CVE-2026-111756

HIGHPre-NVD 8.28.2
EchelonGraph scoreMEDIUM confidence

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

This high-severity CVE scores 8.2 under a secondary CVSS source (NVD's own analysis pending). EPSS exploit probability: 0.5% (40th 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
Trending — 4 sources updated this weekElevated

Also known asEUVD-2026-105225 (ENISA EUVD) · GHSA-q3jh-wrc6-jgq8 (GitHub Security Advisories)Source: ENISA EUVD

8.2EG
EchelonGraph verdictPlan a fixRemediate within your standard update timelines (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: 0.5%CVSS: 8.2Exploit: No code on recordExposed services: Not assessed

A fix is available — apply it.

follow-redirects is a Node.js HTTP and HTTPS client wrapper that automatically follows redirects. From version 1.16.0 to before version 1.16.1, follow-redirects removes sensitive credential headers (Authorization, Proxy-Authorization, Cookie, and any caller-declared sensitiveHeaders) before following a redirect that crosses to a different host or downgrades to a less secure protocol. The removal routine iterates the caller's headers container with for...in and matches header names against a filter. This assumes the headers container is a plain object keyed by header names. Node's underlying http.request, which follow-redirects is a drop-in replacement for, also accepts headers as an alternating array of names and values. For an array, for...in yields the numeric indices "0", "1", "2" and so on, which never match a header-name filter, so nothing is removed. An application that sends array-form headers and follows an attacker-controlled cross-origin redirect therefore forwards its Authorization, Cookie, and Proxy-Authorization headers verbatim to the attacker-controlled destination, with no error or warning. The sensitiveHeaders option added to fix CVE-2026-40895 / GHSA-r4q5-vmmm-2653 is equally ineffective, because it relies on the same helper. This is an unauthenticated confidentiality vulnerability: any remote server the victim application contacts can harvest the victim's credential headers by responding with a cross-origin redirect. This issue has been patched in version 1.16.1.

CVSS v3
8.2
EG Score
8.2HIGHmedium confidence
EG Risk
53
EG Risk 53/100

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)
Severity82% × 45%
Impact severity (EG Severity): CVSS 8.2 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 or medium mission impact; Track* at high (mission-essential systems).
Exploitation public PoC (CISA Vulnrichment) · Automatable no (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: A fix is available. Apply it within your standard update timelines.
EPSS PROB
0.5%
EPSS %ILE
40th
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 (8.2): severity, escalated by confirmed exploitation. This CVE's 8.2 is its impact severity (EG Severity), not escalated.

EG Severity
8.2 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
0.5% within 30 daysSource: FIRST EPSS (model v2026.06.15, score date 2026-10-31). 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: 60 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 public PoC (CISA Vulnrichment) · Automatable no (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)60 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 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 20, 2026

Last Modified

October 23, 2026

Advisory Details (2)

Auto-updated Oct 20, 2026
🔬 Proof of concept available. Patch available. Sources: github_commit, github.
GitHub advisoryMentions a patch (unverified)🟡 PoC Available

Array-form request headers bypass cross-origin sensitive-header stripping in follow-redirects (Authorization, Cookie, Proxy-Authorization, and sensitiveHeaders forwarded to the redirect target) · Advisory · follow-redirects/follow-redirects · GitHub

https://github.com/follow-redirects/follow-redirects/security/advisories/GHSA-q3jh-wrc6-jgq8
GitHub commit

commit 9865ca45490e (follow-redirects/follow-redirects)

Fix landed in follow-redirects/follow-redirects commit 9865ca45490e — awaiting tagged release

https://github.com/follow-redirects/follow-redirects/commit/9865ca45490e4d0f7b6944870318408344570aff

Vendor Advisories for CVE-2026-111756(3)

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

Patch Availability(4)

Vendor / EcosystemFix (by version range) / PatchReleasedSource
redhatgrafana13-1-main-13.1.8-0.4.hum12026-10-23redhat
redhatgrafana13-2-main-13.2.4-0.3.hum12026-10-23redhat
redhatgrafana12-4-main-12.4.13-0.3.hum12026-10-23redhat
npmfollow-redirects @ 1.16.1 (fixes >= 1.16.0, < 1.16.1)—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
follow-redirects—
  • 1.16.0 up to 1.16.1: fixed in 1.16.1
—

Weakness Classification(2)

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

Additional Vendor Advisories

(1)

Vendors that published advisories for this CVE beyond the curated set above. Broader coverage but minimal per-row detail — click through for the original advisory.

Data Freshness Timeline

(refreshed 11× in last 7d / 23× 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 it from the CNA feed. 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). Most recent first.

  1. 2026-11-02 16:43 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.5% · 40th percentile
  2. 2026-11-01 16:33 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.5% · 40th percentile
  3. 2026-11-01 07:59 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-q3jh-wrc6-jgq8 · GitHub severity HIGH
  4. 2026-11-01 07:59 UTCEG score recompute
  5. 2026-10-31 16:31 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.5% · 40th percentile
  6. 2026-10-30 16:33 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.5% · 40th percentile
  7. 2026-10-29 16:32 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.5% · 40th percentile
  8. 2026-10-28 16:31 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.5% · 40th percentile
  9. 2026-10-27 20:41 UTCEG score recompute
  10. 2026-10-27 20:41 UTCVendor advisory
  11. 2026-10-27 16:31 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.5% · 40th percentile
  12. 2026-10-26 16:30 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.5% · 40th percentile
  13. 2026-10-25 16:32 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.5% · 40th percentile
  14. 2026-10-25 14:52 UTCEG score recompute
  15. 2026-10-24 16:32 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 29th percentile
  16. 2026-10-23 16:31 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 29th percentile
  17. 2026-10-23 02:25 UTCEG score recompute
  18. 2026-10-23 02:07 UTCEG score recompute
  19. 2026-10-22 16:33 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 29th percentile
  20. 2026-10-21 16:32 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 29th percentile
  21. 2026-10-20 18:27 UTCEG score recompute
  22. 2026-10-20 18:08 UTCEG score recomputeFirst assessed: 8.2 HIGH
  23. 2026-10-20 18:06 UTCMITRE cvelistV5first tracked

Related CVEs(same product + same vendor + same CWE)

Same vendor

4 shown

redhat:RHSA-2026:88478 · redhat:RHSA-2026:88541

Frequently asked(5)

What is CVE-2026-111756?
CVE-2026-111756 is a high-severity vulnerability; its CVE record was published on October 20, 2026. follow-redirects is a Node.js HTTP and HTTPS client wrapper that automatically follows redirects. From version 1.16.0 to before version 1.16.1, follow-redirects removes sensitive credential headers (Authorization, Proxy-Authorization, Cookie, and any caller-declared sensitiveHeaders) before…
When was the CVE record for CVE-2026-111756 published?
The CVE record for CVE-2026-111756 was published on October 20, 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 October 23, 2026; the record at its source may have been updated since.
Is CVE-2026-111756 actively exploited?
CVE-2026-111756 is not currently on CISA's Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog. FIRST EPSS estimates a 0.5% probability of exploitation in the next 30 days (40th percentile of EPSS-scored CVEs).
What is the CVSS score of CVE-2026-111756?
CVE-2026-111756 has a CVSS base score of 8.2 (a secondary CVSS source that NVD displays; NVD's own analysis pending).
How do I remediate CVE-2026-111756?
A fix for CVE-2026-111756 is available: update to the fixed version the vendor names in its advisory. The vendor advisories EchelonGraph has for CVE-2026-111756 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-2026-111756

Explore →

Is Your Infrastructure Affected by CVE-2026-111756?

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

Book a Demo →Browse All CVEs