CVE-2026-83559

HIGHPre-NVD 7.47.4
EchelonGraph scoreLOW confidence

This high-severity CVE scores 7.4 under a secondary CVSS source (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 a secondary CVSS source
Sources: a secondary CVSS source
Trending — 4 sources updated this week

Also known asEUVD-2026-114896 (ENISA EUVD) · GHSA-f8h3-wpxx-57r3 (GitHub Security Advisories)Source: ENISA EUVD

7.4EG
EchelonGraph verdictPlan a fixRemediate within your standard update timelines (the SSVC decision on this page).
  • High severity, but no confirmed exploitation yet
CISA-KEV: Not listedEPSS PROB: —CVSS: 7.4Exploit: None knownExposed services: Not assessed

The CVE record names the fixed release — apply it.

Improper encoding or escaping of output in Apache Wicket.

org.apache.wicket.core.util.string.JavaScriptUtils#escapeQuotes() replaces each single quote in its input with a backslash and a single quote, and each double quote with a backslash and a double quote, so that the value can be placed inside a JavaScript string literal. It does not escape the backslash, which is the character that has to be escaped, and escaped first, for the rest of that escaping to hold. A value that already holds a backslash immediately before a quote therefore ends up with two backslashes in front of that quote: the first escapes the second, the quote itself is left unescaped, and it closes the literal. Whatever the value carries after that point is no longer text but JavaScript, and it runs in the application's origin and in the session of the user looking at the page. The method is public, is not deprecated, and its documentation states that its result can be part of a JavaScript call such as an alert; the only limitation it notes concerns JSON values, which need different escaping.

An application is affected wherever it calls the method itself and places the result inside a JavaScript string literal, from its own code or from a component of its own or of a third party, and the value it escapes holds data an attacker can influence. There is no further condition, and no component of Wicket has to be involved: the application is using the method for what its documentation offers, and the method does not deliver it.

Two components shipped with Wicket Extensions pass a value through the method. org.apache.wicket.extensions.ajax.markup.html.AjaxEditableLabel writes the editor's first error feedback message into a single-quoted JavaScript string literal in the Ajax response, so an application is affected through that component where the message shown for a failed edit holds data an attacker can influence, whether that is the submitted value itself or another variable the application sets on the validation error. A validation message can carry the submitted value, because input is a message variable that every form component supplies for its own validation errors, and the documentation shows overriding a validator's message to include it; none of the message bundles shipped with Wicket interpolates it, so an application that has not written such a message is not affected through this component. org.apache.wicket.extensions.ajax.markup.html.repeater.AjaxListPanel passes the serialized markup tag of an appended component through the method and is not affected: the tag comes from the panel's own markup file, and a quote in any of its attribute values, the component's markup id included, is written as a character reference by the tag serialization and cannot close the literal.

This issue affects Apache Wicket: from 8.0.0 through 8.19.0, from 9.0.0 through 9.24.0, from 10.0.0 through 10.11.0. Users of Apache Wicket 7.x or older, which are no longer supported, should upgrade to a supported version.

Users are recommended to upgrade to version 8.20.0, 9.25.0 or 10.12.0, which fix the issue.

CVSS v3
7.4
EG Score
7.4HIGHlow confidence
EG Risk
33
EG Risk 33/100

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)
Severity74% × 45%
Impact severity (EG Severity): CVSS 7.4 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: The CVE record names the fixed release. Apply it within your standard update timelines.
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 (7.4): severity, escalated by confirmed exploitation. This CVE's 7.4 is its impact severity (EG Severity), not escalated.

EG Severity
7.4 HIGHCVSS-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
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, and whom BOD 26-04 binds: 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).

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

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.

The score's inputs: 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

November 1, 2026

Last Modified

November 2, 2026

Advisory Details (1)

Auto-updated Nov 1, 2026
Fix named in the CVE record.

Vendor Advisories for CVE-2026-83559(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. 2026-11-02 16:28 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-f8h3-wpxx-57r3 · GitHub severity HIGH
  2. 2026-11-02 00:02 UTCENISA EUVD ID recordedEUVD-2026-114896 · Source: ENISA EUVD
  3. 2026-11-01 23:26 UTCEG score recompute
  4. 2026-11-01 22:23 UTCEG score recomputeFirst assessed: 7.4 HIGH
  5. 2026-11-01 22:21 UTCMITRE cvelistV5first tracked

Frequently asked(4)

What is CVE-2026-83559?
CVE-2026-83559 is a high-severity vulnerability; its CVE record was published on November 1, 2026. Improper encoding or escaping of output in Apache Wicket. org.apache.wicket.core.util.string.JavaScriptUtils#escapeQuotes() replaces each single quote in its input with a backslash and a single quote, and each double quote with a backslash and a double quote, so that the value can be placed inside…
When was the CVE record for CVE-2026-83559 published?
The CVE record for CVE-2026-83559 was published on November 1, 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 November 2, 2026; the record at its source may have been updated since.
What is the CVSS score of CVE-2026-83559?
CVE-2026-83559 has a CVSS base score of 7.4 (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-2026-83559?
The CVE record for CVE-2026-83559 names the fix: "Users are recommended to upgrade to version 8.20.0, 9.25.0 or 10.12.0, which fix the issue." The vendor advisories EchelonGraph has for CVE-2026-83559 are linked in the Vendor Advisories panel on this page.

Dependency Blast Radius

Explore the affected products and dependency analysis for CVE-2026-83559

Explore →

Is Your Infrastructure Affected by CVE-2026-83559?

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