CVE-2026-1062VulnerabilityPublished 17 Jan 2026Updated 23 Feb 2026

CVE-2026-1062: xiweicheng TMS · Server-Side Request Forgery

Affects xiweicheng TMSSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 5.3 Medium.

Data as of 25 Oct 2026, 19:02 UTC

CVSS 4.0 base score

5.3Medium

How severe the flaw is on the 0–10 CVSS scale.

EPSS: 0.3% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 33% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/VA:L/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:P

Base metrics

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Attack Requirements: None
Privileges Required: Low
User Interaction: None
Vulnerable system confidentiality: Low
Vulnerable system integrity: Low
Vulnerable system availability: Low
Subsequent system confidentiality: None
Subsequent system integrity: None
Subsequent system availability: None

Threat metrics

Exploit Maturity: POC

Bold values are the worst case: easiest to exploit or largest impact.

Attack Vector: Network: The vulnerable system is bound to the network stack and the set of possible attackers extends beyond the other options listed below, up to and including the entire Internet. Such a vulnerability is often termed “remotely exploitable” and can be thought of as an attack being exploitable at the protocol level one or more network hops away (e.g., across one or more routers).
Attack Complexity: Low: The attacker must take no measurable action to exploit the vulnerability. The attack requires no target-specific circumvention to exploit the vulnerability. An attacker can expect repeatable success against the vulnerable system.
Attack Requirements: None: The successful attack does not depend on the deployment and execution conditions of the vulnerable system. The attacker can expect to be able to reach the vulnerability and execute the exploit under all or most instances of the vulnerability.
Privileges Required: Low: The attacker requires privileges that provide basic capabilities that are typically limited to settings and resources owned by a single low-privileged user. Alternatively, an attacker with Low privileges has the ability to access only non-sensitive resources.
User Interaction: None: The vulnerable system can be exploited without interaction from any human user, other than the attacker.
Vulnerable system confidentiality: Low: There is some loss of confidentiality. Access to some restricted information is obtained, but the attacker does not have control over what information is obtained, or the amount or kind of loss is limited. The information disclosure does not cause a direct, serious loss to the Vulnerable System.
Vulnerable system integrity: Low: Modification of data is possible, but the attacker does not have control over the consequence of a modification, or the amount of modification is limited. The data modification does not have a direct, serious impact to the Vulnerable System.
Vulnerable system availability: Low: Performance is reduced or there are interruptions in resource availability. Even if repeated exploitation of the vulnerability is possible, the attacker does not have the ability to completely deny service to legitimate users. The resources in the Vulnerable System are either partially available all of the time, or fully available only some of the time, but overall there is no direct, serious consequence to the Vulnerable System.
Subsequent system confidentiality: None: There is no loss of confidentiality within the Subsequent System or all confidentiality impact is constrained to the Vulnerable System.
Subsequent system integrity: None: There is no loss of integrity within the Subsequent System or all integrity impact is constrained to the Vulnerable System.
Subsequent system availability: None: There is no impact to availability within the Subsequent System or all availability impact is constrained to the Vulnerable System.
Exploit Maturity: POC: Based on threat intelligence sources each of the following must apply: · Proof-of-concept is publicly available · No knowledge of reported attempts to exploit this vulnerability · No knowledge of publicly available solutions used to simplify attempts to exploit the vulnerability

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v4.0 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 17 Jan 2026
Detectable: no evidence on record.
No public nuclei template indexed
Weaponised: no evidence on record.
No public exploit code indexed in Metasploit or Exploit-DB
Exploited in the wildExploited: no evidence on record.
Not in CISA KEV and no source reports exploitation
Observed by OffSeq MirageSeen by Mirage: no evidence on record.
No attack traffic recorded by OffSeq Mirage sensors

A missing step is not evidence of safety. Sources: cve.org (opens in a new tab), the Metasploit, Exploit-DB and nuclei-templates index as of 2026-10-25.

Disclosed: The CVE record is public on cve.org. Its publication is t = 0.
Detectable: A public nuclei template can find exposed instances, for defenders and attackers alike.
Weaponised: Public exploit code exists in Metasploit or Exploit-DB, or CISA SSVC reports a public proof of concept.
Exploited in the wild: CISA KEV lists it, CISA SSVC rates exploitation active, or a source reports attacks.
Observed by OffSeq Mirage: OffSeq Mirage honeypot sensors recorded attack traffic for this CVE, or found exposed hosts without attack traffic.

Moments are spaced evenly, not to scale; a dashed line marks a gap of six months or more. Deltas count from t = 0. Sources that give only a date (CISA KEV, Exploit-DB, or a time of exactly 00:00Z) read “same day” rather than hours. Metasploit modules carry the flaw’s disclosure date, not their release date, and nuclei templates carry no date, so both appear above but not on the timeline.

What to do

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
xiweichengTMS	Affected =2.0 =2.1 =2.2 =2.3 =2.4 =2.5 =2.6 =2.7 =2.8 =2.9 =2.10 =2.11 =2.12 =2.13 =2.14 =2.15 =2.16 =2.17 =2.18 =2.19 =2.20 =2.21 =2.22 =2.23 =2.24 =2.25 =2.26 =2.27 =2.28.0	Fixed in–
Mavencom.lhjz.portal/TMS`pkg:maven/com.lhjz.portal/TMS`Other threats	Affected =2.0 =2.1 =2.2 =2.3 =2.4 =2.5 =2.6 =2.7 =2.8 =2.9 =2.10 =2.11 =2.12 =2.13 =2.14 =2.15 =2.16 =2.17 =2.18 =2.19 =2.20 =2.21 =2.22 =2.23 =2.24 =2.25 =2.26 =2.27 =2.28.0	Fixed in–

Check your own hosts for these packages with threat-finder (opens in a new tab), our free open-source scanner.

AI-suggested

To mitigate CVE-2026-1062, organizations should first verify if they are running affected versions of xiweicheng TMS (2.0 through 2.28.0). Immediate actions include restricting network access to the TMS server to trusted IPs and internal networks only, thereby limiting exposure to potential attackers. Implement strict input validation and sanitization on the url parameter in the Summary function to prevent malicious request manipulation. Employ network segmentation and firewall rules to restrict the TMS server's ability to make arbitrary outbound requests, especially to sensitive internal services. Monitor logs for unusual outbound requests originating from the TMS server that could indicate exploitation attempts. If vendor patches become available, prioritize their deployment. Additionally, consider deploying web application firewalls (WAFs) with custom rules to detect and block SSRF attack patterns targeting the TMS application. Conduct regular security assessments and penetration tests focused on SSRF vectors to ensure the effectiveness of mitigations.

Description

A flaw has been found in xiweicheng TMS up to 2.28.0. This affects the function Summary of the file src/main/java/com/lhjz/portal/util/HtmlUtil.java. This manipulation of the argument url causes server-side request forgery. It is possible to initiate the attack remotely. The exploit has been published and may be used.

Impact

The SSRF vulnerability in xiweicheng TMS can have significant impacts on organizations using this software. Exploitation could allow attackers to access internal network resources that are normally protected by firewalls or network segmentation, potentially exposing sensitive data or internal services. This could lead to unauthorized information disclosure, internal network reconnaissance, or pivoting to other systems within the network. Since the vulnerability requires no user interaction and can be exploited remotely, it increases the attack surface and risk of automated attacks. Organizations relying on xiweicheng TMS for critical operations may face service disruptions or data breaches if attackers leverage this SSRF flaw. The medium CVSS score reflects moderate risk, but the actual impact depends on the internal network architecture and the sensitivity of accessible resources. Without timely mitigation, the vulnerability could be a stepping stone for more severe attacks such as privilege escalation or ransomware deployment.

Summary

CVE-2026-1062 is a server-side request forgery vulnerability affecting xiweicheng TMS software versions 2.0 through 2.28.0. The vulnerability resides in the Summary function of the HtmlUtil.java source file, where the url parameter is improperly validated or sanitized. This flaw allows an attacker to craft malicious requests that the server then executes, potentially accessing internal resources or services that are otherwise inaccessible externally. SSRF vulnerabilities typically enable attackers to bypass network access controls, scan internal networks, or interact with backend services, which can lead to further exploitation such as data exfiltration or lateral movement. The vulnerability can be triggered remotely without requiring user interaction or authentication, increasing the risk of exploitation. The CVSS 4.0 vector indicates network attack vector (AV:N), low attack complexity (AC:L), no privileges required (PR:L - low privileges required), no user interaction (UI:N), and low impact on confidentiality, integrity, and availability (VC:L, VI:L, VA:L). While no active exploits have been reported in the wild, the availability of proof-of-concept code raises the likelihood of future attacks. The lack of official patches or mitigation links in the provided data suggests that users must proactively apply security best practices or await vendor updates.

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 23 Feb 2026, 22:47 UTC

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats