HOL LogoGuard

Explore HOL

  • HOL home
  • AI agent registry
  • AI plugins
  • Open standards
  • HOL members
  • Sponsor HOL
  • Advertise with HOL

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.
  • SponsorFund agreed research, implementation and shared testing through the HOL Partner Program.
  • AdvertiseCompare README logo placements, previews and monthly prices, or promote a plugin or extension.
PricingEnterpriseOpen AppInstall Guard
  1. Guard
  2. Security
  3. CVEs
  4. CVE 2026 110912 cisa adp vulnrichment
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
  • Sponsor
  • Advertise
  • Contact
  • Blog
  • GitHub
  • Privacy
  • Terms of Service
Settings

Copyright © 2026 HOL DAO LLC. All rights reserved.

Back to active CVEs
High · CVSS 7.1CVE-2026-110912

CISA ADP VulnrichmentCVE-2026-110912

Answer in brief

CVE-2026-110912 records a High severity (CVSS 7.1) vulnerability in CISA ADP Vulnrichment. The current sources do not mark it as known exploited. The current feed maps DragonFlyBSD/DragonFlyBSD (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 Oct 15, 2026Updated Oct 15, 2026Source checked Oct 15, 2026First seen by HOL Oct 15, 2026Material review Oct 15, 2026
Upstream Advisory

Key facts

Risk
High · CVSS 7.1
Exploitation
Not marked as known exploited
Affected software
1 mapped package or product
Fix availability
Available

Why this deserves its current priority

CVSS is 7.1. 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 DragonFlyBSD/DragonFlyBSD (generic). Check affected ranges and fixed versions before updating.

Mapped affected packages and fixed versions
PackageAffected rangeFixed version
DragonFlyBSD/DragonFlyBSDgeneric>=984263bcb83ad82313113c6ac840d99124d8f90c <4bb22ffcf2e9fb44995fbfd9945194afc87fb1824bb22ffcf2e9fb44995fbfd9945194afc87fb182

Recommended response

  1. 1Check inventory. Check lockfiles and deployed manifests for DragonFlyBSD/DragonFlyBSD.
  2. 2Review the reported fix. Source-reported solution: Update to DragonFly BSD 6.6 once released (the maintainers have confirmed the fix will be included), or apply commit 4bb22ffcf2e9fb44995fbfd9945194afc87fb182 from master, which rejects ARP packets whose ar_hln is not ETHER_ADDR_LEN in arpintr() and whose ar_pln is not sizeof(struct in_addr) in in_arpinput().

Evidence timeline and material changes

  1. Published upstream

    Oct 15, 2026

    Evidence: source:cvelist:source_dates:source-dates:record

  2. Source modified

    Oct 15, 2026

    Evidence: source:cvelist:source_dates:source-dates:record

  3. First seen by HOL

    Oct 15, 2026

Sources and claim methodology

  • GitHub security advisorygithub.com
Upstream source description

In DragonFly BSD through 6.4.2 before 4bb22ff, the ARP input handlers arpintr() and in_arpinput() (sys/netinet/if_ether.c) do not validate the hardware address length (ar_hln) and protocol address length (ar_pln) fields of incoming ARP packets. in_arpreply() then uses these attacker-controlled values as memcpy lengths when copying from kernel buffers that are only 6 and 4 bytes long, resulting in an out-of-bounds read of kernel heap and stack memory that is copied into the ARP reply sent back to the requester. An unauthenticated attacker on the adjacent network can use a single crafted ARP request to disclose up to roughly 250 bytes of each type of kernel memory, including kernel pointers. This is expected to be fixed in the 6.6 stable release when that is available.

Quoted source text, attributed separately from HOL analysis.

Related CVEs

  • WordPress Broken Link Checker plugin <= 2.4.14.1 - Content Injection vulnerabilitySame generic ecosystem
  • Path traversal via logging configuration in P4SearchSame generic ecosystem
  • Incomplete dangerous-extension list in PeaZip object open allows execution of a program or command from a crafted archive entry without confirmationSame generic ecosystem
  • Path traversal in PeaZip object preview allows execution of arbitrary programs via a crafted archive entry nameSame generic ecosystem
  • WordPress User Registration plugin <= 5.2.8 - Cross Site Scripting (XSS) vulnerabilitySame generic ecosystem
  • Cross-Site Scripting via ListBox Bound Text in Kendo UI for jQuerySame generic ecosystem

Record context

Vulnerability class
Tool Poisoning
EPSS
Not reported
CWE IDs
CWE-130
Source
CVE List V5
Source checked
Oct 15, 2026
References
1 linked source
Open source record