CVE-2026-33487
Is CVE-2026-33487 real, exploitable, or a false positive? Here's the community verdict.
signals
public sources
High CVSS base score, but low real-world exploitation probability (EPSS). Likely less urgent than the score implies.
baseline read
auto · not a community verdict
Real, but low real-world risk
A genuine vulnerability on paper, but EPSS shows little real-world exploitation — the base score may overstate urgency. This is not the same as a false positive.
Based on CVSS · FIRST EPSS
Confirm or dispute →CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:N
goxmlsig provides XML Digital Signatures implemented in Go. Prior to version 1.6.0, the `validateSignature` function in `validate.go` goes through the references in the `SignedInfo` block to find one that matches the signed element's ID. In Go versions before 1.22, or when `go.mod` uses an older version, there is a loop variable capture issue. The code takes the address of the loop variable `_ref` instead of its value. As a result, if more than one reference matches the ID or if the loop logic is incorrect, the `ref` pointer will always end up pointing to the last element in the `SignedInfo.References` slice after the loop. goxmlsig version 1.6.0 contains a patch.
References
Published
Embed this verdict
[](https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-33487)<a href="https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-33487"><img src="https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-33487/badge.svg" alt="TruePositive verdict for CVE-2026-33487"></a>Live badge that updates automatically as the community verdict changes.
Community ground truth
Be the first practitioner to weigh in
So far this is only TruePositive's editorial baseline from public sources. Add your real-world verdict below — it becomes the signal the next person triaging this relies on.
🥇 The first 50 practitioners to contribute earn a Founding Contributor badge.
In your experience, is this finding real and exploitable?
awaiting field verdictsCurated baseline: A curated baseline from public sources, shown separately from community verdicts.
No account needed. Anonymous verdicts post as an unverified signal. Log in to make yours verified and earn reputation.
Field notes & remediation
Verdicts are the quick signal. Notes are the evidence and fixes behind them.
- 0
This scores high on paper (CVSS 7.5) but the real-world signal is low. It is not in CISA KEV and no public exploit was found, and near-term exploitation looks unlikely (EPSS about 0%). Verify your own exposure before treating it as urgent. It is reachable over the network with no authentication and no user interaction, which is the most dangerous profile. Not an emergency for most teams, but patch it in your normal cycle and check whether the affected component is actually exposed in your setup.
Add a field note or remediationoptional
Related CVEs
Same weakness: CWE-347.
- CVE-2025-59718CRIT 9.8KEVEPSS 66%
A improper verification of cryptographic signature vulnerability in Fortinet FortiOS 7.6.0 through 7.6.3, FortiOS 7.4.0 through 7.4.8, FortiOS 7.2.0 through 7.2.11, FortiOS 7.0.0 through 7.0.17, FortiProxy 7.6.0 through 7.6.3, FortiProxy 7.4.0 through 7.4.10, FortiProxy 7.2.0 through 7.2.14, FortiProxy 7.0.0 through 7.0.21, FortiSwitchManager 7.2.0 through 7.2.6, FortiSwitchManager 7.0.0 through 7.0.5 allows an unauthenticated attacker to bypass the FortiCloud SSO login authentication via a crafted SAML response message.
- CVE-2026-48558CRIT 10KEVEPSS 1%
SimpleHelp versions 5.5.15 and prior and 6.0 pre-release versions contain an authentication bypass vulnerability in the OIDC authentication flow. When OIDC authentication is configured, identity tokens submitted during login are accepted without verifying their cryptographic signature. In a vulnerable configuration, a remote, unauthenticated attacker can submit a forged token containing arbitrary identity claims to obtain a fully authenticated technician session. In some configurations, this may also allow bypass of multi-factor authentication. No user interaction is required.
- CVE-2026-10723MED 6.8
BIND may accept incorrect child-zone NSEC3 records as valid, which could allow an attacker to forge authenticated NXDOMAIN responses. This issue affects BIND 9 versions 9.18.0 through 9.18.50, 9.20.0 through 9.20.24, 9.21.0 through 9.21.23, 9.11.3-S1 through 9.18.50-S1, and 9.20.9-S1 through 9.20.24-S1.
- CVE-2026-49834MED 5.9
sigstore-go is a Go library for Sigstore signing and verification. Prior to 1.2.0, a verifier configured with WithTransparencyLog(N>1) or WithSignedCertificateTimestamps(N>1) counts verified witnesses per entry or per validation path rather than per log authority, allowing a single compromised transparency log or CT log to satisfy multi-log threshold requirements and defeat the multi-log policy. This issue is fixed in version 1.2.0.
- CVE-2026-40372CRIT 9.1EPSS 11%
Improper verification of cryptographic signature in ASP.NET Core allows an unauthorized attacker to elevate privileges over a network.
- CVE-2026-10795HIGH 8.1Real · low riskEPSS 4%
The UpdraftPlus: WP Backup & Migration Plugin plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Authentication Bypass in all versions up to, and including, 1.26.4 via the UpdraftPlus_Remote_Communications_V2::wp_loaded function. This is due to insufficient validation of the remote communications message format, where signature verification can be bypassed and unchecked decryption return values collapse to a predictable all-zero encryption key. This makes it possible for unauthenticated attackers to forge arbitrary RPC commands and run them as the connected administrator, such as uploading and activating a malicious plugin, which ultimately leads to remote code execution.