CVE-2026-105932

LOWPre-NVD 2.32.3
EchelonGraph scoreMEDIUM confidence

“—” beside the score: it is equal to the CVSS score beside it.

This low-severity CVE scores 2.3 under a secondary CVSS source (NVD's own analysis pending). EPSS exploit probability: 0.5% (42nd percentile of EPSS-scored CVEs). No GitHub Security Advisory CVSS is on record for this CVE.

Triggered by: Headline CVSS from a secondary CVSS source
Sources: EPSS, a secondary CVSS source
Trending — 4 sources updated this week

Also known asEUVD-2026-107469 (ENISA EUVD) · GHSA-6xq3-9hvx-9qxg (GitHub Security Advisories)Source: ENISA EUVD

2.3EG
EchelonGraph verdictMonitorRemediate within your standard update timelines (the SSVC decision on this page).
  • Lower severity and no public exploit yet
CISA-KEV: Not listedEPSS PROB: 0.5%CVSS: 2.3Exploit: None knownExposed services: Not assessed

The CVE record names the fixed release — apply it.

The Apache Pulsar broker admin REST API provides endpoints to read, set and remove the topic-level entry filter policy of a topic. For persistent topics these endpoints check that the caller is authorized for the entry filters topic policy operation. The corresponding endpoints for non-persistent topics (/admin/v2/non-persistent/{tenant}/{namespace}/{topic}/entryFilters) do not perform this authorization check. The only authorization check these endpoints perform is an indirect lookup permission check, made while the topic's partition metadata is retrieved; it is present in all affected versions.

As a result, when authentication and authorization are enabled, an authenticated user who has been granted produce or consume permission on a non-persistent topic, or on its namespace, but not permission to manage the topic's policies can read, replace or remove the topic-level entry filter policy of that topic. These operations should be restricted to users with the tenant admin role or the superuser role. This impact analysis assumes that Pulsar has been configured with the default authorization provider. For custom authorization providers, the impact could be slightly different.

The practical impact is limited by two broker configuration requirements, neither of which is met by default:

  • Entry filters must have been installed by the operator. Entry filter implementations are loaded only at broker startup from the broker's entry filters directory, which is empty by default. A request can only select among entry filters the operator has already deployed; setting any other filter name is rejected. The issue does not allow a caller to install or load entry filter code or to run arbitrary code in the broker.
  • Topic-level entry filter policies must be allowed to override the broker-level configuration (allowOverrideEntryFilters, which is disabled by default). When this setting is disabled, the topic-level entry filter policy has no effect on message dispatch.

In deployments where both conditions are met, an unauthorized user can remove the topic-level entry filter policy of a non-persistent topic, for example one used to restrict which messages are delivered to consumers, or apply a different installed entry filter that withholds messages from subscriptions of that topic. Removing it makes the topic fall back to the namespace-level or broker-level entry filters, which are not removed. A changed policy affects only subscription dispatchers created after the change, for example for new subscriptions or when a subscription is re-created after all of its consumers have disconnected; dispatchers that already exist keep the entry filters they were created with. Because non-persistent topics do not store messages, messages withheld by an entry filter are not delivered. Reading the policy discloses only the names of the configured entry filters. The issue does not allow reading message contents, and entry filters cannot modify message payloads. Persistent topics and namespace-level entry filter policies are not affected. Apache Pulsar versions before 3.3.0 are not affected, because in those versions the entry filters topic policy check is made in code shared by the persistent and non-persistent endpoints.

This issue affects Apache Pulsar versions from 3.3.0 before 4.0.14 and from 4.1.0 before 4.2.5.

  • 3.3.x and 4.0.x version users should upgrade to at least 4.0.14.
  • 4.1.x and 4.2.x version users should upgrade to at least 4.2.5.

Users operating versions prior to those listed above should upgrade to the aforementioned patched versions or newer versions.

The currently supported Apache Pulsar release lines are 4.0.x and 5.0.x. The supported versions schedule is available at https://pulsar.apache.org/contribute/release-policy/.

Users who cannot upgrade immediately and have deployed entry filters should keep allowOverrideEntryFilters at its default value of false, so that topic-level entry filter policies do not affect message dispatch.

CVSS v3
2.3
EG Score
2.3LOWmedium confidence
EG Risk
11
EG Risk 11/100

EG Risk is EchelonGraph's 0–100 priority score. It fuses impact severity (EG Severity, the CVSS base score, never the KEV-floored or EPSS-lifted EG Score) with real-world exploitation and automatability, under weights EchelonGraph set by hand, so you can rank equal-severity CVEs and fix the most dangerous first. Higher = act sooner.

How it’s computed (value × EchelonGraph’s weight)
Severity23% × 45%
Impact severity (EG Severity): CVSS 2.3 of 10. Never the KEV-floored or EPSS-lifted EG Score.
Exploitation0.5% × 40%
FIRST EPSS: the 30-day exploitation probability when EchelonGraph scored this CVE.
Automatability0% × 15%
CISA's SSVC Automatable value: no (Vulnrichment).
SSVC (CISA's decision table, applied by EchelonGraph): Track at every mission impact level.
Exploitation none (CISA Vulnrichment) · Automatable no (CISA Vulnrichment) · Technical impact partial (CISA Vulnrichment). All three are CISA's SSVC values (Vulnrichment). EchelonGraph applied CISA's decision table to them; CISA publishes SSVC inputs and the table, not a decision for each CVE.
Action: The CVE record names the fixed release. Apply it within your standard update timelines.
EPSS PROB
0.5%
EPSS %ILE
42nd
KEV
Not listed

What the EG score is made of (scorer v4.0: the three questions the 0–10 score mixes, published apart · methodology)

The EG score (2.3): severity, escalated by confirmed exploitation. This CVE's 2.3 is its impact severity (EG Severity), not escalated.

EG Severity
2.3 LOWCVSS-B, impact only: no KEV listing, EPSS or EG-KEV tier raises it.a secondary CVSS source · CVSS v3.0 or v3.1
EG Likelihood
0.5% within 30 daysSource: FIRST EPSS (model v2026.06.15, score date 2026-10-24). FIRST's exploitation probability, not an EchelonGraph model.
Confirmed exploitation
None on record (CISA KEV, EG-KEV Tier 1)Reported apart from the likelihood: an observed fact, not a probability.
EG Priority
SSVC Track at medium mission impactTrack at every mission impact level.CISA BOD 26-04: 60 days if the affected system is publicly exposed; Fix on system upgrade if it is not.Each input and its source: the SSVC and BOD 26-04 blocks below.

SSVC (CISA's decision table, applied by EchelonGraph)Track at every mission impact level.

The CVE record names the fixed release. Apply it within your standard update timelines.

Exploitation none (CISA Vulnrichment) · Automatable no (CISA Vulnrichment) · Technical impact partial (CISA Vulnrichment). All three are CISA's SSVC values (Vulnrichment). EchelonGraph applied CISA's decision table to them; CISA publishes SSVC inputs and the table, not a decision for each CVE. Mission impact is CISA's Mission & Well-being decision point, and only you can judge it. CISA's table makes it high when Mission Prevalence is Essential — the vulnerable component "directly provides capabilities that constitute at least one MEF for at least one entity" (MEF: mission essential function) — or when Public Well-Being Impact is Irreversible: "multiple fatalities are likely", the cyber-physical system "is likely lost or destroyed", "extreme or serious externalities" are imposed on other parties, or social systems such as elections or the financial grid "are destabilized and potentially collapse". CISA's decision table

BOD 26-04 (CISA's remediation timeline, Table 1)60 days if the affected system is publicly exposed; Fix on system upgrade if it is not.

In CISA KEV no (CISA's KEV catalog) · Automatable no (CISA Vulnrichment) · Technical impact partial (CISA Vulnrichment). Whether your system is publicly exposed is yours to answer. BOD 26-04 binds US Federal Civilian Executive Branch agencies; for anyone else it is CISA's published timeline, a reference rather than an obligation. The directive · how EchelonGraph applies it

Published

October 21, 2026

Last Modified

October 23, 2026

Vendor Advisories for CVE-2026-105932(1)

These vendors published their own advisory mentioning this CVE — often with vendor-specific remediation steps + affected product lists not in NVD.

Weakness Classification(1)

MITRE Common Weakness Enumeration — the root-cause categories this CVE belongs to.

Data Freshness Timeline

(refreshed 16× in last 7d / 16× in last 30d)

Each row is a time one of our pipelines fetched, updated or re-scored this CVE. For example, "NVD update" means NVD published or revised its analysis for this CVE; "MITRE cvelistV5" means we ingested or refreshed it from the CNA feed. An arrow marks a change the record states ("CVSS v3 → 9.1"); EPSS and GHSA rows show the values recorded at that time, not what changed (EPSS values are rounded; hover one for the exact figures). Most recent first.

  1. 2026-10-27 16:31 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.5% · 42nd percentile
  2. 2026-10-26 16:30 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.5% · 42nd percentile
  3. 2026-10-25 16:32 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.5% · 42nd percentile
  4. 2026-10-25 14:55 UTCEG score recompute
  5. 2026-10-24 16:32 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.5% · 42nd percentile
  6. 2026-10-23 23:34 UTCEG score recompute
  7. 2026-10-23 23:34 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-6xq3-9hvx-9qxg · GitHub severity LOW
  8. 2026-10-23 22:23 UTCEG score recompute
  9. 2026-10-23 22:23 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-6xq3-9hvx-9qxg · GitHub severity LOW
  10. 2026-10-23 16:31 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.5% · 42nd percentile
  11. 2026-10-22 17:13 UTCEG score recompute
  12. 2026-10-22 17:13 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-6xq3-9hvx-9qxg · GitHub severity LOW
  13. 2026-10-22 16:33 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.5% · 42nd percentile
  14. 2026-10-21 19:28 UTCEG score recompute
  15. 2026-10-21 18:31 UTCEG score recomputeFirst assessed: 2.3 LOW
  16. 2026-10-21 18:30 UTCMITRE cvelistV5first tracked

Frequently asked(5)

What is CVE-2026-105932?
CVE-2026-105932 is a low-severity vulnerability; its CVE record was published on October 21, 2026. The Apache Pulsar broker admin REST API provides endpoints to read, set and remove the topic-level entry filter policy of a topic. For persistent topics these endpoints check that the caller is authorized for the entry filters topic policy operation. The corresponding endpoints for non-persistent…
When was the CVE record for CVE-2026-105932 published?
The CVE record for CVE-2026-105932 was published on October 21, 2026. That is the record's publication date; the vulnerability itself may have been made public earlier. EchelonGraph's copy of the record carries a last-modified date of October 23, 2026; the record at its source may have been updated since.
Is CVE-2026-105932 actively exploited?
CVE-2026-105932 is not currently on CISA's Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog. FIRST EPSS estimates a 0.5% probability of exploitation in the next 30 days (42nd percentile of EPSS-scored CVEs).
What is the CVSS score of CVE-2026-105932?
CVE-2026-105932 has a CVSS base score of 2.3 (a secondary CVSS source that NVD displays; NVD's own analysis pending).
How do I remediate CVE-2026-105932?
The CVE record for CVE-2026-105932 names the fix: "- 3.3.x and 4.0.x version users should upgrade to at least 4.0.14." The vendor advisories EchelonGraph has for CVE-2026-105932 are linked in the Vendor Advisories panel on this page.

Dependency Blast Radius

Explore the affected products and dependency analysis for CVE-2026-105932

Explore →

Is Your Infrastructure Affected by CVE-2026-105932?

EchelonGraph automatically scans your cloud infrastructure and maps CVE exposure using blast radius analysis.