HOL LogoGuard

Explore HOL

  • HOL home
  • AI agent registry
  • AI plugins
  • Open standards
  • HOL members

Guard product

  • Guard overviewLocal security and control for AI agents and the tools they use.
  • FeaturesRuntime protection, policy routing, review, and evidence.

Explore Guard

  • Product previewWalk through Guard surfaces in read-only demo mode.
  • ComparisonCompare Guard with native controls and AI security vendors.

AI tools

  • All AI toolsEvery supported AI tool and how Guard applies policy to it.
  • Codex
  • Claude Code
  • Cursor
  • Antigravity CLI
  • OpenCode
  • Hermes
  • OpenClaw
  • GitHub Copilot CLI
  • Antigravity
  • Kimi
  • Grok
  • Pi / Oh My Pi
  • Zcode

Extensions

  • All extensionsBrowse command and MCP coverage with owners and stated limits.
  • Command coverageShell command protection across clouds, databases, backups, and packages.
  • MCP server coverageSee how Guard maps risk state across MCP tools and servers.
  • Core safetyThe safety floor listings that ship with Guard.
  • Data and resilienceBackup and storage command protection.
  • Cloud and infrastructureAWS, Azure, GCP, Kubernetes, and more.

Security

  • AI security hubSecurity research, advisories, and agent safety coverage.
  • AI tool securitySecurity profiles for each supported coding agent.
  • Safe labsHands-on attack simulations with safe boundaries.
  • Redacted warningsReal blocked actions with sensitive details removed.
  • AdvisoriesCoordinated disclosure reports for AI tooling.
  • Active CVEsSearch active CVEs affecting AI tooling.

Learn

  • Security guidesPractical guides for securing AI agent workflows.
  • DocsInstall, configure, and operate Guard with confidence.
  • ResearchPublished security research, benchmarks, and methodology.

Community

  • ReleasesVersion history, shipped changes and upgrade notes.
  • ContributorsThe people and contributions behind HOL Guard.
  • AffiliatesShare Guard with your audience and earn from referrals.
  • SponsorKeep agent security open: sponsor a project, place a banner, or fund a security initiative.
PricingEnterpriseOpen AppInstall Guard
  1. Guard
  2. Security
  3. CVEs
  4. CVE 2026 10582 hugo 0910 through 01650 server side request
HOL Guard

Public security guidance for teams protecting AI harnesses, MCP servers, skills, prompts, and local tool execution.

Install Guard

AI Security

  • Prompt injection
  • MCP security
  • OWASP MCP mapping
  • Supply chain

Resources

  • Trust packet
  • Harness setup
  • Redacted warnings
  • Safe labs

Product

  • Install Guard
  • Pricing
  • Open dashboard
Guard
  • Guard Overview
  • Releases
  • Contributors
  • Install Guard
  • Pricing
Docs
  • Documentation Index
  • Developer Hub
  • API Reference
  • Root OpenAPI
  • Registry OpenAPI
  • Run in Postman
  • Standards
  • Submit ERC-8004 Contract
  • Feature Your Agent
Best Plugins
  • Browse Plugins
  • Plugin Launches
  • Best Claude Plugins
  • Best Codex Plugins
  • Best Grok Plugins
  • Best Kimi Plugins
  • Best DeepSeek Plugins
  • Best Antigravity Plugins
  • Best MCP Servers
  • Best Cursor Plugins
  • Best OpenCode Plugins
Best Agents
  • Best ERC-8004 Agents
  • Best Virtuals Agents
  • Best MCP Servers
  • Best A2A Agents
  • Best x402 Payable
  • All Categories
Community
  • Telegram
  • X
More
  • About HOL
  • Contact
  • Blog
  • GitHub
  • Privacy
  • Terms of Service
Settings

Copyright © 2026 HOL DAO LLC. All rights reserved.

Back to active CVEs
High · CVSS 7.4CVE-2026-10582

Hugo 0.91.0 through 0.165.0 Server-Side Request Forgery via security.http.urls Lacking Destination Address ValidationCVE-2026-10582

Answer in brief

CVE-2026-10582 records a High severity (CVSS 7.4) vulnerability in Hugo 0.91.0 through 0.165.0 Server-Side Request Forgery via security.http.urls Lacking Destination Address Validation. The current sources do not mark it as known exploited. The current feed maps gohugoio/hugo (generic), gohugoio/hugo (generic). Check affected ranges and fixed versions before updating.

Analysis pending evidence review

HOL Guard separates source facts from reviewed analysis. See the methodology.

Published Aug 24, 2026Updated Sep 24, 2026Source checked Oct 8, 2026First seen by HOL Aug 24, 2026Material review Sep 24, 2026
Upstream Advisory

Key facts

Risk
High · CVSS 7.4
Exploitation
Not marked as known exploited
Affected software
2 mapped packages or products
Fix availability
Not reported

Why this deserves its current priority

CVSS is 7.4. The current sources do not mark it as known exploited. Treat this as a source-backed prioritization signal, not a statement about your environment.

Analysis status

Analysis pending evidence review

Factual feed record only; HOL analysis is not approved for indexing. Read the methodology.

Affected scope and exposure questions

The current feed maps gohugoio/hugo (generic), gohugoio/hugo (generic). Check affected ranges and fixed versions before updating.

Mapped affected packages and fixed versions
PackageAffected rangeFixed version
gohugoio/hugogeneric0.91.0Not reported
gohugoio/hugogeneric>=0.91.0 <=0.165.0Not reported

Recommended response

  1. 1Check inventory. Check lockfiles and deployed manifests for gohugoio/hugo, gohugoio/hugo.
  2. 2Review the reported fix. Monitor this advisory for an available fix and review any installs of the affected package.

Evidence timeline and material changes

  1. Published upstream

    Aug 24, 2026

    Evidence: source:cvelist:source_dates:source-dates:record
  2. Source modified

    Sep 24, 2026

    Evidence: source:cvelist:source_dates:source-dates:record
  3. First seen by HOL

    Aug 24, 2026

Sources and claim methodology

  • GitHub security advisorygithub.com
  • GitHub security advisorygithub.com
  • GitHub security advisorygithub.com
  • Source referencevulncheck.com
Upstream source description

Hugo's security.http.urls allowlist is the only control on outbound fetches made by resources.GetRemote, and it inspects the URL text alone. CheckAllowedHTTPURL in config/security/securityConfig.go applies the configured pattern list and then re-checks a canonicalised form of an integer, hex or octal IPv4 host, but it never resolves the hostname and never inspects the address the HTTP client actually connects to. The client constructed in resources/resource_factories/create/create.go installs no dial-time hook, so no check occurs at connection time either. A hostname that resolves to a loopback, private or cloud-metadata address therefore satisfies the policy, and the response body is embedded in the generated site. An attacker who can supply a URL through content, for example a front-matter field or a CMS field, can make the build fetch an internal endpoint and publish the response in the static output, so the build artifact itself carries the data out.

Quoted source text, attributed separately from HOL analysis.

Related CVEs

  • IBM DataPower Gateway affected by server-side request forgeryAlso CWE-918
  • Joomla Extension - balbooa.com - Path Traversal in image preview Gridbox < 2.20.4.0Same generic ecosystem
  • Joomla Extension - balbooa.com - CSRF in language installation feature Gridbox < 2.20.4.0Same generic ecosystem
  • WordPress ShortPixel Image Optimizer plugin <= 6.5.6 - Cross Site Scripting (XSS) vulnerabilitySame generic ecosystem
  • WordPress VillaTheme Core plugin <= 1.0.5 - Broken Access Control vulnerabilitySame generic ecosystem
  • WordPress Vitepos plugin <= 3.6.1 - SQL Injection vulnerabilitySame generic ecosystem

Record context

Vulnerability class
SSRF
EPSS
Not reported
CWE IDs
CWE-918
Source
CVE List V5
Source checked
Oct 8, 2026
References
4 linked sources
Open source record