VulnerabilityPublished 27 Feb 2026Updated 31 Mar 2026

CVE-2026-24445: ev.energy · CWE-307

Affects ev.energySource CVE Database V5

Compare

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 7.5 High.

Data as of 30 Oct 2026, 11:52 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

7.5High

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

EPSS: 0.5% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 46% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: None
User Interaction: None
Scope: Unchanged
Confidentiality: None
Integrity: None
Availability: High

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

Attack Vector: Network: The vulnerable component is bound to the network stack and the set of possible attackers extends beyond the other options listed, 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: Specialized access conditions or extenuating circumstances do not exist. An attacker can expect repeatable success against the vulnerable component.
Privileges Required: None: The attacker is unauthorized prior to attack, and therefore does not require any access to settings or files to carry out an attack.
User Interaction: None: The vulnerable system can be exploited without any interaction from any user.
Scope: Unchanged: An exploited vulnerability can only affect resources managed by the same security authority. In this case, the vulnerable component and the impacted component are either the same, or both are managed by the same security authority.
Confidentiality: None: There is no loss of confidentiality within the impacted component.
Integrity: None: There is no loss of integrity within the impacted component.
Availability: High: There is total loss of availability, resulting in the attacker being able to fully deny access to resources in the impacted component; this loss is either sustained (while the attacker continues to deliver the attack) or persistent (the condition persists even after the attack has completed). Alternatively, the attacker has the ability to deny some availability, but the loss of availability presents a direct, serious consequence to the impacted component (e.g., the attacker cannot disrupt existing connections, but can prevent new connections; the attacker can repeatedly exploit a vulnerability that, in each instance of a successful attack, leaks a only small amount of memory, but after repeated exploitation causes a service to become completely unavailable).

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v3.1 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 27 Feb 2026
Detectable: no evidence on record.
No public nuclei template indexed
Weaponized: 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 30 Oct 2026.

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.
Weaponized: A Metasploit exploit module or Exploit-DB entry exists (Metasploit scanner modules do not count), or CISA SSVC or the CVSS exploit maturity 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
EV Energyev.energy	Affected =All versions	Fixed in–
GitHubcisagov/ev.energy`pkg:github/cisagov/ev.energy`Other threats	Affected *	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-2026-24445, organizations should implement strict rate limiting on the WebSocket API authentication requests to prevent excessive attempts from a single source. This can be achieved by configuring WebSocket servers or deploying API gateways that enforce request thresholds and temporarily block or throttle suspicious clients. Additionally, implementing account lockout policies after a defined number of failed authentication attempts can reduce brute-force risks. Monitoring WebSocket traffic for unusual patterns or spikes in authentication requests is critical to detect ongoing attacks early. Employing anomaly detection systems or intrusion detection/prevention systems (IDS/IPS) tailored to WebSocket protocols can enhance visibility. Organizations should also consider multi-factor authentication (MFA) to strengthen authentication security. Network segmentation and firewall rules restricting access to the WebSocket API to trusted sources can reduce exposure. Since no official patches are available yet, these compensating controls are essential. Finally, organizations should maintain up-to-date incident response plans specific to EV charging infrastructure and coordinate with EV Energy for timely patch deployment once available.

Description

The WebSocket Application Programming Interface lacks restrictions on the number of authentication requests. This absence of rate limiting may allow an attacker to conduct denial-of-service attacks by suppressing or mis-routing legitimate charger telemetry, or conduct brute-force attacks to gain unauthorized access.

Impact

The primary impact of CVE-2026-24445 is on the availability of the ev.energy charging management system. Attackers can conduct denial-of-service attacks by flooding the WebSocket API with authentication requests, which can suppress or mis-route legitimate telemetry data from EV chargers. This disruption can lead to inaccurate charging data, potential charging failures, and degraded user experience. Additionally, the vulnerability enables brute-force attacks against authentication mechanisms, risking unauthorized access to the system. Unauthorized access could allow attackers to manipulate charging sessions, potentially causing financial loss or operational disruption. Given the critical role of EV charging infrastructure in transportation and energy management, widespread exploitation could affect grid stability and user trust. The vulnerability affects all versions of ev.energy, indicating a broad attack surface. Since no authentication or user interaction is required for exploitation, the attack can be automated and launched remotely, increasing the risk and scale of potential attacks. Organizations relying on ev.energy for EV charging management worldwide face operational risks, especially those with large EV fleets or public charging networks.

CWE-307Improper Restriction of Excessive Authentication Attempts (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessOWASP Top 10 A07:2025: Authentication Failures (opens in a new tab)
The product does not implement sufficient measures to prevent multiple failed authentication attempts within a short time frame.
Architecture and Design
Common protection mechanisms include: Disconnecting the user after a small number of failed attempts; Implementing a timeout; Locking out a targeted account; Requiring a computational task on the user's part.
Architecture and Design · Libraries or Frameworks
Use a vetted library or framework that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Authentication (opens in a new tab)
Transport Layer Protection (opens in a new tab)
TLS Cipher String (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V2.2.1 (opens in a new tab)
V2.8.5 (opens in a new tab)
V2.8.4 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Dictionary-based Password Attack (opens in a new tab)
Password Brute Forcing (opens in a new tab)
Password Spraying (opens in a new tab)
Credential Stuffing (opens in a new tab)
Use of Known Kerberos Credentials (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 31 Mar 2026, 19:24 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-307

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats