CVE-2026-74237 Vulnerability Analysis & Exploit Details

CVE-2026-74237
Vulnerability Scoring

6.5
/10
High Risk

If left unpatched, CVE-2026-74237 could lead to major system disruptions or data loss.

Attack Complexity Details

  • Attack Complexity: Low
    Exploits can be performed without significant complexity or special conditions.
  • Attack Vector: Network
    Vulnerability is exploitable over a network without physical access.
  • Privileges Required: Low
    Some privileges are necessary to exploit the vulnerability.
  • Scope: Unchanged
    Exploit remains within the originally vulnerable component.
  • User Interaction: None
    No user interaction is necessary for exploitation.

CVE-2026-74237 Details

Status: Awaiting Analysis

Last updated: 🕓 10 Sep 2026, 16:17 UTC
Originally published on: 🕐 04 Sep 2026, 13:20 UTC

Time between publication and last update: 6 days

CVSS Release: version 3

CVSS3 Source

disclosure@vulncheck.com

CVSS3 Type

Secondary

CVSS3 Vector

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N

CVE-2026-74237 Vulnerability Summary

CVE-2026-74237: GFI Exinda AI and ClearView before 7.6.5 contains an argument injection vulnerability in the Tools Iperf Client functionality. The web_tools_cmd() function constructs an iperf command using the server and options parameters without sanitization, permitting injection of arbitrary iperf flags. An authenticated attacker with Unprivileged (lowest-level) access can supply the iperf -F flag to read an arbitrary file from the system and transmit its contents to an attacker-controlled server.

Assessing the Risk of CVE-2026-74237

Access Complexity Graph

The exploitability of CVE-2026-74237 depends on two key factors: attack complexity (the level of effort required to execute an exploit) and privileges required (the access level an attacker needs).

Exploitability Analysis for CVE-2026-74237

CVE-2026-74237 presents an accessible attack vector with minimal effort required. Restricting access controls and implementing security updates are critical to reducing exploitation risks.

Understanding AC and PR

A lower complexity and fewer privilege requirements make exploitation easier. Security teams should evaluate these aspects to determine the urgency of mitigation strategies, such as patch management and access control policies.

Attack Complexity (AC) measures the difficulty in executing an exploit. A high AC means that specific conditions must be met, making an attack more challenging, while a low AC means the vulnerability can be exploited with minimal effort.

Privileges Required (PR) determine the level of system access necessary for an attack. Vulnerabilities requiring no privileges are more accessible to attackers, whereas high privilege requirements limit exploitation to authorized users with elevated access.

CVSS Score Breakdown Chart

Above is the CVSS Sub-score Breakdown for CVE-2026-74237, illustrating how Base, Impact, and Exploitability factors combine to form the overall severity rating. A higher sub-score typically indicates a more severe or easier-to-exploit vulnerability.

CIA Impact Analysis

Below is the Impact Analysis for CVE-2026-74237, showing how Confidentiality, Integrity, and Availability might be affected if the vulnerability is exploited. Higher values usually signal greater potential damage.

  • Confidentiality: High
    Exploiting CVE-2026-74237 can result in unauthorized access to sensitive data, severely compromising data privacy.
  • Integrity: None
    CVE-2026-74237 poses no threat to data integrity.
  • Availability: None
    CVE-2026-74237 does not impact system availability.

CVE-2026-74237 References

External References

CWE Common Weakness Enumeration

CWE-88

CAPEC Common Attack Pattern Enumeration and Classification

  • Parameter Injection CAPEC-137 An adversary manipulates the content of request parameters for the purpose of undermining the security of the target. Some parameter encodings use text characters as separators. For example, parameters in a HTTP GET message are encoded as name-value pairs separated by an ampersand (&). If an attacker can supply text strings that are used to fill in these parameters, then they can inject special characters used in the encoding scheme to add or modify parameters. For example, if user input is fed directly into an HTTP GET request and the user provides the value "myInput&new_param=myValue", then the input parameter is set to myInput, but a new parameter (new_param) is also added with a value of myValue. This can significantly change the meaning of the query that is processed by the server. Any encoding scheme where parameters are identified and separated by text characters is potentially vulnerable to this attack - the HTTP GET encoding used above is just one example.
  • Flash Parameter Injection CAPEC-174 An adversary takes advantage of improper data validation to inject malicious global parameters into a Flash file embedded within an HTML document. Flash files can leverage user-submitted data to configure the Flash document and access the embedding HTML document.
  • Using Meta-characters in E-mail Headers to Inject Malicious Payloads CAPEC-41 This type of attack involves an attacker leveraging meta-characters in email headers to inject improper behavior into email programs. Email software has become increasingly sophisticated and feature-rich. In addition, email applications are ubiquitous and connected directly to the Web making them ideal targets to launch and propagate attacks. As the user demand for new functionality in email applications grows, they become more like browsers with complex rendering and plug in routines. As more email functionality is included and abstracted from the user, this creates opportunities for attackers. Virtually all email applications do not list email header information by default, however the email header contains valuable attacker vectors for the attacker to exploit particularly if the behavior of the email client application is known. Meta-characters are hidden from the user, but can contain scripts, enumerations, probes, and other attacks against the user's system.
  • HTTP Parameter Pollution (HPP) CAPEC-460 An adversary adds duplicate HTTP GET/POST parameters by injecting query string delimiters. Via HPP it may be possible to override existing hardcoded HTTP parameters, modify the application behaviors, access and, potentially exploit, uncontrollable variables, and bypass input validation checkpoints and WAF rules.
  • OS Command Injection CAPEC-88 In this type of an attack, an adversary injects operating system commands into existing application functions. An application that uses untrusted input to build command strings is vulnerable. An adversary can leverage OS command injection in an application to elevate privileges, execute arbitrary commands and compromise the underlying operating system.

Protect Your Infrastructure against CVE-2026-74237: Combat Critical CVE Threats

Stay updated with real-time CVE vulnerabilities and take action to secure your systems. Enhance your cybersecurity posture with the latest threat intelligence and mitigation techniques. Develop the skills necessary to defend against CVEs and secure critical infrastructures. Join the top cybersecurity professionals safeguarding today's infrastructures.

Other 5 Recently Published CVEs Vulnerabilities

  • CVE-2026-87919 – The Product XML Feed Manager for WooCommerce WordPress plugin before 3.1.1 does not restrict which object method its product shortcode may call, n...
  • CVE-2026-87918 – The WPBot WordPress plugin before 8.5.7 does not perform any authorization or nonce check on several AJAX actions that relay prompts to its config...
  • CVE-2026-87916 – The WPBot WordPress plugin before 8.6.0 does not perform any capability or nonce check on the AJAX action that lists stored chat sessions, allowin...
  • CVE-2026-87894 – The Rox Appointment Booking WordPress plugin before 1.2.3 does not perform any authorization check on the endpoint that returns a booking's confir...
  • CVE-2026-87892 – The Rox Appointment Booking WordPress plugin before 1.2.0 does not verify the order total or the selected payment method against its own server-si...