CVE Intelligence
High

CVE-2026-115727 — AgenticSeek before commit 409840c RCE via Exposed Werkzeug Debugger in llm_server

AgenticSeek before commit 409840c contains a remote code execution vulnerability because llm_server/app.py hardcodes Flask debug mode while binding to all interfaces. Attackers who reach the server port and obtain the derivable Werkzeug debugger PIN can execute Python code and operating system commands with llm_server privileges.

Published Oct 23, 2026 · Updated Oct 23, 2026 · Sources: NIST National Vulnerability Database, CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP · CNA: VulnCheck

Who exploits it and how urgent it is

A 0–100 score combining confirmed exploitation, ransomware and APT use, public exploits, EPSS and severity.

No exploitation signal in the sources consulted so far.
How the score was calculated
  • EPSS 0.7% (30-day exploitation probability)+8
  • Technical severity (high)+6

The score orders the patch queue; it does not replace your asset context (internet exposure, criticality, compensating controls).

Triage

Is it exploited, how likely is exploitation, what does it touch, and how severe do the sources call it.

Exploitation
Not confirmed
Not in CISA KEV — an absence of record, not proof it is unexploited.
EPSS FIRST
0.7%
ahead of 53% of scored CVEs · Oct 30, 2026
Affects
Fosowl
Agenticseek
CVSS base
8.1
High · 2 source(s)

CISA SSVC assessment CISA

Three decision points CISA publishes for the CVEs it assesses (SSVC 2.0.3). A stakeholder decision, not a severity score.

Exploitation
None
none · proof-of-concept · active
Automatable
No
can an attacker script the kill-chain steps
Technical impact
Total
partial · total control of the vulnerable component

Remediation

Fixes and mitigations documented by the sources — linked to the original advisory.

No fix documented by the sources we poll. That does not mean none exists: check the vendor advisory.

First 24 hours

Ordered from the record’s own fields — exposure first, because you cannot patch what you have not found. A rule-generated starting point.

  1. Identify exposed assets running the affected vendor/product/version combinations (Fosowl Agenticseek).
  2. The attack is network-based and needs no privileges: restrict exposure (ACLs, VPN, WAF) until patched.
  3. No fix documented in the sources: reduce exposure and monitor the vendor advisory.
  4. Search available logs for exploit probes, errors and authentication anomalies.

Affected scope

Vendor, product and versions as the sources word them.

VendorProductVersionsStatusSource
Fosowl Agenticseek < 409840c033851d861c5c83a91c05fd4a2a75a096 Vulnerable CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP

Attack characteristics

The CVSS vector, decoded. It describes the attack, not your exposure to it.

Attack vector
Network
Attack complexity
High
Privileges required
None
User interaction
None
Scope
Unchanged
Confidentiality
High
Integrity
High
Availability
High

Every base score collected

Sources score independently and may disagree; each row says who scored it and under which version.

ScoreVersionSeverityExpl.ImpactScored by
9.2 CVSS 4.0 Critical — — disclosure@vulncheck.com via NIST National Vulnerability Database
9.2 CVSS 4.0 Critical — — VulnCheck via CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP
8.1 CVSS 3.1 High 2.2 5.9 disclosure@vulncheck.com via NIST National Vulnerability Database
8.1 CVSS 3.1 High — — VulnCheck via CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H (score shown at the top: disclosure@vulncheck.com)

Weakness MITRE

Weakness class according to MITRE’s CWE catalog.

CWE-489

Other CVEs with this weakness →

EPSS over time FIRST

Oct 24, 2026 → Oct 30, 2026 · 7 reading(s) · max 1.01%

Detection

Read off the CVSS vector and the weakness class. Starting points, not tested rules.

  • Prioritize edge telemetry for the network-reachable component (proxy, WAF, IDS/IPS).
web/proxy/WAF logsnetwork IDS/IPS

Timeline

What happened to this CVE, newest first.

  • 2026
  • SSVC assessment updated
    Oct 23, 2026 · CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP
  • Affected products added · fosowl/agenticseek
    Oct 23, 2026 · CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP
  • Record published
    Oct 23, 2026
  • CVSS changed · 8.1
    Oct 23, 2026 · NIST National Vulnerability Database
  • Source status changed · → Deferred
    Oct 23, 2026 · NIST National Vulnerability Database
  • Record created in this database
    Oct 23, 2026 · Alertas do Telegram
  • CVE published
    Oct 23, 2026 · VulnCheck

Source activity

Repeated readings are counted rather than listed.

  • 1× References added · Oct 23, 2026 – Oct 23, 2026
  • 1× Official description updated · Oct 23, 2026 – Oct 23, 2026

References

4 on the record

Elsewhere on this site

Fosowl
every CVE for this vendor
CWE-489
other pages naming this weakness

Related CVEs (same products)

  • CVE-2026-72776 AgenticSeek Unauthenticated RCE via /query API Endpoint Aug 13, 2026
  • CVE-2026-5584 Fosowl agenticSeek query Endpoint PyInterpreter.py PyInterpreter.execute code injection Apr 5, 2026

Not in any source we poll

Listed rather than left blank: an empty field and an unmeasured one look identical on screen, and only one is a reason to look elsewhere.

  • No fixed version, patch or mitigation documented.
  • No confirmed IOCs, IP addresses, domains, file hashes, or malware artifacts supplied.
  • No organization-specific asset inventory, compensating-control status, or patch deployment evidence supplied.
  • No exploit packet captures, log samples, or incident case IDs supplied.

Answered from this record

Text assembled only from the fields above — no additional claims.

What should defenders know first?

CVE-2026-115727 is "AgenticSeek before commit 409840c RCE via Exposed Werkzeug Debugger in llm_server", rated High. It affects Agenticseek (Fosowl); versions are in the scope table. It is not in CISA KEV, which does not rule out exploitation. CVSS 8.1 describes technical severity. EPSS 0.70% estimates the probability of exploitation in 30 days; neither replaces your asset context. First verify whether exposed or business-critical assets run the affected versions, apply vendor fixes or mitigations, and preserve logs for review.

Comments

Moderated technical discussion. Read the community guidelines.

No comments yet.

Sign in or create an account to comment and suggest corrections.