CVE-2026-92937

CRITICALPre-NVD 10.010.0
EchelonGraph scoreMEDIUM confidence

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

Score 10.0 from GitHub Security Advisory (severity: CRITICAL) published 2026-10-01. A secondary CVSS source baseline 10.0; sources differ by 0.0.

Triggered by: GitHub Security Advisory CVSS
Sources: EPSS, GitHub Security Advisory, a secondary CVSS source
Trending — Patch released this weekElevated

Also known asEUVD-2026-81587 (ENISA EUVD) · GHSA-3f84-vwv5-r42g (GitHub Security Advisories) · GHSA-647f-g98j-qq25 (GitHub Security Advisories)Source: ENISA EUVD

10.0EG
EchelonGraph verdictPlan a fixRemediate within your standard update timelines at low or medium mission impact and sooner than that at high (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: 1.0%CVSS: 10.0Exploit: No code on recordExposed services: Not assessed

A fix is available — apply it.

vm2 3.11.6 is vulnerable to a sandbox escape leading to remote code execution in the host Node.js process. The fix for GHSA-m283-3h24-438v is incomplete: the bridge gate at lib/bridge.js:1624 identity-checks only the direct call target when deciding whether to rebuild/sanitise a rejected host Promise value. Registering the rejection handler through Function.prototype.call or .apply indirection (e.g., p.then.call(p, undefined, cb)) makes the intercepted target host Function.prototype.call, so the sanitiser never runs and the raw host error reaches sandbox code with its own properties intact. If an embedder exposes a host-realm Promise to the sandbox (an async host function bridged via the sandbox option, or a NodeVM external module's async method) and that Promise rejects with an Error carrying a non-primitive own property referencing a host object (for example err.detail = process), untrusted code in the sandbox obtains a fully functional proxy to that host object and can execute arbitrary commands with the privileges of the host process (e.g., e.detail.mainModule.require('child_process').execSync(...)). The direct p.then(undefined, cb), bind, and Reflect.apply forms are correctly sanitised. Fixed in vm2 3.11.7.

CVSS v3
10.0
EG Score
10.0CRITICALmedium confidence
EG Risk
76
EG Risk 76/100

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)
Severity100% × 45%
Impact severity (EG Severity): CVSS 10.0 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.
Automatability100% × 15%
CISA's SSVC Automatable value: yes (Vulnrichment).
SSVC (CISA's decision table, applied by EchelonGraph): Track at low, Track* at medium and Attend at high mission impact.
Exploitation public PoC (CISA Vulnrichment) · Automatable yes (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: 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
1.0%
EPSS %ILE
63rd
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 (10.0): severity, escalated by confirmed exploitation. This CVE's 10.0 is its impact severity (EG Severity), not escalated.

EG Severity
10.0 CRITICALCVSS-B, impact only: no KEV listing, EPSS or EG-KEV tier raises it.GitHub Security Advisory CVSS
EG Likelihood
1.0% 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, Track* at medium and Attend at high mission impact.CISA BOD 26-04: 3 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, Track* at medium and Attend at high mission impact.

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

Exploitation public PoC (CISA Vulnrichment) · Automatable yes (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 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 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

Published

September 17, 2026

Last Modified

September 18, 2026

Advisory Details (2)

Auto-updated Oct 31, 2026
🔬 Proof of concept available. Patch available. Sources: github.
GitHub advisoryMentions a patch (unverified)🟡 PoC Available

vm2: GHSA-m283-3h24-438v fix bypass leads to host RCE via call/apply indirection · Advisory · patriksimek/vm2 · GitHub

https://github.com/patriksimek/vm2/security/advisories/GHSA-647f-g98j-qq25
Web page

vm2 3.11.6 Remote Code Execution via Promise call/apply | Advisories | VulnCheck

https://www.vulncheck.com/advisories/vm2-3.11.6-remote-code-execution-via-promise-call-apply

Patch Availability(7)

Vendor / EcosystemFix (by version range) / PatchReleasedSource
redhatrhdh/rhdh-hub-rhel9:17931178132026-10-28redhat
redhatansible-automation-platform/bootc-automation-portal-rhel9:17918656602026-10-13redhat
redhatansible-automation-platform/automation-portal:17912953792026-10-12redhat
redhatansible-automation-platform/automation-portal:17912937802026-10-12redhat
redhatrhdh/rhdh-hub-rhel9:17913114952026-10-08redhat
redhatrhdh/red-hat-developer-hub-backstage-plugin-orchestrator-backend:17912512822026-10-06redhat
npmvm2 @ 3.11.7 (fixes = 3.11.6)—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
vm23.11.6
  • 3.11.6 up to 3.11.7: fixed in 3.11.7
—

Weakness Classification(2)

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

Data Freshness Timeline

(refreshed 21× in last 7d / 114× 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 226 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 126 oldest rows on record are not shown and were not checked, so the counts can still include repeats.

  1. 2026-11-01 16:36 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 1.0% · 63rd percentile
  2. 2026-11-01 12:36 UTCVendor advisory
  3. 2026-11-01 12:36 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-647f-g98j-qq25 · GitHub severity CRITICAL · GitHub CVSS 10.0
  4. 2026-11-01 07:37 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-647f-g98j-qq25 · GitHub severity CRITICAL · GitHub CVSS 10.0
  5. 2026-11-01 07:37 UTCEG score recompute
  6. 2026-10-31 16:33 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 1.0% · 63rd percentile
  7. 2026-10-31 11:23 UTCEG score recompute
  8. 2026-10-31 11:23 UTCVendor advisory
  9. 2026-10-30 16:35 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 1.0% · 63rd percentile
  10. 2026-10-30 10:10 UTCEG score recompute
  11. 2026-10-30 10:10 UTCVendor advisory
  12. 2026-10-29 16:34 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 1.0% · 63rd percentile
  13. 2026-10-29 08:57 UTCEG score recompute
  14. 2026-10-29 08:57 UTCVendor advisory
  15. 2026-10-28 16:33 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 1.0% · 63rd percentile
  16. 2026-10-28 07:39 UTCEG score recompute
  17. 2026-10-28 07:39 UTCVendor advisory
  18. 2026-10-27 16:33 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 1.0% · 63rd percentile
  19. 2026-10-27 06:27 UTCEG score recompute
  20. 2026-10-27 06:27 UTCVendor advisory
  21. 2026-10-26 16:33 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 1.0% · 63rd percentile
  22. 2026-10-26 01:18 UTCEG score recompute
  23. 2026-10-26 01:18 UTCVendor advisory
  24. 2026-10-25 16:34 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 1.0% · 63rd percentile
  25. 2026-10-25 13:50 UTCEG score recompute
Show 75 more
  1. 2026-10-25 00:06 UTCEG score recompute
  2. 2026-10-25 00:06 UTCVendor advisory
  3. 2026-10-24 16:34 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 1.0% · 63rd percentile
  4. 2026-10-23 22:52 UTCEG score recompute
  5. 2026-10-23 22:52 UTCVendor advisory
  6. 2026-10-23 16:33 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 1.0% · 63rd percentile
  7. 2026-10-22 21:39 UTCEG score recompute
  8. 2026-10-22 21:39 UTCVendor advisory
  9. 2026-10-22 16:35 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 1.0% · 63rd percentile
  10. 2026-10-21 20:26 UTCEG score recompute
  11. 2026-10-21 20:26 UTCVendor advisory
  12. 2026-10-21 16:34 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 1.0% · 63rd percentile
  13. 2026-10-20 19:14 UTCEG score recompute
  14. 2026-10-20 19:14 UTCVendor advisory
  15. 2026-10-20 16:34 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 1.0% · 63rd percentile
  16. 2026-10-19 18:02 UTCEG score recompute
  17. 2026-10-19 18:02 UTCVendor advisory
  18. 2026-10-19 16:33 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 1.0% · 63rd percentile
  19. 2026-10-18 16:48 UTCEG score recompute
  20. 2026-10-18 16:48 UTCVendor advisory
  21. 2026-10-18 16:33 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 1.0% · 63rd percentile
  22. 2026-10-18 02:59 UTCEG score recompute
  23. 2026-10-17 16:35 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 1.0% · 63rd percentile
  24. 2026-10-17 15:34 UTCEG score recompute
  25. 2026-10-17 15:34 UTCVendor advisory
  26. 2026-10-17 08:13 UTCEG score recompute
  27. 2026-10-17 08:13 UTCVendor advisory
  28. 2026-10-16 16:45 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 1.0% · 63rd percentile
  29. 2026-10-16 06:59 UTCEG score recompute
  30. 2026-10-16 06:59 UTCVendor advisory
  31. 2026-10-15 16:33 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 1.0% · 63rd percentile
  32. 2026-10-15 05:42 UTCEG score recompute
  33. 2026-10-15 05:42 UTCVendor advisory
  34. 2026-10-14 16:34 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 1.0% · 63rd percentile
  35. 2026-10-14 01:20 UTCEG score recompute
  36. 2026-10-14 01:20 UTCVendor advisory
  37. 2026-10-13 16:35 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 1.0% · 62nd percentile
  38. 2026-10-12 21:33 UTCEG score recompute
  39. 2026-10-12 21:33 UTCVendor advisory
  40. 2026-10-12 16:35 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 1.0% · 62nd percentile
  41. 2026-10-12 14:44 UTCEG score recompute
  42. 2026-10-12 05:02 UTCVendor advisory
  43. 2026-10-11 23:02 UTCVendor advisory
  44. 2026-10-11 19:13 UTCEG score recompute
  45. 2026-10-11 18:40 UTCVendor advisory
  46. 2026-10-11 16:29 UTCEG score recompute
  47. 2026-10-11 14:01 UTCEG score recompute
  48. 2026-10-11 14:01 UTCVendor advisory
  49. 2026-10-11 13:50 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 1.0% · 62nd percentile
  50. 2026-10-11 13:43 UTCEG score recompute
  51. 2026-10-11 09:04 UTCVendor advisory
  52. 2026-10-11 04:00 UTCVendor advisory
  53. 2026-10-10 23:45 UTCEG score recompute
  54. 2026-10-10 23:45 UTCVendor advisory
  55. 2026-10-10 20:00 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 1.0% · 62nd percentile
  56. 2026-10-10 19:32 UTCVendor advisory
  57. 2026-10-10 15:17 UTCVendor advisory
  58. 2026-10-10 11:04 UTCVendor advisory
  59. 2026-10-10 06:49 UTCVendor advisory
  60. 2026-10-10 02:35 UTCVendor advisory
  61. 2026-10-09 22:21 UTCEG score recompute
  62. 2026-10-09 22:21 UTCVendor advisory
  63. 2026-10-09 20:08 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 1.0% · 62nd percentile
  64. 2026-10-09 18:03 UTCVendor advisory
  65. 2026-10-09 13:35 UTCVendor advisory
  66. 2026-10-09 07:03 UTCVendor advisory
  67. 2026-10-09 02:48 UTCVendor advisory
  68. 2026-10-08 22:35 UTCVendor advisory
  69. 2026-10-08 18:03 UTCEG score recompute
  70. 2026-10-08 18:03 UTCVendor advisory
  71. 2026-10-08 17:14 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 1.0% · 62nd percentile
  72. 2026-10-08 11:04 UTCVendor advisory
  73. 2026-10-08 06:50 UTCVendor advisory
  74. 2026-10-08 02:36 UTCEG score recompute
  75. 2026-10-08 02:36 UTCVendor advisory

Frequently asked(5)

What is CVE-2026-92937?
CVE-2026-92937 is a critical-severity vulnerability; its CVE record was published on September 17, 2026. vm2 3.11.6 is vulnerable to a sandbox escape leading to remote code execution in the host Node.js process. The fix for GHSA-m283-3h24-438v is incomplete: the bridge gate at lib/bridge.js:1624 identity-checks only the direct call target when deciding whether to rebuild/sanitise a rejected host…
When was CVE-2026-92937 made public?
CVE-2026-92937 was made public on August 24, 2026: that is the date its CVE record's CNA, VulnCheck, gives for when the vulnerability was made public. The CVE record itself was published on September 17, 2026. EchelonGraph's copy of the record carries a last-modified date of September 18, 2026; the record at its source may have been updated since.
Is CVE-2026-92937 actively exploited?
CVE-2026-92937 is not currently on CISA's Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog. FIRST EPSS estimates a 1.0% probability of exploitation in the next 30 days (63rd percentile of EPSS-scored CVEs).
What is the CVSS score of CVE-2026-92937?
CVE-2026-92937 has a CVSS base score of 10.0 (a secondary CVSS source that NVD displays; NVD's own analysis pending).
How do I remediate CVE-2026-92937?
A fix for CVE-2026-92937 is available: update to the fixed version the vendor names in its advisory. The vendor advisories EchelonGraph has for CVE-2026-92937 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-2026-92937

Explore →

Is Your Infrastructure Affected by CVE-2026-92937?

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