Evidence-led vulnerability intelligence · 2026-10-30 20:46 IST

CVE-2026-61728

SOCFortress CoPilot focuses on providing a single pane of glass for all your security operations needs. In affected snapshots preceding the respective 0.1.70 and 0.1.76 sink repairs, portal users, including `customer_user`, can submit stored markup through `POST /api/incidents/db_operations/alert/comment`. In `customer-portal/src/components/alerts/AlertDetails/AlertComment.vue`, `commentHtml` replaces newlines in `comment.comment` but passes the result to `v-html` without escaping or sanitizing HTML. When another user views the poisoned alert, stored script executes on the application origin; the same unsanitized rendering pattern affects server-stored SOC case, asset and health-check fields in `SocCaseNote.vue`, `SocCaseItem.vue`, `SocCaseAssetsItem.vue`, `SocAlertAssetsItem.vue` and `HealthcheckItem.vue`. The authentication store in `customer-portal/src/stores/auth.ts` persists both access and refresh tokens in JavaScript-readable storage, and `customer-portal/src/api/httpClient.ts` uses bearer headers rather than HttpOnly cookies. An injected script can steal both tokens, impersonate the viewer and obtain fresh tokens through `/auth/refresh`. If an analyst or administrator views the poisoned alert or case, this enables persistent privileged account takeover, cross-tenant data access, incident modification or deletion, and detection/response subversion. The health-check sink repair is first contained in version 0.1.70, while the comment and other SOC sink repairs are first contained in version 0.1.76. Version 0.1.76 is the provisional first release containing all observed repairs; grouped versus split CVE scope requires curator adjudication.

CRITICAL · 9.9

Executive briefing

The source record describes: SOCFortress CoPilot focuses on providing a single pane of glass for all your security operations needs. In affected snapshots preceding the respective 0.1.70 and 0.1.76 sink repairs, portal users, including `customer_user`, can submit stored markup through `POST /api/incidents/db_operations/alert/comment`. In `customer-portal/src/components/alerts/AlertDetails/AlertComment.vue`, `commentHtml` replaces newlines in `comment.comment` but passes the result to `v-html` without escaping or sanitizing HTML. When another user views the poisoned alert, stored script executes on the application origin; the same unsanitized rendering pattern affects server-stored SOC case, asset and health-check fields in `SocCaseNote.vue`, `SocCaseItem.vue`, `SocCaseAssetsItem.vue`, `SocAlertAssetsItem.vue` and `HealthcheckItem.vue`. The authentication store in `customer-portal/src/stores/auth.ts` persists both access and refresh tokens in JavaScript-readable storage, and `customer-portal/src/api/httpClient.ts` uses bearer headers rather than HttpOnly cookies. An injected script can steal both tokens, impersonate the viewer and obtain fresh tokens through `/auth/refresh`. If an analyst or administrator views the poisoned alert or case, this enables persistent privileged account takeover, cross-tenant data access, incident modification or deletion, and detection/response subversion. The health-check sink repair is first contained in version 0.1.70, while the comment and other SOC sink repairs are first contained in version 0.1.76. Version 0.1.76 is the provisional first release containing all observed repairs; grouped versus split CVE scope requires curator adjudication. The practical risk depends on whether an affected product/version is present, reachable and configured in an exploitable way. Review the affected-product evidence and linked vendor advisories before assigning exposure status.

Assessment: Potential exposure only — validate the installed product, exact version, configuration and vendor applicability before treating an asset as confirmed vulnerable.

Evidence confidence: Limited Evidence-derived, not an exploitability verdict

Severity & attack characteristics

9.9 / 10 · 3.1

CVSS vector:
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H

Attack vectorN
Attack complexityL
Privileges requiredL
User interactionN
ScopeC
Confidentiality impactH
Integrity impactH
Availability impactH

Technical explanation & impact

The technical mechanism is not expanded beyond the source description unless a referenced advisory supplies additional evidence. Read the linked vendor/CERT advisories for root-cause detail.

Potential impact must be interpreted from the published CVSS impact metrics and the affected component. A CVSS impact score is not proof that a particular asset is exploitable.

Weakness classification

CWE-79CWE-922

Affected products and versions

NVD has not supplied machine-readable vulnerable CPE product/version entries for this CVE. This is an information gap, not proof that no products are affected. Check the vendor advisory references below.

Remediation & validation

  1. Identify exposure by comparing the affected product and version ranges with your asset inventory, SBOM and externally exposed services.
  2. Review the linked vendor security advisory or patch notes. Upgrade to a vendor-confirmed fixed release; do not infer a fixed version from the CVE description.
  3. Until patched, consider restricting network access or disabling the affected feature where operationally safe. These are temporary controls, not a substitute for a vendor fix.
  4. Validate the remediation with a version check and vulnerability rescan, then retain change evidence.

No fixed version is displayed unless it is explicitly established by a vendor advisory. Follow the vendor's release notes for exact product and branch applicability.

Vendor advisories, patches & exploit references

Information gaps & confidence notes

These gaps indicate missing source data. CVE Watch does not fill them with guessed product, exploit or patch details.

Last enrichment: 2026-11-07T10:13:30+00:00 · Source last modified: 2026-11-05T22:18:50.630

Open NVD record ← Back to CVE Watch

Threat intelligence, made actionable · CVE data sourced from the NVD