CVE-2026-61642

HIGHPre-NVD 7.77.7
EchelonGraph scoreMEDIUM confidence

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

This high-severity CVE scores 7.7 under a secondary CVSS source (NVD's own analysis pending). EPSS exploit probability: 2.0% (81st 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 — 3 sources updated this week

Also known asEUVD-2026-98919 (ENISA EUVD)Source: ENISA EUVD

7.7EG
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: 2.0%CVSS: 7.7Exploit: None knownExposed services: Not assessed

A fix is available — apply it.

Squid is a caching proxy for the Web. From 3.3.0.1 to before 7.6, due to an improper enforcement of behavioral workflow bug, Squid is vulnerable to a Request Smuggling attack against HTTP/1.1 Transfer-Encoding. HTTP header parsing (src/HttpHeader.cc) accepted the bare Transfer-Encoding: identity form, which the HTTP specification prohibits because any transfer coding must be wrapped within chunked encoding. This problem allows a trusted client to perform an HTTP Request Smuggling attack when HTTP/1.1 is used, bypassing security mechanisms that may be in place between attacker and Squid. When there is an HTTP cache operating prior to the affected Squid, this Request Smuggling attack also allows the attacker to poison that web cache and store arbitrary malicious content at any URL for delivery to other clients' future requests. This issue is fixed in version 7.6.

CVSS v3
7.7
EG Score
7.7HIGHmedium confidence
EG Risk
36
EG Risk 36/100

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)
Severity77% × 45%
Impact severity (EG Severity): CVSS 7.7 of 10. Never the KEV-floored or EPSS-lifted EG Score.
Exploitation2.2% × 40%
FIRST EPSS: the 30-day exploitation probability when EchelonGraph scored this CVE.
Automatability0% × 15%
CISA's SSVC Automatable value: no (Vulnrichment).
SSVC (CISA's decision table, applied by EchelonGraph): Track at every mission impact level.
Exploitation none (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
2.0%
EPSS %ILE
81st
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 (7.7): severity, escalated by confirmed exploitation. This CVE's 7.7 is its impact severity (EG Severity), not escalated.

EG Severity
7.7 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
2.0% within 30 daysSource: FIRST EPSS. 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 every mission impact level.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 every mission impact level.

A fix is available. Apply it within your standard update timelines.

Exploitation none (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 13, 2026

Last Modified

October 16, 2026

Advisory Details (6)

Auto-updated Oct 13, 2026
Patch available. Sources: github_pr, github_commit, github_release, github.
GitHub release Patch Available

v7.6

Patch available: squid-cache/squid SQUID_7_6

https://github.com/squid-cache/squid/releases/tag/SQUID_7_6
GitHub commit

commit d808a7c825a7 (squid-cache/squid)

Fix landed in squid-cache/squid commit d808a7c825a7 — awaiting tagged release

https://github.com/squid-cache/squid/commit/d808a7c825a70275113790471135c9c4d547ee51
GitHub commit

commit d06f48de8b8c (squid-cache/squid)

Fix landed in squid-cache/squid commit d06f48de8b8c — awaiting tagged release

https://github.com/squid-cache/squid/commit/d06f48de8b8cc9a378cb91ecfe8e89b6e81696d2
GitHub pull request

HTTP/1.1: Transfer-Encoding:identity is prohibited (#2427)

Fix merged in squid-cache/squid PR #2431 on 2026-06-02 — awaiting tagged release

https://github.com/squid-cache/squid/pull/2431
GitHub pull request

HTTP/1.1: Transfer-Encoding:identity is prohibited

Upstream fix in progress (PR #2427 · squid-cache/squid, state=closed)

https://github.com/squid-cache/squid/pull/2427
GitHub advisoryMentions a patch (unverified)

SQUID-2026:6 Request Smuggling in HTTP Transfer-Encoding · Advisory · squid-cache/squid · GitHub

https://github.com/squid-cache/squid/security/advisories/GHSA-537g-4gfh-w7m6

Vendor Advisories for CVE-2026-61642(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
ubuntusquidclient (6.14-0ubuntu0.24.04.5) @ noble2026-10-23ubuntu

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.

Weakness Classification(1)

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 9× in last 7d / 31× 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 16:35 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 2.0% · 81st percentile
  2. 2026-10-31 16:33 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 2.0% · 81st percentile
  3. 2026-10-30 16:34 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 2.0% · 81st percentile
  4. 2026-10-30 12:14 UTCEG score recompute
  5. 2026-10-30 12:14 UTCVendor advisory
  6. 2026-10-29 16:33 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 2.2% · 82nd percentile
  7. 2026-10-28 16:32 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 2.2% · 82nd percentile
  8. 2026-10-27 16:32 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 2.2% · 82nd percentile
  9. 2026-10-26 16:32 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 2.2% · 82nd percentile
  10. 2026-10-25 16:33 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 2.2% · 82nd percentile
  11. 2026-10-25 14:14 UTCEG score recompute
  12. 2026-10-24 16:33 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 4.7% · 91st percentile
  13. 2026-10-23 16:32 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 4.7% · 91st percentile
  14. 2026-10-23 14:12 UTCEG score recompute
  15. 2026-10-23 14:12 UTCVendor advisory
  16. 2026-10-22 16:35 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 4.7% · 91st percentile
  17. 2026-10-21 16:33 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 4.7% · 91st percentile
  18. 2026-10-20 16:33 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 4.7% · 91st percentile
  19. 2026-10-19 16:32 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 4.7% · 91st percentile
  20. 2026-10-18 16:32 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 4.7% · 91st percentile
  21. 2026-10-18 03:25 UTCEG score recompute
  22. 2026-10-17 16:35 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 4.7% · 91st percentile
  23. 2026-10-16 16:43 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 4.7% · 91st percentile
  24. 2026-10-16 16:09 UTCEG score recompute
  25. 2026-10-15 16:32 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 4.7% · 91st percentile
Show 6 more
  1. 2026-10-14 16:33 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 4.7% · 91st percentile
  2. 2026-10-13 18:26 UTCEG score recompute
  3. 2026-10-13 18:00 UTCEG score recompute
  4. 2026-10-13 17:27 UTCEG score recompute
  5. 2026-10-13 16:39 UTCEG score recomputeFirst assessed: 7.7 HIGH
  6. 2026-10-13 16:39 UTCMITRE cvelistV5first tracked

Related CVEs(same vendor + same CWE)

Frequently asked(5)

What is CVE-2026-61642?
CVE-2026-61642 is a high-severity vulnerability; its CVE record was published on October 13, 2026. Squid is a caching proxy for the Web. From 3.3.0.1 to before 7.6, due to an improper enforcement of behavioral workflow bug, Squid is vulnerable to a Request Smuggling attack against HTTP/1.1 Transfer-Encoding. HTTP header parsing (src/HttpHeader.cc) accepted the bare Transfer-Encoding: identity…
When was the CVE record for CVE-2026-61642 published?
The CVE record for CVE-2026-61642 was published on October 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 October 16, 2026; the record at its source may have been updated since.
Is CVE-2026-61642 actively exploited?
CVE-2026-61642 is not currently on CISA's Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog. FIRST EPSS estimates a 2.0% probability of exploitation in the next 30 days (81st percentile of EPSS-scored CVEs).
What is the CVSS score of CVE-2026-61642?
CVE-2026-61642 has a CVSS base score of 7.7 (a secondary CVSS source that NVD displays; NVD's own analysis pending).
How do I remediate CVE-2026-61642?
A fix for CVE-2026-61642 is available: update to the fixed version the vendor names in its advisory. The vendor advisories EchelonGraph has for CVE-2026-61642 are linked in the Vendor Advisories panel on this page.

Dependency Blast Radius

Explore the affected products and dependency analysis for CVE-2026-61642

Explore →

Is Your Infrastructure Affected by CVE-2026-61642?

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

Book a Demo →Browse All CVEs