VulnerabilityPublished 15 Mar 2026Updated 16 Mar 2026

CVE-2026-4168: Tecnick TCExam · Cross-site Scripting

Affects Tecnick TCExamSource CVE Database V5

Compare

Public exploit available · CVSS 4.8 Medium.

Data as of 29 Oct 2026, 19:04 UTC

CVSS 4.0 base score

4.8Medium

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

EPSS: 0.2% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 20% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

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

Base metrics

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Attack Requirements: None
Privileges Required: High
User Interaction: Passive
Vulnerable system confidentiality: None
Vulnerable system integrity: Low
Vulnerable system availability: None
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: High: The attacker requires privileges that provide significant (e.g., administrative) control over the vulnerable system allowing full access to the vulnerable system’s settings and files.
User Interaction: Passive: Successful exploitation of this vulnerability requires limited interaction by the targeted user with the vulnerable system and the attacker’s payload. These interactions would be considered involuntary and do not require that the user actively subvert protections built into the vulnerable system.
Vulnerable system confidentiality: None: There is no loss of confidentiality within 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: 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.
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 15 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
TecnickTCExam	Affected =16.5.0	Fixed in–
GitHubtecnickcom/tcexam`pkg:github/tecnickcom/tcexam`Other threats	Affected <=16.5.0	Fixed in–

CPE configurations (1)

cpe:2.3:a:tecnick:tcexam:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*

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 verify their TCExam version and upgrade to the latest release where this vulnerability is fixed. If upgrading is not immediately feasible, administrators should restrict access to the /admin/code/tce_edit_group.php endpoint to trusted IPs and enforce strict authentication and authorization controls. Input validation and output encoding should be reviewed and enhanced to sanitize the 'Name' parameter and other user inputs rigorously. Implement Content Security Policy (CSP) headers to reduce the impact of potential XSS attacks. Regularly audit administrator accounts and monitor logs for suspicious activity indicative of exploitation attempts. Educate administrators about phishing and social engineering risks that could facilitate user interaction required for exploitation. Finally, maintain an incident response plan to quickly address any detected compromise related to this vulnerability.

Description

CVE-2026-4168 is a medium severity cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability found in Tecnick TCExam version 16.5.0, specifically in the /admin/code/tce_edit_group.php file within the Group Handler component. The vulnerability arises from improper sanitization of the 'Name' argument, allowing remote attackers to inject malicious scripts. Exploitation requires high privileges and user interaction, and no authentication bypass is indicated. Although a public exploit exists, the vendor has indicated that the issue could not be reproduced in later versions, suggesting it has been fixed. Organizations using TCExam 16.5.0 or earlier should upgrade to the latest version to mitigate risk.

Impact

The vulnerability allows attackers with high privileges to execute arbitrary scripts in the context of the TCExam web application, potentially leading to session hijacking, unauthorized data access, or manipulation of exam groups and configurations. This could compromise the confidentiality and integrity of sensitive examination data and user credentials. While availability is not directly impacted, successful exploitation could undermine trust in the examination system and lead to reputational damage. Organizations relying on TCExam for exam management, especially educational institutions and certification bodies, may face operational disruptions and data breaches. The requirement for high privileges and user interaction limits the attack surface but does not eliminate risk, particularly in environments with multiple administrators or where phishing attacks could facilitate exploitation. The presence of a public exploit increases the likelihood of opportunistic attacks against unpatched systems.

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…