CVE-2026-35587 — Glances IP Plugin has SSRF via public_api that leads to credential leakage
Glances is an open-source system cross-platform monitoring tool. Prior to version 4.5.4, a Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) vulnerability exists in the Glances IP plugin due to improper validation of the public_api configuration parameter. The value of public_api is used directly in outbound HTTP requests without any scheme restriction or hostname/IP validation. An attacker who can modify the Glances configuration can force the application to send requests to arbitrary internal or external endpoints. Additionally, when public_username and public_password are set, Glances automatically includes these credentials in the Authorization: Basic header, resulting in credential leakage to attacker-controlled servers. This vulnerability can be exploited to access internal network services, retrieve sensitive data from cloud metadata endpoints, and/or exfiltrate credentials via outbound HTTP requests. The issue arises because public_api is passed directly to the HTTP client (urlopen_auth) without validation, allowing unrestricted outbound connections and unintended disclosure of sensitive information. Version 4.5.4 contains a patch.
Who exploits it and how urgent it is
A 0–100 score combining confirmed exploitation, ransomware and APT use, public exploits, EPSS and severity.
How the score was calculated
- EPSS 0.5% (30-day exploitation probability)+6
- Technical severity (high)+6
- CISA SSVC: exploitation "poc"+5
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.
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.
Remediation
Fixes and mitigations documented by the sources — linked to the original advisory.
- Documented patch — github.com (NIST National Vulnerability Database)
- Documented mitigation — github.com (NIST National Vulnerability Database)
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.
- Identify exposed assets running the affected vendor/product/version combinations (Nicolargo Glances).
- Apply the fixed version or the patch documented under Remediation.
- Search available logs for exploit probes matching the vulnerability class (ssrf), errors and authentication anomalies.
Affected scope
Vendor, product and versions as the sources word them.
Attack characteristics
The CVSS vector, decoded. It describes the attack, not your exposure to it.
Every base score collected
Sources score independently and may disagree; each row says who scored it and under which version.
| Score | Version | Severity | Expl. | Impact | Scored by |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 7.3 | CVSS 4.0 | High | — | — | security-advisories@github.com via NIST National Vulnerability Database |
| 7.3 | CVSS 4.0 | High | — | — | GitHub_M via CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP |
| 8.8 | CVSS 3.1 | High | 2.8 | 5.9 | nvd@nist.gov via NIST National Vulnerability Database |
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H (score shown at the top: nvd@nist.gov) Weakness MITRE
Weakness class according to MITRE’s CWE catalog.
EPSS over time FIRST
Oct 13, 2026 → Oct 14, 2026 · 2 reading(s) · max 0.48%
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).
- Monitor outbound requests from the server to internal IPs and cloud metadata endpoints.
Timeline
What happened to this CVE, newest first.
- 2026
- Affected products added · nicolargo/glances
- SSVC assessment updated
- Record published
- Fix documented
- CVSS changed · 8.8
- Source status changed · → Analyzed
- Record created in this database
- CVE published
Source activity
Repeated readings are counted rather than listed.
- 1× Official description updated · Oct 13, 2026 – Oct 13, 2026
References
2 on the record
Elsewhere on this site
Related CVEs (same products)
- High CVE-2026-53925 Glances: Arbitrary file write and command execution via `secure_popen` redirection and chaining operators in AMP command configuration Jun 25, 2026
- High CVE-2026-46606 Glances: Command Injection via KVM/QEMU VM Domain Names in glances/plugins/vms/engines/virsh.py Jun 25, 2026
- High CVE-2026-46608 Glances: XML-RPC Multi-Origin CORS Configuration Silently Falls Back to Wildcard (Incomplete Fix for CVE-2026-33533) Jun 25, 2026
- High CVE-2026-46607 Glances: Insecure Pickle Deserialization in Version Cache Leads to Arbitrary Code Execution Jun 25, 2026
- Medium CVE-2026-46611 Glances: XML-RPC Server Missing Host Header Validation Enables DNS Rebinding Attack Jun 25, 2026
- Medium CVE-2026-35588 Glances has CQL Injection in its Cassandra Export Module via Unsanitized Config Values Apr 20, 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 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-2026-35587 is "Glances IP Plugin has SSRF via public_api that leads to credential leakage", rated High. It affects Glances (Nicolargo); versions are in the scope table. It is not in CISA KEV, which does not rule out exploitation. CVSS 8.8 describes technical severity. EPSS 0.48% 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.