VulnerabilityPublished 16 Feb 2026Updated 23 Feb 2026

CVE-2026-2544: yued-fe LuLu UI · OS Command Injection

Affects yued-fe LuLu UISource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 6.9 Medium.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 15:59 UTC

CVSS 4.0 base score

6.9Medium

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

EPSS: 3.1% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 87% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

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

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Attack Requirements: None
Privileges Required: None
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

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: None: The attacker is unauthorized prior to attack, and therefore does not require any access to settings or files of the vulnerable system to carry out an attack.
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.

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v4.0 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 16 Feb 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 26 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.
Weaponised: Public exploit code exists in Metasploit or Exploit-DB, 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
yued-feLuLu UI	Affected =3.0	Fixed in–

AI-suggested

Organizations should immediately audit their use of yued-fe LuLu UI and identify all instances running version 3.0.0 or earlier. Until an official patch is released, apply the following mitigations: 1) Restrict network access to the LuLu UI interfaces by implementing strict firewall rules and network segmentation to limit exposure to trusted users only. 2) Employ Web Application Firewalls (WAFs) with custom rules to detect and block suspicious command injection patterns targeting the run.js endpoint. 3) Review and sanitize all inputs that interact with the child_process.exec function in run.js, if source code access is available, to implement proper input validation and escaping. 4) Monitor logs for unusual command execution attempts or anomalies in system behavior. 5) Consider deploying host-based intrusion detection systems (HIDS) to detect unauthorized command execution. 6) Engage with the vendor or community for updates and patches, and plan for rapid deployment once available. 7) Educate system administrators about the risks and signs of exploitation to enable prompt incident response.

Description

A security flaw has been discovered in yued-fe LuLu UI up to 3.0.0. This issue affects the function child_process.exec of the file run.js. The manipulation results in os command injection. The attack can be launched remotely. The vendor was contacted early about this disclosure but did not respond in any way.

Impact

The primary impact of CVE-2026-2544 is the potential for remote attackers to execute arbitrary OS commands on affected systems without any authentication or user interaction. This can lead to unauthorized access, data leakage, system manipulation, or service disruption. Confidentiality may be compromised if attackers access sensitive data through command execution. Integrity can be affected if attackers modify files or system configurations. Availability may be impacted if attackers execute commands that disrupt services or cause system crashes. Since the vulnerability is remotely exploitable over the network with low complexity, it poses a significant risk to organizations using LuLu UI. The absence of patches and vendor communication increases exposure duration. Organizations in sectors relying on this UI for operational or administrative tasks could face operational disruptions, data breaches, or lateral movement within networks if exploited. The lack of known exploits currently limits immediate widespread impact but does not reduce the urgency for mitigation.

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…