PROB
0.2%
EPSS %ILE
4th
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 (7.4): severity, escalated by confirmed exploitation. This CVE's 7.4 is its impact severity (EG Severity), not escalated.

EG Severity
7.4 HIGHCVSS-B, impact only: no KEV listing, EPSS or EG-KEV tier raises it.a secondary CVSS source · CVSS v3.0 or v3.1
EG Likelihood
0.2% 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; Track* at high (mission-essential systems).CISA BOD 26-04: 14 days if the affected system is publicly exposed; Fix on system upgrade if it is not.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; Track* at high (mission-essential systems).

A fix is available. Apply it within your standard update timelines.

Exploitation none (CISA Vulnrichment) · Automatable no (CISA Vulnrichment) · Technical impact total (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; Fix on system upgrade if it is not.

The score's inputs: In CISA KEV no (CISA's KEV catalog) · Automatable no (CISA Vulnrichment) · Technical impact total (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

November 6, 2026

Last Modified

November 10, 2026

Advisory Details (2)

Auto-updated Nov 6, 2026
Patch available. Sources: github.
GitHub advisoryMentions a patch (unverified)

undici vulnerable to cache poisoning and cross-user disclosure via intermediate redirect hops · Advisory · nodejs/undici · GitHub

https://github.com/nodejs/undici/security/advisories/GHSA-mqg3-3v4r-cm32
Web page

Security Advisories | OpenJS Foundation CVE Numbering Authority

https://cna.openjsf.org/security-advisories.html

Vendor Advisories for CVE-2026-116592(1)

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

Affected Packages

(3 across 3 ecosystems)
Debian:12(1)
PackageVulnerable rangeFix by version rangeDependents
node-undici5.15.0+dfsg1+~cs20.10.9.3-1 ... 8.9.0+dfsg+~cs3.2.0-1 (43 versions)
  • every version on: no fix on record
—
Debian:13(1)
PackageVulnerable rangeFix by version rangeDependents
node-undici7.15.0+dfsg+~cs3.2.0-1 ... 8.9.0+dfsg+~cs3.2.0-1 (19 versions)
  • every version on: no fix on record
—
Debian:14(1)
PackageVulnerable rangeFix by version rangeDependents
node-undici7.15.0+dfsg+~cs3.2.0-1 ... 8.9.0+dfsg+~cs3.2.0-1 (19 versions)
  • every version on: no fix on record
—

Weakness Classification(2)

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

Data Freshness Timeline

(refreshed 7× in last 7d / 9× 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 v3 → 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. 2026-11-13 16:50 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 4th percentile
  2. 2026-11-12 16:33 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 4th percentile
  3. 2026-11-11 16:38 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 4th percentile
  4. 2026-11-11 03:42 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  5. 2026-11-10 18:36 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  6. 2026-11-10 16:42 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 4th percentile
  7. 2026-11-09 16:34 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 4th percentile
  8. 2026-11-08 16:38 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 4th percentile
  9. 2026-11-07 16:38 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 4th percentile
  10. 2026-11-06 11:04 UTCENISA EUVD ID recordedEUVD-2026-118180 · Source: ENISA EUVD
  11. 2026-11-06 10:27 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  12. 2026-11-06 10:14 UTCEchelonGraph re-scoredFirst assessed: 7.4 HIGH
  13. 2026-11-06 10:12 UTCMITRE cvelistV5first tracked

Related CVEs(same product + same CWE)

Frequently asked(5)

What is CVE-2026-116592?
CVE-2026-116592 is a high-severity vulnerability; its CVE record was published on November 6, 2026. undici is an HTTP client for Node.js. In versions 7.30.1 and 8.12.2 through 8.12.3, when an originless Agent composes the redirect and shared cache interceptors, undici decides whether to store the final response under the original request key by inspecting only the final redirect hop, which…
When was the CVE record for CVE-2026-116592 published?
The CVE record for CVE-2026-116592 was published on November 6, 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 10, 2026; the record at its source may have been updated since.
Is CVE-2026-116592 actively exploited?
CVE-2026-116592 is not currently on CISA's Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog. FIRST EPSS estimates a 0.2% probability of exploitation in the next 30 days (4th percentile of EPSS-scored CVEs).
What is the CVSS score of CVE-2026-116592?
CVE-2026-116592 has a CVSS base score of 7.4 (a secondary CVSS source that NVD displays; NVD's own analysis pending).
How do I remediate CVE-2026-116592?
A fix for CVE-2026-116592 is available: update to the fixed version the vendor names in its advisory. The vendor advisories EchelonGraph has for CVE-2026-116592 are linked in the Vendor Advisories panel on this page.

Dependency Blast Radius

See which npm, PyPI, Go, and Maven packages are affected by CVE-2026-116592

Explore →

Is Your Infrastructure Affected by CVE-2026-116592?

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

Book a Demo →Browse All CVEs