CVE-2026-92938

CRITICALPre-NVD 9.99.9
EchelonGraph scoreMEDIUM confidence

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

Score 9.9 from GitHub Security Advisory (severity: CRITICAL) published 2026-10-01. A secondary CVSS source baseline 9.9; sources differ by 0.0.

Triggered by: GitHub Security Advisory CVSS
Sources: EPSS, GitHub Security Advisory, a secondary CVSS source
Elevated

Also known asEUVD-2026-81588 (ENISA EUVD) · GHSA-6w8r-xxw2-g3hx (GitHub Security Advisories) · GHSA-m7cq-7f2q-f9fh (GitHub Security Advisories)Source: ENISA EUVD

9.9EG
EchelonGraph verdictPlan a fixRemediate within your standard update timelines at low or medium mission impact and sooner than that at high (the SSVC decision on this page).
  • CISA's Vulnrichment rates exploitation as PoC; EchelonGraph holds no exploit-code reference for it
CISA-KEV: Not listedEPSS PROB: 0.6%CVSS: 9.9Exploit: No code on recordExposed services: Not assessed

A fix is available — apply it.

vm2 versions 3.11.3 through 3.11.6 expose Node.js's host node:sqlite module to code running in NodeVM when that builtin is permitted, either explicitly or through builtin: ['*']. The module is wrapped with vm.readonly(), which prevents property assignment but leaves host-authority callables reachable; in addition, the resolver treats any request starting with 'node:' as a core-module request and the runtime strips only one 'node:' prefix, so a sandbox request for 'node:node:sqlite' resolves to the configured node:sqlite entry. Sandboxed code can therefore create an in-memory DatabaseSync with extension loading enabled and call DatabaseSync.loadExtension() on a native library bundled in the untrusted plugin package (path derived from __dirname). SQLite loads the library into the Node.js host process and invokes its native entry point, giving the sandboxed plugin arbitrary native code execution outside the sandbox with the host process's privileges. The issue is fixed in vm2 3.11.7.

CVSS v3
9.9
EG Score
9.9CRITICALmedium confidence
EG Risk
61
EG Risk 61/100

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)
Severity99% × 45%
Impact severity (EG Severity): CVSS 9.9 of 10. Never the KEV-floored or EPSS-lifted EG Score.
Exploitation40% × 40%
EchelonGraph's fixed weight for EG-KEV Tier 3 (Elevated): a constant, not a probability.
Automatability0% × 15%
CISA's SSVC Automatable value: no (Vulnrichment).
SSVC (CISA's decision table, applied by EchelonGraph): Track at low, Track* at medium and Attend at high mission impact.
Exploitation public PoC (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 at low or medium mission impact and sooner than that at high.
EPSS PROB
0.6%
EPSS %ILE
50th
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 (9.9): severity, escalated by confirmed exploitation. This CVE's 9.9 is its impact severity (EG Severity), not escalated.

EG Severity
9.9 CRITICALCVSS-B, impact only: no KEV listing, EPSS or EG-KEV tier raises it.GitHub Security Advisory CVSS
EG Likelihood
0.6% within 30 daysSource: FIRST EPSS (model v2026.06.15, score date 2026-11-12). 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, Track* at medium and Attend at high mission impact.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, Track* at medium and Attend at high mission impact.

A fix is available. Apply it within your standard update timelines at low or medium mission impact and sooner than that at high.

Exploitation public PoC (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

September 17, 2026

Last Modified

September 19, 2026

Advisory Details (2)

Auto-updated Nov 9, 2026
🔬 Proof of concept available. Patch available. Sources: github.
GitHub advisoryMentions a patch (unverified)🟡 PoC Available

vm2 3.11.6 allows a sandboxed plugin to execute native code through `node:sqlite` · Advisory · patriksimek/vm2 · GitHub

https://github.com/patriksimek/vm2/security/advisories/GHSA-6w8r-xxw2-g3hx
Web page

vm2 3.11.3 through 3.11.6 Remote Code Execution via node:sqlite | Advisories | VulnCheck

https://www.vulncheck.com/advisories/vm2-3.11.3-through-3.11.6-remote-code-execution-via-node-sqlite

Patch Availability(7)

Vendor / EcosystemFix (by version range) / PatchReleasedSource
redhatrhdh/rhdh-hub-rhel9:17931178132026-10-28redhat
redhatansible-automation-platform/bootc-automation-portal-rhel9:17918656602026-10-13redhat
redhatansible-automation-platform/automation-portal:17912953792026-10-12redhat
redhatansible-automation-platform/automation-portal:17912937802026-10-12redhat
redhatrhdh/rhdh-hub-rhel9:17913114952026-10-08redhat
redhatrhdh/red-hat-developer-hub-backstage-plugin-orchestrator-backend:17912512822026-10-06redhat
npmvm2 @ 3.11.7 (fixes >= 3.11.3, <= 3.11.6)—ghsa

Patches are aggregated from vendor advisories (Red Hat, Microsoft, Cisco, GitHub) and package ecosystems (OSV, GHSA). Multiple rows for the same upstream release have been deduplicated.

Affected Packages

(1 across 1 ecosystem)
npm(1)
PackageVulnerable rangeFix by version rangeDependents
vm2—
  • 3.11.3 up to 3.11.7: fixed in 3.11.7
—

Weakness Classification(1)

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

Data Freshness Timeline

(refreshed 19× in last 7d / 70× 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.

Showing the most recent 100 of 268 rows on record for this CVE.

A repeat, a row identical to one the same pipeline wrote less than 10 seconds earlier, is not a separate refresh and is not counted. None are among the latest 100 rows. The 168 oldest rows on record are not shown and were not checked, so the counts can still include repeats.

  1. 2026-11-13 14:36 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  2. 2026-11-13 14:36 UTCVendor advisory
  3. 2026-11-13 14:36 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-6w8r-xxw2-g3hx · GitHub severity CRITICAL · GitHub CVSS 9.9
  4. 2026-11-12 16:35 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.6% · 50th percentile
  5. 2026-11-12 12:48 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  6. 2026-11-12 12:48 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-6w8r-xxw2-g3hx · GitHub severity CRITICAL · GitHub CVSS 9.9
  7. 2026-11-11 16:41 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.6% · 49th percentile
  8. 2026-11-11 11:00 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  9. 2026-11-11 11:00 UTCVendor advisory
  10. 2026-11-11 11:00 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-6w8r-xxw2-g3hx · GitHub severity CRITICAL · GitHub CVSS 9.9
  11. 2026-11-10 16:46 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.6% · 49th percentile
  12. 2026-11-10 09:12 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  13. 2026-11-10 09:12 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-6w8r-xxw2-g3hx · GitHub severity CRITICAL · GitHub CVSS 9.9
  14. 2026-11-09 16:36 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.6% · 49th percentile
  15. 2026-11-09 07:24 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  16. 2026-11-09 07:24 UTCVendor advisory
  17. 2026-11-09 07:24 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-6w8r-xxw2-g3hx · GitHub severity CRITICAL · GitHub CVSS 9.9
  18. 2026-11-08 16:41 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.6% · 49th percentile
  19. 2026-11-08 05:37 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  20. 2026-11-08 05:37 UTCVendor advisory
  21. 2026-11-08 05:37 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-6w8r-xxw2-g3hx · GitHub severity CRITICAL · GitHub CVSS 9.9
  22. 2026-11-07 16:40 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.6% · 49th percentile
  23. 2026-11-07 03:48 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  24. 2026-11-07 03:48 UTCVendor advisory
  25. 2026-11-07 03:48 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-6w8r-xxw2-g3hx · GitHub severity CRITICAL · GitHub CVSS 9.9
Show 75 more
  1. 2026-11-06 22:25 UTCOSV refresh
  2. 2026-11-06 16:40 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.6% · 49th percentile
  3. 2026-11-06 02:00 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  4. 2026-11-06 02:00 UTCVendor advisory
  5. 2026-11-06 02:00 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-6w8r-xxw2-g3hx · GitHub severity CRITICAL · GitHub CVSS 9.9
  6. 2026-11-05 16:39 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.6% · 49th percentile
  7. 2026-11-05 00:13 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  8. 2026-11-05 00:13 UTCVendor advisory
  9. 2026-11-05 00:13 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-6w8r-xxw2-g3hx · GitHub severity CRITICAL · GitHub CVSS 9.9
  10. 2026-11-04 16:37 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.6% · 49th percentile
  11. 2026-11-03 22:24 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  12. 2026-11-03 22:24 UTCVendor advisory
  13. 2026-11-03 22:24 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-6w8r-xxw2-g3hx · GitHub severity CRITICAL · GitHub CVSS 9.9
  14. 2026-11-03 16:49 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.6% · 49th percentile
  15. 2026-11-02 20:35 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  16. 2026-11-02 20:35 UTCVendor advisory
  17. 2026-11-02 20:35 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-6w8r-xxw2-g3hx · GitHub severity CRITICAL · GitHub CVSS 9.9
  18. 2026-11-02 16:46 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.6% · 49th percentile
  19. 2026-11-01 18:46 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  20. 2026-11-01 18:46 UTCVendor advisory
  21. 2026-11-01 18:46 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-6w8r-xxw2-g3hx · GitHub severity CRITICAL · GitHub CVSS 9.9
  22. 2026-11-01 16:36 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.6% · 49th percentile
  23. 2026-11-01 07:37 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-6w8r-xxw2-g3hx · GitHub severity CRITICAL · GitHub CVSS 9.9
  24. 2026-11-01 07:37 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  25. 2026-10-31 16:57 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  26. 2026-10-31 16:57 UTCVendor advisory
  27. 2026-10-31 16:33 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.6% · 49th percentile
  28. 2026-10-30 16:35 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.6% · 49th percentile
  29. 2026-10-30 14:57 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  30. 2026-10-30 14:57 UTCVendor advisory
  31. 2026-10-29 16:34 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.6% · 49th percentile
  32. 2026-10-29 13:10 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  33. 2026-10-29 13:10 UTCVendor advisory
  34. 2026-10-28 16:33 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.6% · 49th percentile
  35. 2026-10-28 11:19 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  36. 2026-10-28 11:19 UTCVendor advisory
  37. 2026-10-27 16:33 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.6% · 49th percentile
  38. 2026-10-27 09:01 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  39. 2026-10-27 09:01 UTCVendor advisory
  40. 2026-10-26 16:33 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.6% · 49th percentile
  41. 2026-10-26 06:01 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  42. 2026-10-26 06:01 UTCVendor advisory
  43. 2026-10-25 16:34 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.6% · 49th percentile
  44. 2026-10-25 13:50 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  45. 2026-10-25 04:13 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  46. 2026-10-25 04:13 UTCVendor advisory
  47. 2026-10-24 16:34 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.6% · 48th percentile
  48. 2026-10-24 02:24 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  49. 2026-10-24 02:24 UTCVendor advisory
  50. 2026-10-23 16:33 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.6% · 48th percentile
  51. 2026-10-23 00:36 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  52. 2026-10-23 00:36 UTCVendor advisory
  53. 2026-10-22 16:35 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.6% · 48th percentile
  54. 2026-10-21 22:46 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  55. 2026-10-21 22:46 UTCVendor advisory
  56. 2026-10-21 16:34 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.6% · 48th percentile
  57. 2026-10-20 20:59 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  58. 2026-10-20 20:59 UTCVendor advisory
  59. 2026-10-20 16:34 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.6% · 48th percentile
  60. 2026-10-19 19:11 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  61. 2026-10-19 19:11 UTCVendor advisory
  62. 2026-10-19 16:33 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.6% · 48th percentile
  63. 2026-10-18 17:22 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  64. 2026-10-18 17:22 UTCVendor advisory
  65. 2026-10-18 16:33 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.6% · 48th percentile
  66. 2026-10-18 02:59 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  67. 2026-10-17 16:35 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.6% · 48th percentile
  68. 2026-10-17 15:34 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  69. 2026-10-17 15:34 UTCVendor advisory
  70. 2026-10-17 09:22 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  71. 2026-10-17 09:22 UTCVendor advisory
  72. 2026-10-16 16:45 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.6% · 48th percentile
  73. 2026-10-16 07:33 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  74. 2026-10-16 07:33 UTCVendor advisory
  75. 2026-10-15 16:33 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.6% · 48th percentile

Frequently asked(5)

What is CVE-2026-92938?
CVE-2026-92938 is a critical-severity vulnerability; its CVE record was published on September 17, 2026. vm2 versions 3.11.3 through 3.11.6 expose Node.js's host node:sqlite module to code running in NodeVM when that builtin is permitted, either explicitly or through builtin: ['*']. The module is wrapped with vm.readonly(), which prevents property assignment but leaves host-authority callables…
When was CVE-2026-92938 made public?
CVE-2026-92938 was made public on August 24, 2026: that is the date its CVE record's CNA, VulnCheck, gives for when the vulnerability was made public. The CVE record itself was published on September 17, 2026. EchelonGraph's copy of the record carries a last-modified date of September 19, 2026; the record at its source may have been updated since.
Is CVE-2026-92938 actively exploited?
CVE-2026-92938 is not currently on CISA's Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog. FIRST EPSS estimates a 0.6% probability of exploitation in the next 30 days (50th percentile of EPSS-scored CVEs).
What is the CVSS score of CVE-2026-92938?
CVE-2026-92938 has a CVSS base score of 9.9 (a secondary CVSS source that NVD displays; NVD's own analysis pending).
How do I remediate CVE-2026-92938?
A fix for CVE-2026-92938 is available: update to the fixed version the vendor names in its advisory. The vendor advisories EchelonGraph has for CVE-2026-92938 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-2026-92938

Explore →

Is Your Infrastructure Affected by CVE-2026-92938?

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