VulnerabilityPublished 9 Mar 2026

CVE-2026-3816: OWASP DefectDojo · Denial of Service

Affects OWASP DefectDojoSource CVE Database V5

Compare

Public exploit available · CVSS 5.3 Medium.

Data as of 30 Oct 2026, 06:59 UTC

CVSS 4.0 base score

5.3Medium

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

EPSS: 0.5% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 47% 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:N/VI:N/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: None
Vulnerable system integrity: None
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: None: There is no loss of confidentiality within the Vulnerable System.
Vulnerable system integrity: None: There is no loss of integrity within 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 9 Mar 2026
Detectable: no evidence on record.
No public nuclei template indexed
Weaponized: evidence found.
CVSS exploit maturity: proof of concept public
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), CVSS vector, 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

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
OWASPDefectDojo	Affected 2.55.0 – 2.55.4 5 affected builds	Fixed in–
PyPIdefectdojo`pkg:pypi/defectdojo`Other threats	Affected 2.55.0 – 2.55.4 5 affected builds	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-2026-3816, organizations should upgrade OWASP DefectDojo to version 2.56.0 or later, which contains the official patch for this vulnerability. Until the upgrade is applied, administrators should consider restricting access to DefectDojo instances, especially the components handling ZIP file inputs, to trusted networks or VPNs to reduce exposure. Implement network-level protections such as Web Application Firewalls (WAFs) or Intrusion Prevention Systems (IPS) to detect and block malformed or suspicious ZIP file uploads targeting the vulnerable parser. Monitoring application logs for unusual errors or crashes related to ZIP file processing can provide early detection of exploitation attempts. Additionally, security teams should review and harden input validation and parsing logic in custom integrations or extensions that interact with DefectDojo parsers. Regularly auditing and updating all components of the security toolchain will help prevent similar vulnerabilities. Finally, maintain an incident response plan that includes procedures for handling denial of service incidents affecting security infrastructure.

Description

A security vulnerability has been detected in OWASP DefectDojo up to 2.55.4. This vulnerability affects the function input_zip.read of the file parser.py of the component SonarQubeParser/MSDefenderParser. The manipulation leads to denial of service. The attack can be initiated remotely. The exploit has been disclosed publicly and may be used. Upgrading to version 2.56.0 is able to resolve this issue. The identifier of the patch is e8f1e5131535b8fd80a7b1b3085d676295fdcd41. Upgrading the affected component is recommended.

Impact

The primary impact of CVE-2026-3816 is denial of service, which can cause DefectDojo instances to crash or become unresponsive. This disrupts security teams' ability to manage and track vulnerabilities, potentially delaying remediation efforts and increasing organizational risk exposure. Since DefectDojo is often integrated into security pipelines and used for vulnerability aggregation and reporting, its unavailability can impair incident response and compliance activities. The vulnerability does not lead to data leakage or integrity compromise, but availability loss in security tooling can indirectly increase risk by hindering timely vulnerability management. Organizations relying heavily on DefectDojo for security orchestration may experience operational downtime, impacting their overall security posture. The ease of remote exploitation without authentication means attackers can potentially launch DoS attacks from external networks, increasing the threat surface. However, the lack of known exploits in the wild suggests limited active targeting so far. Prompt patching is critical to avoid service interruptions and maintain continuous security operations.

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 9 Mar 2026, 16:26 UTC

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats