CVE-2026-49259

HIGHPre-NVD 8.78.7
EchelonGraph scoreMEDIUM confidence

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

Score 8.7 from GitHub Security Advisory (severity: HIGH) published 2026-07-13. The CNA's CVSS baseline 8.7; sources differ by 0.0.

Triggered by: GitHub Security Advisory CVSS
Sources: the CNA's CVSS, GitHub Security Advisory

Also known asGHSA-w2w5-w2pw-r929 (GitHub Security Advisories)

8.7EG
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: —CVSS: 8.7Exploit: None knownExposed services: Not assessed

A fix is available — apply it.

NukeViet: Improper Neutralization of Input During Web Page Generation ('Cross-site Scripting')

Summary

A stored cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability exists in NukeViet CMS versions 4.x through 4.5.08. A low-privileged authenticated user can store a JavaScript payload in their profile's display name fields. The payload executes in the browser of any visitor — including administrators — who clicks the Reply ("Answer") link on a comment posted by that user.

Affected Component

The {COMMENT.post_name} template variable is interpolated without JavaScript-context escaping into an inline onclick handler in both comment block positions:

  • themes/default/modules/comment/comment.tpl line 27 (top-level comments)
  • themes/default/modules/comment/comment.tpl line 64 (nested/reply comments)

onclick="nv_commment_feedback(event, {COMMENT.cid}, '{COMMENT.post_name}')"

Root Cause

The first_name and last_name profile fields are sanitized with HTML numeric character references (' → ', ( → (, ) → ), / → /) via Request::_get_title() with $specialchars = true. This encoding is correct for plain HTML attribute and element contexts, but insufficient for a JavaScript string literal embedded inside an HTML attribute.

Browsers decode HTML entities in attribute values before the JavaScript engine parses the string. As a result, ' is decoded back to ', which terminates the JS string early and allows the remainder of the value to be executed as JavaScript.

The combined display name (nv_show_name_user(first_name, last_name)) is what reaches the template, giving an attacker up to ~200 encoded characters across both fields — sufficient for any practical payload.

Proof of Concept

Set first_name to the following value in profile settings (/index.php?nv=users&op=editinfo), then post any comment:

a');alert(document.domain);//

The value is stored as a');alert(document.domain);//.

When a visitor clicks the Reply link on the comment, the browser renders:

nv_commment_feedback(event, 1, 'a');alert(document.domain);// Tester')

causing alert(document.domain) to execute in the visitor's browser context.

A data-exfiltration variant (split across both name fields) navigates the victim's browser to an attacker-controlled URL carrying document.cookie as a query parameter. End-to-end verification was performed using a local listener.

Exploitation Conditions (default configuration)

| Condition | Default value | Effect | |---|---|---| | captcha_area_comm | 1 | No CAPTCHA for logged-in users — payload delivery requires no CAPTCHA solve | | auto_postcomm | enabled | Comments are published immediately without moderation | | active_editinfo_censor | 0 | Profile edits take effect immediately without admin review | | CSP script-src | 'unsafe-inline' | Inline onclick handlers execute normally |

Any registered member can set the payload and post a comment with no additional steps.

If captcha_area_comm is set to 0, the name field of anonymous comments (modules/comment/funcs/post.php) is processed by the same get_title(..., 1) call, making exploitation possible without authentication.

Impact

An attacker with a regular user account can execute arbitrary JavaScript in the browser of any visitor who interacts with the Reply button on their comment, including site administrators.

Practical consequences include:

  • Privilege escalation via admin session hijacking — forging administrative actions (content modification, account manipulation) in the context of an authenticated admin.
  • Credential phishing — injecting a fake login form into the page.
  • Data exfiltration — reading page content and non-HttpOnly cookies.

> Note: NukeViet session cookies carry the HttpOnly flag, so they are not directly readable via document.cookie; however, the above attack vectors remain fully viable.

Remediation

Preferred fix: Remove post_name from the inline handler entirely. Pass only cid to nv_commment_feedback and have the function retrieve the display name from the already-rendered DOM (e.g., the adjacent ` element).

Alternative fix: If the value must be passed inline, encode it with json_encode($post_name) (PHP) so that the output is a properly escaped JavaScript string literal, not an HTML-entity-encoded one. HTML numeric character references must not be relied upon for JavaScript string escaping.

As a general note, the result of get_title(..., $specialchars=true)` is safe for HTML element content and quoted HTML attribute values, but unsafe when placed inside a JavaScript string literal within an attribute. Other locations in the codebase using the same pattern should be audited.

Resources

  • OWASP: Cross Site Scripting Prevention — Rule 2: Attribute Encoding is Not Sufficient for JS Contexts
  • CWE-79: Improper Neutralization of Input During Web Page Generation
  • CWE-116: Improper Encoding or Escaping of Output

CVSS v3
8.7
EG Score
8.7HIGHmedium confidence
EG Risk
39
EG Risk 39/100

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)
Severity87% × 45%
Impact severity (EG Severity): CVSS 8.7 of 10. Never the KEV-floored or EPSS-lifted EG Score.
Exploitation0% × 40%
No KEV listing, EG-KEV tier or EPSS when EchelonGraph scored this CVE.
Automatability0% × 15%
CISA's BOD 26-04 default: no one has published Automatable for this CVE, and CISA treats it as “no” for a CVE not in KEV.
SSVC (CISA's decision table, applied by EchelonGraph): Track at low or medium mission impact; Track* at high (mission-essential systems).
Exploitation none (no CISA value, KEV listing or exploit code on record) · Automatable no (CISA's BOD 26-04 default) · Technical impact total (CISA's BOD 26-04 default). EchelonGraph holds no SSVC assessment of this CVE from CISA: none of these inputs is from 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
—
EPSS %ILE
—
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 (8.7): severity, escalated by confirmed exploitation. This CVE's 8.7 is its impact severity (EG Severity), not escalated.

EG Severity
8.7 HIGHCVSS-B, impact only: no KEV listing, EPSS or EG-KEV tier raises it.GitHub Security Advisory CVSS
EG Likelihood
Unknown (no EPSS on record)Unknown, not low: FIRST has published no EPSS probability for this CVE.
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 (no CISA value, KEV listing or exploit code on record) · Automatable no (CISA's BOD 26-04 default) · Technical impact total (CISA's BOD 26-04 default). EchelonGraph holds no SSVC assessment of this CVE from CISA: none of these inputs is from 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's BOD 26-04 default) · Technical impact total (CISA's BOD 26-04 default). Where an input reads “CISA's BOD 26-04 default”, no one has published it for this CVE, and CISA's implementation guidance says: “If “Automatable” and “Technical Impact” information items about a CVE ID are not available and the CVE ID is not in the KEV Catalog, CISA will treat its values as “no” and “total,” respectively, until CISA or a third party provides metadata about the CVE ID. CISA will always provide the Vulnrichment data for a CVE ID listed in the KEV Catalog.” 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

July 13, 2026

Last Modified

July 13, 2026

Vendor Advisories for CVE-2026-49259(1)

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

Patch Availability(1)

Vendor / EcosystemFix (by version range) / PatchReleasedSource
composernukeviet/nukeviet @ 4.6.00 (fixes < 4.5.09)—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)
Packagist(1)
PackageVulnerable rangeFix by version rangeDependents
nukeviet/nukeviet4.0.24, 4.4.01
  • every version up to 4.6.00: fixed in 4.6.00
—

Weakness Classification(1)

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

Data Freshness Timeline

(refreshed 2× in last 7d / 8× 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. 2026-11-01 07:46 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-w2w5-w2pw-r929 · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 8.7
  2. 2026-11-01 07:46 UTCEG score recompute
  3. 2026-10-25 14:22 UTCEG score recompute
  4. 2026-10-18 03:34 UTCEG score recompute
  5. 2026-10-12 16:00 UTCEG score recompute
  6. 2026-10-11 19:43 UTCEG score recompute
  7. 2026-10-11 16:57 UTCEG score recompute
  8. 2026-10-11 14:21 UTCEG score recompute
  9. 2026-10-01 14:12 UTCEG score recompute
  10. 2026-07-30 13:34 UTCEG score recompute
  11. 2026-07-26 11:52 UTCEG score recompute
  12. 2026-07-23 03:18 UTCEG score recompute
  13. 2026-07-13 18:07 UTCEG score recompute

Frequently asked(4)

What is CVE-2026-49259?
CVE-2026-49259 is a high-severity vulnerability; its CVE record was published on July 13, 2026. NukeViet: Improper Neutralization of Input During Web Page Generation ('Cross-site Scripting') Summary A stored cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability exists in NukeViet CMS versions 4.x through 4.5.08. A low-privileged authenticated user can store a JavaScript payload in their profile's display…
When was the CVE record for CVE-2026-49259 published?
The CVE record for CVE-2026-49259 was published on July 13, 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 July 13, 2026; the record at its source may have been updated since.
What is the CVSS score of CVE-2026-49259?
CVE-2026-49259 has a CVSS base score of 8.7 (the CNA's own assessment, by github_m; NVD's own analysis pending).
How do I remediate CVE-2026-49259?
A fix for CVE-2026-49259 is available: update to the fixed version the vendor names in its advisory. The vendor advisories EchelonGraph has for CVE-2026-49259 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-2026-49259

Explore →

Is Your Infrastructure Affected by CVE-2026-49259?

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