CVE-2026-105944

CRITICALPre-NVD 10.010.0
EchelonGraph scoreLOW confidence

This critical-severity CVE scores 10.0 under the CNA's CVSS (NVD's own analysis pending). EPSS exploit-prediction score not yet available (the EPSS model rescores nightly; freshly-published CVEs typically appear within 48 hours). No GitHub Security Advisory CVSS is on record for this CVE.

Triggered by: Headline CVSS from the CNA's CVSS
Sources: the CNA's CVSS
Trending — 3 sources updated this week
10.0EG
EchelonGraph verdictPlan mitigationRemediate within your standard update timelines (the SSVC decision on this page).
  • High severity, but no confirmed exploitation yet
CISA-KEV: Not listedEPSS PROB: —CVSS: 10.0Exploit: None knownExposed services: Not assessed

No fix is confirmed yet — apply a workaround or compensating control (WAF / firewall / segmentation) and watch for the fix.

The CVE record's CNA (Apache Software Foundation) lists Apache Software Foundation Apache Pulsar Manager versions 0.1.0 up to and including 0.4.0 as affected. No release containing a fix is confirmed on record.

Apache Pulsar Manager is a web console for administering Apache Pulsar clusters. It has its own user accounts and login, and it can be configured with an HTTP authentication credential, such as a token, that it uses to call the Pulsar admin API on behalf of its users. Pulsar Manager has the following security issues:

  • The operation for creating the initial administrator (superuser) account is available without authentication, and it remains available after the instance has been initialized. Anyone who can reach Pulsar Manager can create an additional administrator account at any time and log in with it. This issue affects versions 0.3.0 and later.
  • Requests to the Pulsar admin API that Pulsar Manager proxies to the configured Pulsar cluster are not subject to Pulsar Manager's authentication. Version 0.2.0 checks the caller's permissions for some of these requests, but not for all of them. An unauthenticated user can therefore use Pulsar Manager to send requests to the Pulsar admin API, which the cluster processes with the credential configured in Pulsar Manager.
  • The destination of a proxied request can be chosen by the requester, and Pulsar Manager attaches its configured Pulsar admin credential to the request. An unauthenticated user can make Pulsar Manager send this credential to a host of the user's choosing, and the credential can then be used directly against the Pulsar cluster.
  • In versions 0.3.0 and later, Pulsar Manager does not distinguish between privilege levels of its accounts. Every account, including one created through the first issue, effectively has full administrative privileges in Pulsar Manager.

The impact depends on the version and the deployment. In versions 0.3.0 and later, any user who can reach Pulsar Manager over the network can take full control of Pulsar Manager. In all versions, when Pulsar Manager is configured with an HTTP authentication credential for a Pulsar cluster, any user who can reach Pulsar Manager can perform the Pulsar admin operations that this credential permits and can obtain the credential itself. When Pulsar Manager is configured with the token signing key of a Pulsar cluster, an administrator of Pulsar Manager can create tokens for the cluster.

Apache Pulsar Manager is no longer maintained and is completely unsupported. The Apache Pulsar PMC has retired it. There are no supported versions, and no further releases, fixes or security updates will be made for any version. These issues will not be fixed.

Using Pulsar Manager is not recommended. Users should stop using Pulsar Manager, remove existing deployments, and move to one of the alternatives described in the Administration UI documentation (https://pulsar.apache.org/docs/administration-ui). Users who have exposed Pulsar Manager configured with a Pulsar credential or token signing key should also consider replacing that credential or key.

Until a deployment is removed, users should not expose Pulsar Manager to untrusted networks, and should restrict network access to it to trusted administrators.

CVSS v3
10.0
EG Score
10.0CRITICALlow confidence
EG Risk
45
EG Risk 45/100

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)
Severity100% × 45%
Impact severity (EG Severity): CVSS 10.0 of 10. Never the KEV-floored or EPSS-lifted EG Score.
Exploitation0% × 40%
No KEV listing, EG-KEV tier or EPSS when EchelonGraph scored this CVE.
Automatability0% × 15%
CISA's BOD 26-04 default: no one has published Automatable for this CVE, and CISA treats it as “no” for a CVE not in KEV.
SSVC (CISA's decision table, applied by EchelonGraph): Track at low or medium mission impact; Track* at high (mission-essential systems).
Exploitation none (no CISA value, KEV listing or exploit code on record) · Automatable no (CISA's BOD 26-04 default) · Technical impact total (CVSS v4.0 confidentiality and integrity impact both High). EchelonGraph holds no SSVC assessment of this CVE from CISA: none of these inputs is from Vulnrichment. EchelonGraph applied CISA's decision table to them; CISA publishes SSVC inputs and the table, not a decision for each CVE.
Action: No fix is confirmed yet. Restrict network exposure of the affected system or apply the vendor's mitigation within your standard update timelines, and watch the vendor's advisory for the fix.
EPSS PROB
—
EPSS %ILE
—
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 (10.0): severity, escalated by confirmed exploitation. This CVE's 10.0 is its impact severity (EG Severity), not escalated.

EG Severity
10.0 CRITICALCVSS-B, impact only: no KEV listing, EPSS or EG-KEV tier raises it.the CNA's CVSS · CVSS v3.0 or v3.1
EG Likelihood
Unknown (no EPSS on record)Unknown, not low: FIRST has published no EPSS probability for this CVE.
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 low or medium mission impact; Track* at high (mission-essential systems).CISA BOD 26-04: 14 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 low or medium mission impact; Track* at high (mission-essential systems).

No fix is confirmed yet. Restrict network exposure of the affected system or apply the vendor's mitigation within your standard update timelines, and watch the vendor's advisory for the fix.

Exploitation none (no CISA value, KEV listing or exploit code on record) · Automatable no (CISA's BOD 26-04 default) · Technical impact total (CVSS v4.0 confidentiality and integrity impact both High). EchelonGraph holds no SSVC assessment of this CVE from CISA: none of these inputs is from 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)14 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's BOD 26-04 default) · Technical impact total (CVSS v4.0 confidentiality and integrity impact both High). Where an input reads “CISA's BOD 26-04 default”, no one has published it for this CVE, and CISA's implementation guidance says: “If “Automatable” and “Technical Impact” information items about a CVE ID are not available and the CVE ID is not in the KEV Catalog, CISA will treat its values as “no” and “total,” respectively, until CISA or a third party provides metadata about the CVE ID. CISA will always provide the Vulnrichment data for a CVE ID listed in the KEV Catalog.” 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 21, 2026

Advisory Details (2)

Auto-updated Oct 21, 2026
No fix on record yet.
Web page

Administration UI | Apache Pulsar

https://pulsar.apache.org/docs/administration-ui
Web page

Pony Mail

https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/hol3z7fzhjntwvrv8xqqwx4l4d2jx796

Vendor Advisories for CVE-2026-105944(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 5× in last 7d / 5× 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. 2026-10-21 22:17 UTCEG score recompute
  2. 2026-10-21 22:17 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-436h-c7mw-9wgf · GitHub severity CRITICAL
  3. 2026-10-21 19:27 UTCEG score recompute
  4. 2026-10-21 18:31 UTCEG score recomputeFirst assessed: 10.0 CRITICAL
  5. 2026-10-21 18:30 UTCMITRE cvelistV5first tracked

Related CVEs(same CWE)

Frequently asked(4)

What is CVE-2026-105944?
CVE-2026-105944 is a critical-severity vulnerability; its CVE record was published on October 21, 2026. Apache Pulsar Manager is a web console for administering Apache Pulsar clusters. It has its own user accounts and login, and it can be configured with an HTTP authentication credential, such as a token, that it uses to call the Pulsar admin API on behalf of its users. Pulsar Manager has the…
When was the CVE record for CVE-2026-105944 published?
The CVE record for CVE-2026-105944 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 21, 2026; the record at its source may have been updated since.
What is the CVSS score of CVE-2026-105944?
CVE-2026-105944 has a CVSS base score of 10.0 (a secondary CVSS source that NVD displays; NVD's own analysis pending). The EG score is currently aggregating — additional source signals are being incorporated as they become available..
How do I remediate CVE-2026-105944?
No fix for CVE-2026-105944 is confirmed yet. Until one is published, restrict network exposure of the affected system or apply the vendor's mitigation — for example, keep it off the internet or limit it to trusted networks — and watch the vendor's advisory for the fix. The CVE record's CNA (Apache Software Foundation) lists Apache Software Foundation Apache Pulsar Manager versions 0.1.0 up to and including 0.4.0 as affected. No release containing a fix is confirmed on record. The vendor advisories EchelonGraph has for CVE-2026-105944 are linked in the Vendor Advisories panel on this page.

Dependency Blast Radius

Explore the affected products and dependency analysis for CVE-2026-105944

Explore →

Is Your Infrastructure Affected by CVE-2026-105944?

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

Book a Demo →Browse All CVEs