SonicWall warned customers of two security flaws affecting end-of-life Global Management System (GMS) systems that will not be patched. Global Management System (GMS) helps IT admins deploy and manage thousands of SonicWall security appliances from a single interface, but SonicWall has officially replaced it with the Network Security Manager (NSM) management platform. The two vulnerabilities were found and reported by Pentest-Tools security researchers and affect systems running SonicWall GMS 9.5.2 and earlier. The first GMS flaw disclosed this week is tracked as CVE-2026-109593, and it enables unauthenticated attackers with network access to vulnerable instances (running GMS 9.5.2 and earlier versions) to steal sensitive information by reading internal files. SonicWall also flagged a second security issue (CVE-2026-109594) that can let threat actors with high privileges access or modify information stored in the GMS database through low-complexity SQL Injection attacks.
The US Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) warned federal agencies that attackers have started exploiting a recently patched high-severity WordPress vulnerability in the wild. Tracked as CVE-2026-119977, this high-severity WordPress Core flaw stems from a Time-of-check Time-of-use (TOCTOU) race condition and was reported by Picus Security researcher Umut Bayram. Successful exploitation can let remote threat actors without privileges execute code on the server in high-complexity attacks due to predictable, web-accessible staging paths used during full-package core upgrades. "A weakness in the WordPress upgrade process which can lead to remote code execution during the upgrade window," the WordPress security team said on October 28 when it released WordPress 7.1.4 with patches to address this security issue. "Because this is a security release, it is recommended that you update your sites immediately."
U.S. Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) adds WordPress flaw to its Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog. The U.S. Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) added a WordPress flaw, tracked as CVE-2026-119977 (CVSS score of 8.1), to its Known Exploited Vulnerabilities (KEV) catalog. CVE-2026-119977 is a high-severity remote code execution vulnerability affecting WordPress versions 4.7 through 7.1.3. It stems from predictable, web-accessible staging directories used during core updates. Unauthenticated attackers could exploit a race condition to execute malicious code on the server while an update is in progress, potentially compromising the website. WordPress addressed the flaw in version 7.1.4. Threat actors began scanning for CVE-2026-119977 shortly after WordPress released the security update. Wordfence recorded more than 18,500 requests targeting vulnerable staging installer paths within the first 21 hours. However, these figures document exploitation attempts, not confirmed successful compromises. “Wordfence telemetry shows that threat actors are already actively attempting to exploit the vulnerability. The first match for our new firewall rule arrived nine minutes after deployment. During the first 21 hours, we recorded more than 18,500 requests targeting staged setup-config.php installer paths.” reads the report published by Wordfence. “Two of the largest sources repeatedly polled small groups of sites for roughly 14.5 hours, behavior consistent with trying to catch the brief upgrade window. Other sources tested many staging-directory and version-name variations.” According to Binding Operational Directive (BOD) 22-01: Reducing the Significant Risk of Known Exploited Vulnerabilities, FCEB agencies have to address the identified vulnerabilities by the due date to protect their networks against attacks exploiting the flaws in the catalog. Experts also recommend that private organizations review the Catalog and address the vulnerabilities in their infrastructure. CISA orders federal agencies to fix the flaw by November 6, 2026. Follow me on Twitter: @securityaffairs and Facebook and Mastodon Pierluigi Paganini (SecurityAffairs – hacking, CVE-2026-119977)
The U.S. Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) has added a security flaw in WordPress Core to the Known Exploited Vulnerabilities (KEV) catalog, citing evidence of active exploitation. The high-severity vulnerability, tracked as CVE-2026-119977 (CVSS score: 8.1), is a case of Time-of-check Time-of-use (TOCTOU) race condition that could be exploited to achieve arbitrary code
Google has expanded its Cloud Vulnerability Reward Program (VRP) with a new top-tier reward for high-impact architectural security flaws. Starting this month, researchers can earn $250,000 for Root-in-Cloud bugs, including tenant-isolation bypasses and complex cross-service logic flaws that let attackers gain full administrative control over arbitrary Google Cloud organizations. "To earn this premier reward, you must demonstrate full administrative control, the equivalent of 'roles/owner' or complete IAM control, over arbitrary Google Cloud organizations or projects with no prior access or special project setup," said Chris Betz, Google Cloud's Chief Information Security Officer (CISO). "Additionally, valid vulnerability reports demonstrating remote code execution (RCE) in underlying Google production infrastructure (Borg) or achieving root-in-prod will automatically be evaluated by the Google Cloud VRP panel for root-in-cloud eligibility."
Hackers who breached Harvard University's Alumni Affairs and Development systems in November 2025 stole data linked to more than 850,000 unique email addresses, according to breach notification service Have I Been Pwned. Harvard is a private Ivy League research university with over 20,000 faculty and staff, over 24,500 undergraduate and graduate students, and more than 400,000 alumni worldwide. As the university discovered on November 18, 2025, the attackers gained access to the personal information of students, alumni, donors, staff, and faculty members, including email addresses, telephone numbers, home and business addresses, event attendance records, donation details, and "biographical information pertaining to University fundraising and alumni engagement activities." However, Klara Jelinkova, Harvard's Vice President and University Chief Information Officer (CIO), said the breached IT systems didn't store Social Security numbers, passwords, payment card information, or financial information.
NIS2 Article 20 makes management bodies answerable for the access controls they approve, and boards are starting to ask for proof that those controls work. NIS2 board accountability gives directors a more direct role in cybersecurity. Under Article 20, the management bodies of essential and important entities must approve the cybersecurity risk-management measures required by the directive, oversee their implementation, and can be held liable for infringements, subject to national law. That obligation is live across most of the EU, with four member states going to the Court of Justice in July for failing to notify full transposition. Access control is one of the required measures. Directors are not expected to decide who gets administrator rights or review individual user accounts. They do, however, need to know that access is being controlled, that someone has responsibility for managing the risk, and that problems are being addressed. An estimated 160,000 entities fall within the scope of NIS2 across the EU. Approval is only part of the job Article 20 requires management bodies to both approve cybersecurity risk-management measures and oversee their implementation. It also requires the members of those bodies to undergo cybersecurity training, and to offer comparable training to employees on a regular basis. The measures themselves are set out in Article 21. They include access control policies and asset management, along with the use of multi-factor authentication or continuous authentication solutions where appropriate. Many organizations have traditionally left these decisions to security and IT teams. Under NIS2, the board still needs to know whether the measures it approved are being implemented. Day-to-day responsibility can remain with the CISO and IT teams. The difficulty comes when the person responsible for a risk does not control the budget, systems, or people needed to address it. Greece’s implementation goes further in defining who carries that responsibility. Its NIS2 law requires essential and important entities to appoint a suitably qualified member of their organization as an Information and Communication Systems Security Officer. The officer coordinates compliance, must have the resources needed to do the job, and operates independently of the company’s data protection officer. Access problems also need to reach the board in terms that it can act on. If an MFA rollout has failed or administrators have more access than they need, the board needs to understand the risk of leaving it unresolved. The CISO may be responsible for the risk without controlling the budget or teams needed to fix it. The board needs evidence Board reports often show what the access control policy requires, rather than whether it is being followed. For example, a company policy will likely require MFA and the removal of accounts when employees leave. However, the board also needs to know about the exceptions, including old accounts that remain active, excessive privileges, MFA exemptions that have never been reviewed, and suppliers whose access has outlasted their contracts. The board needs information about how the controls are working in practice. In a NIS2 access management report from European password and secrets manager Passwork, regulators from two national cybersecurity authorities and independent security leaders describe boards that have absorbed the liability change and now ask for proof that controls work, where they once accepted a summary of the policy. Organizations should be able to show who can access critical systems, why that access was granted, who approved it, how long it is valid, and when it was changed or revoked. The board needs to know whether that evidence exists and what it says about material access risk. Personal liability raises the stakes Implementation is still catching up in parts of Europe. In July 2026, the European Commission referred Ireland, Spain, France, and the Netherlands to the Court of Justice of the European Union for failing to notify full transposition of NIS2 into national law. The Commission also asked the Court to impose financial sanctions. For organizations in countries where NIS2 has been transposed, regulators have significant enforcement powers. For essential entities, member states must set a maximum fine of at least €10,000,000 or 2% of the global annual turnover, whichever is higher. Important entities are subject to a lower maximum threshold, of at least €7,000,000 or 1.4% of their global annual turnover, in a similar capacity. Article 32 also allows competent authorities, in specific circumstances, to seek the temporary prohibition of someone at CEO or legal representative level from exercising managerial functions in an essential entity. This can happen where enforcement action has failed to produce the required response. It is not an automatic consequence of a cyber incident. Article 20 separately requires member states to ensure that management bodies can be held liable for infringements of Article 21, subject to the applicable rules under national law. Approving the policy is not the end of the board’s involvement. It also needs information on whether the policy is being followed and what is happening with known problems. Verizon’s 2026 Data Breach Investigations Report found credential abuse somewhere in the chain of 39% of breaches, more than any other vector. Stolen credentials also circulate at scale, as the exposed database of 24 billion credential records reported in June showed. Directors should expect an answer on which accounts and credentials reach critical systems, who is responsible for them, and whether that access is being controlled. Give access risk an owner with authority CISOs briefing their boards should be able to say who owns access-control risk and whether that person has the authority to address it. The board also needs evidence of what is happening. When an access problem is identified, someone needs to be responsible for getting it fixed. That might mean removing unnecessary privileges or dealing with an MFA exception that has remained in place. If the fix depends on another team’s budget or resources, the board needs to know. Board reporting should show whether the controls it approved are working, flag significant exceptions that remain unresolved, and who is accountable for closing them. Author the author: Kirsten Doyle has spent 27 years writing about technology and has covered the industry through some of its most significant shifts. Her focus areas include cybersecurity, cloud, channel, enterprise IT, and data centre operations. She works across many formats: news, features, white papers, eBooks, and thought leadership. Kirsten has many years of experience in journalism and editing for both print and digital media, and has supported plenty of go-to-market and PR programmes with technically grounded writing that holds up to scrutiny. She is also a regular writer at Bora. Follow me on Twitter: @securityaffairs and Facebook and Mastodon Pierluigi Paganini (SecurityAffairs – hacking, NIS2)
Threat actors are attempting to exploit an unpatched maximum-severity security vulnerability in the CryptoPayment Gateway WordPress plugin, according to findings from Defused Cyber. The vulnerability in question is CVE-2026-81648, which carries a CVSS score of 10.0. Successful exploitation of the flaw could permit unauthenticated users to delete arbitrary files on the server and extract
Cybersecurity researchers have disclosed details of a cyber espionage campaign targeting Israel and the Kurdistan Region of Iraq by an Iran state-aligned threat actor between August and October 2026. According to a report published by Dream Research Labs, the campaign has led to the compromise of a high-profile individual in Israel, along with additional compromises affecting a government cloud
OpenAI has just confirmed that it's rolling out ChatGPT Work capabilities directly into regular Chat, while also combining usage allowances across ChatGPT and Codex. In an email seen by BleepingComputer, OpenAI noted that it will test a combined experience for Chat and Work tabs in the coming weeks, initially with a small group of users. If you're selected for the test, you'll be able to move from ordinary conversations to more complex tasks without switching modes. "This will enable you to move from exploring an idea to having ChatGPT carry it through, all in one place," OpenAI explained. "You can bring in your files and plugins and ask ChatGPT to build a website, create a presentation, or do things for you on the web, while reviewing and guiding its work." The combined experience will initially be tested with a small group of users before OpenAI expands it to more people.
Confirm this action.
Leaving now will discard your changes.