HOL LogoGuard

Explore HOL

  • HOL home
  • AI agent registry
  • AI plugins
  • Open standards
  • HOL members

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
  • Gemini 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.
  • SponsorKeep agent security open: sponsor a project, place a banner, or fund a security initiative.
PricingEnterpriseOpen AppInstall Guard
  1. Guard
  2. Security
  3. CVEs
  4. CVE 2026 86832 metform 431 unauthenticated form entry data
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 Plugins
  • 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
  • Contact
  • Blog
  • GitHub
  • Privacy
  • Terms of Service
Settings

Copyright © 2026 HOL DAO LLC. All rights reserved.

Back to active CVEs
Unknown severity · Source severity not reportedCVE-2026-86832

MetForm < 4.3.1 - Unauthenticated Form Entry Data Disclosure via REST API

Answer in brief

CVE-2026-86832 records a Unknown severity vulnerability in MetForm < 4.3.1 - Unauthenticated Form Entry Data Disclosure via REST API. The current sources do not mark it as known exploited. The current feed maps Unknown/MetForm (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 3, 2026Updated Oct 3, 2026Source checked Oct 3, 2026First seen by HOL Oct 3, 2026Material review Oct 3, 2026
Upstream Advisory

Key facts

Risk
Unknown severitySource severity not reported
Exploitation
Not marked as known exploited
Affected software
1 mapped package or product
Fix availability
Available

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.

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 Unknown/MetForm (generic). Check affected ranges and fixed versions before updating.

Mapped affected packages and fixed versions
PackageAffected rangeFixed version
Unknown/MetFormgeneric>=0 <4.3.14.3.1

Recommended response

  1. 1Check inventory. Check lockfiles and deployed manifests for Unknown/MetForm.
  2. 2Review the reported fix. Update Unknown/MetForm to 4.3.1 if you use the affected versions. Test the change in a non-production environment first.

Evidence timeline and material changes

  1. Published upstream

    Oct 3, 2026

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

  2. Source modified

    Oct 3, 2026

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

  3. First seen by HOL

    Oct 3, 2026

Sources and claim methodology

  • Source referencewpscan.com
Upstream source description

The MetForm WordPress plugin before 4.3.1 does not properly restrict access to form submission data, allowing unauthenticated attackers to view submitter information through the REST API.

Quoted source text, attributed separately from HOL analysis.

Related CVEs

  • MetForm 2.2.1 - 4.3.0 - Unauthenticated Debug File Disclosure via HubSpot Forms IntegrationSame unknown/metform package
  • WPZOOM Connect: AI Chat, Click to Chat, Social Icons & Share Buttons <= 4.7.3 - Unauthenticated Sensitive Information Disclosure via HMAC Signature Collision (Missing Domain Separation) in HMAC Signature Domain-Separation Flaw in `/yamidoo/v1/customer`…Also CWE-200
  • WP Ultimate CSV Importer < 9.2 - Unauthenticated Imported Data Disclosure via Predictable Log PathAlso CWE-200
  • Pie Register < 3.8.4.14 - Unauthenticated User Email Disclosure via Invitation CodeAlso CWE-200
  • Ultra Addons Lite for Elementor <= 1.3.2 - Authenticated (Contributor+) Stored Cross-Site Scripting via Type Out WidgetSame generic ecosystem
  • Rich Showcase for Google Reviews <= 7.1.3 - Authenticated (Subscriber+) Stored Cross-Site Scripting via Google Review Text (imported via Places API)Same generic ecosystem

Record context

Vulnerability class
Arbitrary File Read
EPSS
Not reported
CWE IDs
CWE-200
Source
CVE List V5
Source checked
Oct 3, 2026
References
1 linked source
Open source record