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.
  • CIGARPoint your coding agent at the right lines and cut its token bill by about a third.

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.
  • Gauntlet benchmarkGuard tested with real coding agents: safe work runs, risky actions stop.

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 84987 code16sharp server side request forgery through
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

Get HOL Guard for your computer

HOL Guard is a free desktop app that watches what coding agents such as Claude Code, Codex and Cursor run, read and install, and asks you before anything risky happens.

  • Download for macOS
  • Windows download
  • Linux download

Free. macOS 13+ on Apple silicon, Windows x64, Linux AppImage. Other ways to install

Star HOL Guard on GitHub to download
Runs on
macOS 13 or later on Apple silicon, Windows x64 and Linux x86_64.
Price
Free. Paid plans add Guard Cloud for teams. See pricing
Where your data stays
On your computer. Guard Cloud is optional.
Token savings
33% to 38% lower spend across three coding agents in our CIGAR benchmark.

HOL

HOL builds open infrastructure for AI agents: HOL Guard, a directory of AI plugins and MCP servers, an AI agent registry and the open HCS standards.

  • GitHub (opens in a new tab)
  • X (Twitter) (opens in a new tab)
  • YouTube (opens in a new tab)
  • Telegram (opens in a new tab)

HOL Guard

  • What is HOL Guard
  • Features
  • Cut coding agent token costs (CIGAR)
  • Install Guard
  • Download the desktop app
  • Pricing
  • Guard for teams
  • Compare Guard
  • Release notes

Guard for your AI tool

  • Guard for Claude Code
  • Guard for Codex
  • Guard for Cursor
  • Guard for GitHub Copilot CLI
  • Guard for OpenCode
  • Guard for Pi and Oh My Pi
  • Guard for Hermes
  • Guard for OpenClaw
  • All supported AI tools

Research and security

  • Gauntlet: Guard tested with real agents
  • CIGAR token benchmark
  • Research
  • AI security hub
  • Security advisories
  • Active CVEs in AI tools
  • AI agent security guides
  • Extensions and coverage

Plugins and MCP servers

  • Browse AI plugins
  • New 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

AI agent registry

  • Best AI agents
  • Best ERC-8004 agents
  • Best Virtuals agents
  • Best A2A agents
  • Best x402 payable agents
  • Submit an ERC-8004 contract
  • Feature your agent

Developers

  • Guard docs
  • Documentation index
  • Developer hub
  • Registry API reference
  • OpenAPI spec
  • Registry OpenAPI spec
  • Run in Postman (opens in a new tab)
  • HCS standards

Company

  • About HOL
  • Blog
  • Contribute to HOL
  • Guard contributors
  • Sponsor
  • Advertise
  • Affiliate program
  • Contact

Copyright © 2026 HOL DAO LLC. All rights reserved.

  • Privacy
  • Terms of Service
Back to active CVEs
Medium · CVSS 5.4CVE-2026-84987GHSA-G6F8-C3X9-JV7F

code16/sharp: Server-side request forgery through an unanchored autocomplete endpoint checkCVE-2026-84987

Answer in brief

CVE-2026-84987 records a Medium severity (CVSS 5.4) vulnerability in code16/sharp: Server-side request forgery through an unanchored autocomplete endpoint check. The current sources do not mark it as known exploited. The current feed maps code16/sharp (composer), code16/sharp (composer), code16/sharp (composer), code16/sharp (composer) and additional mapped packages. Check affected ranges and fixed versions before updating.

Analysis pending evidence review

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

Published Nov 12, 2026Updated Nov 12, 2026Source checked Nov 12, 2026First seen by HOL Nov 12, 2026Material review Nov 12, 2026
Upstream Advisory

Key facts

Risk
Medium · CVSS 5.4
Exploitation
Not marked as known exploited
Affected software
6 mapped packages or products
Fix availability
Available

Why this deserves its current priority

CVSS is 5.4. 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 code16/sharp (composer), code16/sharp (composer), code16/sharp (composer), code16/sharp (composer) and additional mapped packages. Check affected ranges and fixed versions before updating.

Mapped affected packages and fixed versions
PackageAffected rangeFixed version
code16/sharpcomposer<9.23.09.23.0
code16/sharpcomposer>=10.0.0-beta.1,<10.0.0-beta.410.0.0-beta.4
code16/sharpcomposer<9.23.09.23.0
code16/sharpcomposer>=10.0.0-beta.1,<10.0.0-beta.410.0.0-beta.4
code16/sharppackagist>=0 <9.23.09.23.0
code16/sharppackagist>=10.0.0-beta.1 <10.0.0-beta.410.0.0-beta.4

Recommended response

  1. 1Check inventory. Check lockfiles and deployed manifests for code16/sharp, code16/sharp, code16/sharp.
  2. 2Review the reported fix. Update code16/sharp to 9.23.0; code16/sharp to 10.0.0-beta.4; code16/sharp to 9.23.0; code16/sharp to 10.0.0-beta.4; code16/sharp to 9.23.0; code16/sharp to 10.0.0-beta.4 if you use the affected versions. Test the change in a non-production environment first.

Evidence timeline and material changes

  1. Published upstream

    Nov 12, 2026

    Evidence: source:ghsa:source_dates:source-dates:record

  2. Source modified

    Nov 12, 2026

    Evidence: source:ghsa:source_dates:source-dates:record

  3. First seen by HOL

    Nov 12, 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
  • GitHub security advisorygithub.com
  • GitHub security advisorygithub.com
Upstream source description

### Impact An authenticated attacker can call the Autocomplete API with the configured endpoint as a substring to request another server-side route. ### Patches The problem has been patched in 9.23.0 and pre-release version 10.0.0-beta.4. The regex verifying the endpoint has been anchored to forbid substring injection. ### Workarounds Use `SharpFormAutocompleteRemoteField::setRemoteCallback()` instead of `SharpFormAutocompleteRemoteField::setRemoteEndpoint()`.

Quoted source text, attributed separately from HOL analysis.

Related CVEs

  • code16/sharp: Arbitrary class instantiation through the embed_key API parameterSame code16/sharp package
  • Server-side request forgery in the Prometheus data source resource APIAlso CWE-918
  • Joomla Extension - jdownloads.com - SSRF via external download URL field jDownloads < 4.1.8Also CWE-918

Record context

Vulnerability class
SSRF
EPSS
Not reported
CWE IDs
CWE-625, CWE-918
Source
GitHub Security Advisories
Source checked
Nov 12, 2026
References
7 linked sources
Open source record