VulnerabilityPublished 10 Mar 2026

CVE-2026-30928: nicolargo glances · Information Exposure

Affects nicolargo glancesSource CVE Database V5

Compare

Not known to be exploited · public detection template (Nuclei) · CVSS 8.7 High : upgrade to 4.5.1 soon.

Data as of 30 Oct 2026, 06:59 UTC

CVSS 4.0 base score

8.7High

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

EPSS: 1.6% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 77% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.
Patch: Available – fixed in 4.5.1

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

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Attack Requirements: None
Privileges Required: None
User Interaction: None
Vulnerable system confidentiality: High
Vulnerable system integrity: None
Vulnerable system availability: None
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: High: There is a total loss of confidentiality, resulting in all information within the Vulnerable System being divulged to the attacker. Alternatively, access to only some restricted information is obtained, but the disclosed information presents a direct, serious impact. For example, an attacker steals the administrator's password, or private encryption keys of a web server.
Vulnerable system integrity: None: There is no loss of integrity within the Vulnerable System.
Vulnerable system availability: None: There is no impact to availability within 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 10 Mar 2026
Detectable: evidence found.
nuclei template: Glances - Information Disclosure
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 29 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 glances and nicolargo/glances to 4.5.1.

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
nicolargoglances	Affected <4.5.1	Fixed in 4.5.1
GitHubnicolargo/glances`pkg:github/nicolargo/glances`Other threats	Affected <4.5.1	Fixed in 4.5.1

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

AI-suggested

To mitigate this vulnerability, organizations should immediately upgrade Glances to version 4.5.1 or later, where the issue is fixed. Until upgrading is possible, restrict network access to the /api/4/config endpoint by implementing firewall rules, network segmentation, or API gateway controls to allow only trusted hosts or administrators. Disable or restrict the API endpoint if it is not required. Implement strong network-level authentication and encryption (e.g., VPN, TLS) to protect API communications. Regularly audit and rotate credentials stored in Glances configuration files, especially if exposure is suspected. Monitor logs for unusual access patterns to the API endpoint. Additionally, review and harden the overall deployment environment of Glances to minimize attack surface, including limiting user permissions and applying the principle of least privilege to all services and accounts involved.

Description

Glances is an open-source system cross-platform monitoring tool. Prior to 4.5.1, the /api/4/config REST API endpoint returns the entire parsed Glances configuration file (glances.conf) via self.config.as_dict() with no filtering of sensitive values. The configuration file contains credentials for all configured backend services including database passwords, API tokens, JWT signing keys, and SSL key passwords. This vulnerability is fixed in 4.5.1.

Impact

The exposure of sensitive credentials through the Glances API endpoint can have severe consequences for organizations worldwide. Attackers gaining access to database passwords and API tokens can infiltrate backend systems, exfiltrate data, or manipulate system operations. Exposure of JWT signing keys compromises authentication mechanisms, enabling attackers to forge tokens and impersonate legitimate users or services. SSL key password exposure can lead to compromise of encrypted communications. Since Glances is often deployed in monitoring and management contexts, attackers could leverage these credentials to pivot within networks, escalate privileges, or disrupt monitoring infrastructure. The vulnerability’s network accessibility and lack of authentication requirements increase the likelihood of exploitation, potentially leading to data breaches, service outages, and loss of trust. Organizations relying on Glances for system monitoring must consider the risk of credential leakage and subsequent attacks on their infrastructure.

CWE-200Exposure of Sensitive Information to an Unauthorized Actor (opens in a new tab)
Class weaknessLikelihood of exploit: HighCWE Top 25 (2025): #20OWASP Top 10 A01:2025: Broken Access Control (opens in a new tab)
The product exposes sensitive information to an actor that is not explicitly authorized to have access to that information.
MITRE discourages mapping vulnerabilities to this broad entry; the root cause is usually a more specific weakness.
Architecture and Design · Separation of Privilege
Compartmentalize the system to have "safe" areas where trust boundaries can be unambiguously drawn. Do not allow sensitive data to go outside of the trust boundary and always be careful when interfacing with a compartment outside of the safe area.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Error Handling (opens in a new tab)
Logging (opens in a new tab)
Authorization (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V8.3.4 (opens in a new tab)
V14.3.3 (opens in a new tab)
V7.3.3 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Subverting Environment Variable Values (opens in a new tab)
ICMP Echo Request Ping (opens in a new tab)
TCP SYN Scan (opens in a new tab)
Enumerate Mail Exchange (MX) Records (opens in a new tab)
DNS Zone Transfers (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 10 Mar 2026, 17:04 UTC

Public exploits and detectiona Nuclei detection template

WeaknessesCWE-200

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats