IBM Guardium Data Protection is affected by multiple vulnerabilities.

Why this deserves its current priority

A CVSS score is not reported in the current record. The current sources do not mark it as known exploited. Treat this as a source-backed prioritization signal, not a statement about your environment.

Affected scope and exposure questions

The current feed maps IBM/Guardium Data Protection (generic). Check affected ranges and fixed versions before updating.

Recommended response

1. 1Check inventory. Check lockfiles and deployed manifests for IBM/Guardium Data Protection.
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

   Sep 18, 2026

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

2. Source modified

   Sep 18, 2026

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

3. First seen by HOL

   Sep 18, 2026

Sources and claim methodology

• Source referenceibm.com

Related CVEs

• IBM Guardium Data Protection is affected by multiple vulnerabilities.Same ibm/guardium data protection package
• CordysCRM: Authenticated SQL injection via `sort.name` on `POST /account-pool/page`Also CWE-89
• Suricata ippair: hash collision can cause incorrect state reuse across IPv4 and IPv6Same generic ecosystem
• Suricata windows: unquoted LocalSystem service ImagePath can allow local privilege escalationSame generic ecosystem
• Suricata dhcp: unbounded transactions in unidirectional traffic can lead to resource exhaustionSame generic ecosystem
• Suricata datasets: NULL pointer dereference in JSON/NDJSON dataset loadingSame generic ecosystem