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 33230 improper neutralization of input during web page
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
Medium · CVSS 6.1CVE-2026-33230GHSA-GFWX-W7GR-FVH7

Improper Neutralization of Input During Web Page Generation ('Cross-site Scripting') in nltkCVE-2026-33230

Answer in brief

CVE-2026-33230 records a Medium severity (CVSS 6.1) vulnerability in Improper Neutralization of Input During Web Page Generation ('Cross-site Scripting') in nltk. The current sources do not mark it as known exploited. The current feed maps nltk (pypi). Check affected ranges and fixed versions before updating.

Analysis pending evidence review

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

Published Mar 18, 2026Updated Sep 10, 2026Source checked Oct 25, 2026First seen by HOL Sep 10, 2026Material review Sep 10, 2026
Upstream Advisory

Key facts

Risk
Medium · CVSS 6.1
Exploitation
Not marked as known exploited
Affected software
1 mapped package or product
Fix availability
Available

Why this deserves its current priority

CVSS is 6.1. 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 nltk (pypi). Check affected ranges and fixed versions before updating.

Mapped affected packages and fixed versions
PackageAffected rangeFixed version
nltkpypi>=0 <3.9.43.9.4

Recommended response

  1. 1Check inventory. Check lockfiles and deployed manifests for nltk.
  2. 2Review the reported fix. Update nltk to 3.9.4 if you use the affected versions. Test the change in a non-production environment first.

Evidence timeline and material changes

  1. Published upstream

    Mar 18, 2026

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

    Sep 10, 2026

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

    Sep 10, 2026

Sources and claim methodology

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

### Summary `nltk.app.wordnet_app` contains a reflected cross-site scripting issue in the `lookup_...` route. A crafted `lookup_<payload>` URL can inject arbitrary HTML/JavaScript into the response page because attacker-controlled `word` data is reflected into HTML without escaping. This impacts users running the local WordNet Browser server and can lead to script execution in the browser origin of that application. ### Details The vulnerable flow is in `nltk/app/wordnet_app.py`: - [`nltk/app/wordnet_app.py:144`](/mnt/Data/my_brains/test/nltk/nltk/app/wordnet_app.py#L144) - Requests starting with `lookup_` are handled as HTML responses: - `page, word = page_from_href(sp)` - [`nltk/app/wordnet_app.py:755`](/mnt/Data/my_brains/test/nltk/nltk/app/wordnet_app.py#L755) - `page_from_href()` calls `page_from_reference(Reference.decode(href))` - [`nltk/app/wordnet_app.py:769`](/mnt/Data/my_brains/test/nltk/nltk/app/wordnet_app.py#L769) - `word = href.word` - [`nltk/app/wordnet_app.py:796`](/mnt/Data/my_brains/test/nltk/nltk/app/wordnet_app.py#L796) - If no results are found, `word` is inserted directly into the HTML body: - `body = "The word or words '%s' were not found in the dictionary." % word` This is inconsistent with the `search` route, which does escape user input: - [`nltk/app/wordnet_app.py:136`](/mnt/Data/my_brains/test/nltk/nltk/app/wordnet_app.py#L136) - `word = html.escape(...)` As a result, a malicious `lookup_...` payload can inject script into the response page. The issue is exploitable because: - `Reference.decode()` accepts attacker-controlled base64-encoded pickle data for the URL state. - The decoded `word` is reflected into HTML without `html.escape()`. - The server is started with `HTTPServer(("", port), MyServerHandler)`, so it listens on all interfaces by default, not just `localhost`. ### PoC 1. Start the WordNet Browser in an isolated Docker environment: ```bash docker run -d --name nltk-wordnet-web -p 8002:8002 \ nltk-sandbox \ python -c "import nltk; nltk.download('wordnet', quiet=True); from nltk.app.wordnet_app import wnb; wnb(8002, False)" ``` 2. Use the following crafted payload, which decodes to: ```python ("<script>alert(1)</script>", {}) ``` Encoded payload: ```text gAWVIQAAAAAAAACMGTxzY3JpcHQ-YWxlcnQoMSk8L3NjcmlwdD6UfZSGlC4= ``` 3. Request the vulnerable route: ```bash curl -s "http://127.0.0.1:8002/lookup_gAWVIQAAAAAAAACMGTxzY3JpcHQ-YWxlcnQoMSk8L3NjcmlwdD6UfZSGlC4=" ``` 4. Observed result: ```text The word or words '<script>alert(1)</script>' were not found in the dictionary. ``` <img width="867" height="208" alt="127" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/ec09da08-09bc-4fc4-bfc1-c4489e9adaf6" /> I also validated the issue directly at function level in Docker: ```python import base64 import pickle from nltk.app.wordnet_app import page_from_href payload = base64.urlsafe_b64encode( pickle.dumps(("<script>alert(1)</script>", {}), -1) ).decode() page, word = page_from_href(payload) print(word) print("<script>alert(1)</script>" in page) ``` Observed output: ```text WORD= <script>alert(1)</script> HAS_SCRIPT= True ``` ### Impact This is a reflected XSS issue in the NLTK WordNet Browser web UI. An attacker who can convince a user to open a crafted `lookup_...` URL can execute arbitrary JavaScript in the origin of the local WordNet Browser application. This can be used to: - run arbitrary script in the browser tab - manipulate the page content shown to the user - issue same-origin requests to other WordNet Browser routes - potentially trigger available UI actions in that local app context This primarily impacts users who run `nltk.app.wordnet_app` as a local or self-hosted HTTP service and open attacker-controlled links.

Quoted source text, attributed separately from HOL analysis.

Record context

Vulnerability class
XSS
EPSS
Not reported
CWE IDs
Not reported
Source
OSV
Source checked
Oct 25, 2026
References
5 linked sources
Open source record