CVE-2026-53723

MEDIUMPre-NVD 5.85.8
EchelonGraph scoreMEDIUM confidence

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

Score 5.8 from GitHub Security Advisory (severity: MODERATE) published 2026-06-11. A secondary CVSS source baseline 5.8; sources differ by 0.0.

Triggered by: GitHub Security Advisory CVSS
Sources: EPSS, GitHub Security Advisory, a secondary CVSS source
Trending — 3 sources updated this week

Also known asEUVD-2026-36242 (ENISA EUVD) · GHSA-q8r6-5hfw-5jff (GitHub Security Advisories)Source: ENISA EUVD

5.8EG
EchelonGraph verdictMonitorRemediate within your standard update timelines at low or medium mission impact and sooner than that at high (the SSVC decision on this page).
  • Lower severity and no public exploit yet
CISA-KEV: Not listedEPSS PROB: 0.2%CVSS: 5.8Exploit: None knownExposed services: Not assessed

A fix is available — apply it.

Guzzle Services provides an implementation of the Guzzle Command library that uses Guzzle service descriptions to describe web services, serialize requests, and parse responses into easy to use model structures. Versions prior ro 1.5.4 do not safely serialize scalar XML element values containing the CDATA terminator ]]>. The XML request serializer writes values containing <, >, or & with XMLWriter::writeCData($value). If attacker-controlled input contains ]]>, the CDATA section closes early and the remainder is interpreted as XML markup. This is an outgoing request-body integrity issue, not a response parsing issue. The attacker does not need to control the service description or schema. Users are affected when all of the following are true: the application uses guzzlehttp/guzzle-services to serialize outgoing requests; a request parameter or additionalParameters schema uses location: xml; the value is serialized as XML element text, not an XML attribute; the value can contain attacker-controlled, user-controlled, tenant-controlled, or otherwise untrusted input; the value is not constrained by a safe enum, pattern, or custom filter that excludes ]]>; and the downstream service parses the generated XML structurally and may act on unexpected, duplicated, or injected elements. Applications that serialize untrusted input into location: xml request parameters can emit XML containing attacker-controlled elements outside the intended text node. Depending on the receiving service, this can alter operation semantics, smuggle privileged fields, bypass modeled parameter boundaries, or create conflicting duplicated elements. Fixed service descriptions are sufficient if they contain an XML element parameter populated from attacker-controlled input. Users are not directly affected if they only use Guzzle Services to deserialize HTTP response bodies. Response XML parsing uses the response XML location visitor and does not invoke the vulnerable request XML serializer. Response bodies matter only in a second-order flow, such as parsing attacker-controlled response XML, storing or forwarding a parsed string value, and later using it as a location: xml request parameter. The issue is patched in 1.5.3 and later by safely splitting embedded CDATA terminators before serialization. The fix preserves the original scalar value as XML text and prevents injected nodes. As a workaround, constrain attacker-controlled XML element values with a strict enum, pattern, or custom filter that excludes ]]>, or avoid serializing untrusted data into location: xml element text until patched. Where appropriate for the service schema, XML attributes are not affected because they are written with XMLWriter attribute APIs rather than CDATA sections. To determine whether action is needed, search service descriptions for request parameters using location: xml, including operation parameters and additionalParameters. Response-only models are not directly affected unless parsed values are reused for request serialization. For object and array parameters, review nested scalar properties because leaf element values can still be affected.

CVSS v3
5.8
EG Score
5.8MEDIUMmedium confidence
EG Risk
41
EG Risk 41/100

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)
Severity58% × 45%
Impact severity (EG Severity): CVSS 5.8 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.
Automatability100% × 15%
CISA's SSVC Automatable value: yes (Vulnrichment).
SSVC (CISA's decision table, applied by EchelonGraph): Track at low or medium mission impact; Attend at high (mission-essential systems).
Exploitation none (CISA Vulnrichment) · Automatable yes (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 at low or medium mission impact and sooner than that at high.
EPSS PROB
0.2%
EPSS %ILE
12th
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 (5.8): severity, escalated by confirmed exploitation. This CVE's 5.8 is its impact severity (EG Severity), not escalated.

EG Severity
5.8 MEDIUMCVSS-B, impact only: no KEV listing, EPSS or EG-KEV tier raises it.GitHub Security Advisory CVSS
EG Likelihood
0.2% 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; Attend at high (mission-essential systems).CISA BOD 26-04: 14 days if the affected system is publicly exposed; 60 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 or medium mission impact; Attend at high (mission-essential systems).

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

Exploitation none (CISA Vulnrichment) · Automatable yes (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)14 days if the affected system is publicly exposed; 60 days if it is not.

The score's inputs: In CISA KEV no (CISA's KEV catalog) · Automatable yes (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

June 11, 2026

Last Modified

October 25, 2026

Advisory Details (1)

Auto-updated Jun 13, 2026
Patch available. Sources: github.
GitHub advisoryMentions a patch (unverified)

XML Injection via CDATA Terminator in guzzlehttp/guzzle-services XML Request Serialization · Advisory · guzzle/guzzle-services · GitHub

https://github.com/guzzle/guzzle-services/security/advisories/GHSA-q8r6-5hfw-5jff

Vendor Advisories for CVE-2026-53723(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
composerguzzlehttp/guzzle-services @ 1.5.4 (fixes < 1.5.4)—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
guzzlehttp/guzzle-services0.1.0 ... 1.5.3 (24 versions)
  • every version up to 1.5.4: fixed in 1.5.4
—

Weakness Classification(2)

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

Data Freshness Timeline

(refreshed 9× in last 7d / 40× 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.

Showing the most recent 100 of 185 refreshes 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 85 oldest rows on record are not shown and were not checked, so the counts can still include repeats.

  1. 2026-11-02 16:45 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 12th percentile
  2. 2026-11-01 16:34 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 12th percentile
  3. 2026-11-01 07:45 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-q8r6-5hfw-5jff · GitHub severity MODERATE · GitHub CVSS 5.8
  4. 2026-11-01 07:45 UTCEG score recompute
  5. 2026-10-31 16:33 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 12th percentile
  6. 2026-10-30 16:34 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 12th percentile
  7. 2026-10-29 16:33 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 12th percentile
  8. 2026-10-28 16:32 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 12th percentile
  9. 2026-10-27 16:32 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 12th percentile
  10. 2026-10-26 16:31 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 12th percentile
  11. 2026-10-25 23:35 UTCEG score recompute
  12. 2026-10-25 16:33 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 12th percentile
  13. 2026-10-25 14:20 UTCEG score recompute
  14. 2026-10-24 16:33 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.3% · 27th percentile
  15. 2026-10-23 16:32 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.3% · 27th percentile
  16. 2026-10-22 21:47 UTCEG score recompute
  17. 2026-10-22 16:34 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.3% · 27th percentile
  18. 2026-10-21 16:33 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.3% · 26th percentile
  19. 2026-10-20 16:33 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.3% · 26th percentile
  20. 2026-10-19 16:32 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.3% · 26th percentile
  21. 2026-10-18 16:32 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.3% · 26th percentile
  22. 2026-10-18 03:31 UTCEG score recompute
  23. 2026-10-17 16:34 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.3% · 26th percentile
  24. 2026-10-16 16:42 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.3% · 26th percentile
  25. 2026-10-15 16:32 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.3% · 26th percentile
Show 75 more
  1. 2026-10-14 16:33 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.3% · 26th percentile
  2. 2026-10-13 16:34 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.3% · 26th percentile
  3. 2026-10-12 16:34 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.3% · 26th percentile
  4. 2026-10-12 15:57 UTCEG score recompute
  5. 2026-10-11 19:40 UTCEG score recompute
  6. 2026-10-11 16:55 UTCEG score recompute
  7. 2026-10-11 14:18 UTCEG score recompute
  8. 2026-10-11 13:49 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.3% · 26th percentile
  9. 2026-10-10 20:00 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.3% · 26th percentile
  10. 2026-10-09 20:07 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.3% · 26th percentile
  11. 2026-10-08 17:12 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.3% · 26th percentile
  12. 2026-10-07 23:48 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.3% · 26th percentile
  13. 2026-10-06 15:18 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.3% · 26th percentile
  14. 2026-10-05 17:43 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.3% · 25th percentile
  15. 2026-10-04 23:22 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.3% · 25th percentile
  16. 2026-10-03 14:26 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.3% · 25th percentile
  17. 2026-10-03 08:39 UTCOSV refresh
  18. 2026-10-02 17:56 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.3% · 25th percentile
  19. 2026-10-01 19:50 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.3% · 25th percentile
  20. 2026-09-30 15:03 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.3% · 25th percentile
  21. 2026-09-29 15:22 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.3% · 25th percentile
  22. 2026-09-28 13:51 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.3% · 25th percentile
  23. 2026-09-27 13:48 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.3% · 25th percentile
  24. 2026-09-26 15:59 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.3% · 25th percentile
  25. 2026-09-24 14:04 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.3% · 25th percentile
  26. 2026-09-23 17:54 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 12th percentile
  27. 2026-09-20 20:16 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 12th percentile
  28. 2026-09-18 19:28 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 12th percentile
  29. 2026-09-16 14:08 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 12th percentile
  30. 2026-09-16 05:15 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 12th percentile
  31. 2026-09-14 04:11 UTCEG score recompute
  32. 2026-09-13 16:47 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 12th percentile
  33. 2026-09-11 14:53 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 12th percentile
  34. 2026-09-10 09:35 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 12th percentile
  35. 2026-09-08 22:01 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 12th percentile
  36. 2026-09-07 16:01 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 12th percentile
  37. 2026-09-06 13:47 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 12th percentile
  38. 2026-09-04 05:06 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 12th percentile
  39. 2026-09-02 14:12 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 12th percentile
  40. 2026-09-01 13:54 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 12th percentile
  41. 2026-09-01 04:40 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 12th percentile
  42. 2026-08-31 00:05 UTCEG score recompute
  43. 2026-08-30 19:17 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 12th percentile
  44. 2026-08-30 01:22 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 12th percentile
  45. 2026-08-28 21:41 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 12th percentile
  46. 2026-08-27 14:25 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 12th percentile
  47. 2026-08-26 14:46 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 12th percentile
  48. 2026-08-25 13:49 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 12th percentile
  49. 2026-08-25 00:06 UTCEG score recompute
  50. 2026-08-23 10:43 UTCEG score recompute
  51. 2026-08-23 00:19 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 12th percentile
  52. 2026-08-21 23:49 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 12th percentile
  53. 2026-08-20 17:15 UTCEG score recompute
  54. 2026-08-19 17:04 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 12th percentile
  55. 2026-08-19 14:54 UTCEG score recompute
  56. 2026-08-18 13:48 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 12th percentile
  57. 2026-08-17 13:47 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 12th percentile
  58. 2026-08-16 23:18 UTCEG score recompute
  59. 2026-08-16 14:56 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 12th percentile
  60. 2026-08-16 02:14 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 12th percentile
  61. 2026-08-15 23:51 UTCEG score recompute
  62. 2026-08-15 01:30 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 12th percentile
  63. 2026-08-13 22:15 UTCEG score recompute
  64. 2026-08-13 22:00 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 12th percentile
  65. 2026-08-12 18:50 UTCEG score recompute
  66. 2026-08-12 13:51 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 12th percentile
  67. 2026-08-11 19:23 UTCEG score recompute
  68. 2026-08-11 00:00 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 12th percentile
  69. 2026-08-09 17:46 UTCEG score recompute
  70. 2026-08-09 13:46 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 12th percentile
  71. 2026-08-08 18:20 UTCEG score recompute
  72. 2026-08-08 16:37 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 12th percentile
  73. 2026-08-07 18:53 UTCEG score recompute
  74. 2026-08-06 19:26 UTCEG score recompute
  75. 2026-08-06 13:47 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 12th percentile

Frequently asked(5)

What is CVE-2026-53723?
CVE-2026-53723 is a medium-severity vulnerability; its CVE record was published on June 11, 2026. Guzzle Services provides an implementation of the Guzzle Command library that uses Guzzle service descriptions to describe web services, serialize requests, and parse responses into easy to use model structures. Versions prior ro 1.5.4 do not safely serialize scalar XML element values containing…
When was the CVE record for CVE-2026-53723 published?
The CVE record for CVE-2026-53723 was published on June 11, 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 25, 2026; the record at its source may have been updated since.
Is CVE-2026-53723 actively exploited?
CVE-2026-53723 is not currently on CISA's Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog. FIRST EPSS estimates a 0.2% probability of exploitation in the next 30 days (12th percentile of EPSS-scored CVEs).
What is the CVSS score of CVE-2026-53723?
CVE-2026-53723 has a CVSS base score of 5.8 (a secondary CVSS source that NVD displays; NVD's own analysis pending).
How do I remediate CVE-2026-53723?
A fix for CVE-2026-53723 is available: update to the fixed version the vendor names in its advisory. The vendor advisories EchelonGraph has for CVE-2026-53723 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-2026-53723

Explore →

Is Your Infrastructure Affected by CVE-2026-53723?

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