CVE-2026-0322
CRITICALNVD 7.2EG9.0▲EchelonGraph scoreHIGH confidence
“▲” beside the score: it is higher than NVD's CVSS score.
Score elevated to 9.0 because this CVE is listed on the CISA Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog (added 2026-10-14), indicating real-world exploitation has been confirmed by US federal agencies. NVD baseline CVSS 7.2 retained for reference. The 9.0 is the floor for confirmed exploitation, not an impact rating: this CVE's impact severity (EG Severity) is CVSS 7.2 HIGH under GitHub Security Advisory CVSS. Confidence: HIGH.
Triggered by: CISA KEV (actively exploited)
Sources: CISA Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog, EPSS, GitHub Security Advisory, NVD CVSS v3
🔥Trending — 3 sources updated this week🔴Exploited in the wildⓘEG-KEV Tier 1: Exploited in the wildEG-KEV is EchelonGraph's own tiering of exploitation signals from CISA KEV, CISA's SSVC data (Vulnrichment), ransomware data, public exploit-code references and EPSS.Tier 1 is evidence of exploitation in the wild: a CISA KEV listing, CISA's SSVC exploitation value "active", or known ransomware campaign use.Signals for this CVE: listed in CISA KEV, CISA's SSVC exploitation value: active.First exploitation evidence (added to CISA KEV): 2026-10-14EchelonGraph confidence 94%: a heuristic from the tier and the number of signals, not a measured probability. Also known asEUVD-2026-101495 (ENISA EUVD) · GHSA-9fh3-97mp-7wmv (GitHub Security Advisories)Source: ENISA EUVD
EchelonGraph verdictPatch nowTreat as an emergency — this is being exploited.
- •6 internet-facing services (distinct ip:port) on record running an affected version — derived from Shodan data (© Shodan); a patched service can stay counted while its port stays open
- •Actively exploited in the wild (CISA-KEV) — the reason this is sooner than the SSVC decision on this page at low or medium mission impact
CISA-KEV: ExploitedEPSS PROB: 1.7%CVSS: 7.2Exploit: No code on recordExposed services: 6
Upgrade to 12.2.4 or later (from the CVE record's solution, Palo Alto Networks, Inc.) — apply it.
A remote code execution (RCE) vulnerability in the management interface of Palo Alto Networks PAN-OS® software enables an authenticated attacker with network access to execute arbitrary code with root privileges on the firewall.
The security risk posed by this issue is minimized by restricting access to the management interface to only trusted internal IP addresses according to our recommended best practice deployment guidelines https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/community-blogs/tips-amp-tricks-how-to-secure-the-management-access-of-your-palo/ba-p/464431 .
This issue is applicable to PAN-OS software on PA-Series and VM-Series firewalls and on Panorama (virtual and M-Series).
Cloud NGFW and Prisma® Access are not impacted by this vulnerability.
Internet exposure · derived from Shodan data
6 internet-facing services (distinct ip:port) on record running a version that maps to CVE-2026-0322, in our KEV-Exposure radar’s Shodan-derived sample.
across 3 countries (United States, Germany, China)top: pan-os
See the KEV-Exposure radar →Derived from Shodan data. Shodan data is owned by Shodan, which holds its copyright (© Shodan). EchelonGraph claims no ownership of it or copyright in it. Aggregate, host-redacted. How it counts: every 12 hours, when Shodan query credits allow, the radar runs one Shodan query per tracked product, reads up to 100 ip:port services per query, and keeps a service when its banner version matches a CISA-KEV or high-EPSS CVE; a service is dropped when neither a search nor a Shodan InternetDB port re-check has refreshed it for 21 days. A re-check that finds the port still listed by Shodan InternetDB refreshes the service without re-reading the banner, so a patched service can stay counted while its port stays open. A count is a banner-version inference over a sample, not an exploit test and not an internet-wide census, and the unit is a service, not a machine: a machine answering on two ports counts twice.
- CVSS v3
- 7.2
- EG Score
- 9.0CRITICALhigh confidence
- EG Riskⓘ
- 72
EG Risk 72/100
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)
Severity72% × 45%
Impact severity (EG Severity): CVSS 7.2 of 10. Never the KEV-floored or EPSS-lifted EG Score.
Exploitation100% × 40%
Fixed at 100% for a CISA KEV listing: EchelonGraph's rule.
Automatability0% × 15%
CISA's SSVC Automatable value: no (Vulnrichment).
SSVC (CISA's decision table, applied by EchelonGraph): Track at low, Attend at medium and Act at high mission impact.
Exploitation active (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: Upgrade to 12.2.4 or later (from the CVE record's solution, Palo Alto Networks, Inc.). Apply it within your standard update timelines at low, sooner than that at medium and as soon as possible at high mission impact.
- EPSS PROB
- 1.7%
- EPSS %ILE
- 77th
- KEV
- ⚠ Exploited
What the EG score is made of (scorer v4.0: the three questions the 0–10 score mixes, published apart · methodology)
The EG score (9.0): severity, escalated by confirmed exploitation. This CVE's 9.0 is the CISA KEV floor for confirmed exploitation, not an impact rating: its impact severity (EG Severity) is CVSS 7.2 HIGH.
- EG Severity
- 7.2 HIGHCVSS-B, impact only: no KEV listing, EPSS or EG-KEV tier raises it.GitHub Security Advisory CVSS
- EG Likelihood
- 1.7% within 30 daysSource: FIRST EPSS (model v2026.06.15, score date 2026-11-01). FIRST's exploitation probability, not an EchelonGraph model.
- Confirmed exploitation
- CISA KEV and EG-KEV Tier 1 (exploited in the wild)Reported apart from the likelihood: an observed fact, not a probability.
- EG Priority
- SSVC Attend at medium mission impactTrack at low, Attend at medium and Act at high mission impact.CISA BOD 26-04: 3 days & forensic triage if the affected system is publicly exposed; 14 days 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, Attend at medium and Act at high mission impact.
Upgrade to 12.2.4 or later (from the CVE record's solution, Palo Alto Networks, Inc.). Apply it within your standard update timelines at low, sooner than that at medium and as soon as possible at high mission impact.
Exploitation active (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)3 days & forensic triage if the affected system is publicly exposed; 14 days if it is not.
The score's inputs: In CISA KEV yes (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
CISA required action“Apply mitigations in accordance with vendor instructions, ensuring compliance with CISA’s BOD 26-04 Prioritizing Security Updates Based on Risk (see URL in Notes) guidance and CISA’s “Forensics Triage Requirements” (see URL in Notes). Follow applicable BOD 26-04 guidance for cloud services or discontinue use of the product if mitigations are unavailable. Stakeholders are responsible for evaluating each asset's internet exposure and ensuring adherence to BOD 26-04 patching guidelines.”
Quoted verbatim from CISA's Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog. CISA directs it at US federal civilian executive branch agencies under Binding Operational Directive (BOD) 26-04, which replaced BOD 22-01 on 10 June 2026; it is not EchelonGraph's advice. CISA's notes: https://security.paloaltonetworks.com/CVE-2026-0322 · https://www.cisa.gov/news-events/directives/bod-26-04-prioritizing-security-updates-based-risk · https://www.cisa.gov/news-events/directives/bod-26-04-implementation-guidance-prioritizing-security-updates-based-risk · https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-0322
Is Your Infrastructure Affected by CVE-2026-0322?
EchelonGraph automatically scans your cloud infrastructure and maps CVE exposure using blast radius analysis.