VulnerabilityPublished 27 Feb 2026Updated 3 Mar 2026

CVE-2026-28272: kiteworks security-advisories · Cross-site Scripting

Affects kiteworks security-advisoriesSource CVE Database V5

Compare

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 8.1 High : upgrade to 9.2.0 soon.

Data as of 30 Oct 2026, 11:52 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

8.1High

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

EPSS: 0.3% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 32% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.
Patch: Available – fixed in 9.2.0

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

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

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: High: The attacker is authorized with (i.e., requires) privileges that provide significant (e.g., administrative) control over the vulnerable component that could affect component-wide settings and files.
User Interaction: Required: Successful exploitation of this vulnerability requires a user to take some action before the vulnerability can be exploited.
Scope: Changed: An exploited vulnerability can affect resources beyond the security scope managed by the security authority of the vulnerable component. In this case, the vulnerable component and the impacted component are different and managed by different security authorities.
Confidentiality: High: There is total loss of confidentiality, resulting in all resources within the impacted component being divulged to the attacker. Alternatively, access to only some restricted information is obtained, but the disclosed information presents a direct, serious impact.
Integrity: High: There is a total loss of integrity, or a complete loss of protection. For example, the attacker is able to modify any/all files protected by the impacted component. Alternatively, only some files can be modified, but malicious modification would present a direct, serious consequence to the impacted component.
Availability: None: There is no impact to availability within the impacted component.

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

Upgrade security-advisories and kiteworks/security-advisories to 9.2.0.

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
kiteworkssecurity-advisories	Affected <9.2.0	Fixed in 9.2.0
GitHubkiteworks/security-advisories`pkg:github/kiteworks/security-advisories`Other threats	Affected <9.2.0	Fixed in 9.2.0

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

AI-suggested

Organizations should immediately upgrade Kiteworks Email Protection Gateway to version 9.2.0 or later, where the vulnerability is patched. Until the update can be applied, restrict administrator access to trusted personnel and enforce strong authentication mechanisms such as multi-factor authentication (MFA) to reduce the risk of account compromise. Conduct regular audits of administrator accounts and monitor for unusual configuration changes or script injections. Implement web application firewalls (WAFs) with rules tailored to detect and block XSS payloads targeting the management interface. Educate administrators about the risks of injecting untrusted input and encourage safe configuration practices. Additionally, review and harden user interface components to ensure proper input validation and output encoding are consistently applied. Incident response plans should include procedures for detecting and mitigating XSS attacks, including session invalidation and credential resets if compromise is suspected.

Description

Kiteworks is a private data network (PDN). Prior to version 9.2.0, a vulnerability in Kiteworks Email Protection Gateway allows authenticated administrators to inject malicious scripts through a configuration interface. The stored script executes when users interact with the affected user interface. Version 9.2.0 contains a patch for the issue.

Impact

The vulnerability poses significant risks to organizations using Kiteworks Email Protection Gateway versions prior to 9.2.0. Successful exploitation can lead to unauthorized disclosure of sensitive information, including user credentials and session tokens, compromising confidentiality. Integrity is at risk as attackers may execute unauthorized actions on behalf of legitimate users. Although availability is not directly impacted, the breach of trust and potential for further exploitation can disrupt normal operations. The requirement for administrator privileges limits the attack surface but also means that insider threats or compromised administrator accounts can be leveraged. Organizations handling sensitive communications or regulated data are particularly vulnerable to compliance violations and reputational damage. The persistent nature of stored XSS increases the likelihood of widespread impact within affected user populations. Given the network attack vector and low complexity, attackers with access to administrator accounts can exploit this vulnerability remotely, emphasizing the need for timely patching.

CWE-79Improper Neutralization of Input During Web Page Generation (Cross-site Scripting) (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessLikelihood of exploit: HighCWE Top 25 (2025): #1OWASP Top 10 A05:2025: Injection (opens in a new tab)
The product does not neutralize or incorrectly neutralizes user-controllable input before it is placed in output that is used as a web page that is served to other users.
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.
Implementation · Architecture and Design
Understand the context in which your data will be used and the encoding that will be expected. This is especially important when transmitting data between different components, or when generating outputs that can contain multiple encodings at the same time, such as web pages or multi-part mail messages.
Architecture and Design · Implementation · Attack Surface Reduction
Understand all the potential areas where untrusted inputs can enter your software: parameters or arguments, cookies, anything read from the network, environment variables, reverse DNS lookups, query results, request headers, URL components, e-mail, files, filenames, databases, and any external systems that provide…
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Cross Site Scripting Prevention (opens in a new tab)
DOM based XSS Prevention (opens in a new tab)
Injection Prevention (opens in a new tab)
Abuse Case (opens in a new tab)
Deserialization (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V5.3.3 (opens in a new tab)
V1.5.1 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
XSS Using MIME Type Mismatch (opens in a new tab)
DOM-Based XSS (opens in a new tab)
Reflected XSS (opens in a new tab)
Stored XSS (opens in a new tab)
Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).

References

github.com/kiteworks/security-advisories/security/advisories/GHSA-7hxj-ch78-xqgr (opens in a new tab)

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 6 Mar 2026, 21:20 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-79

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats