Aggregator

Bank Cybersecurity Veteran Moona Ederveen-Schneider on Demystifying the Process
Enterprises need to start planning and executing their transition to post-quantum cryptography, and the best way to get started is through tabletop exercises - marshaling internal stakeholders in security, HR, legal and finance, said Moona Ederveen-Schneider, founder of consultancy Resilia Connect.

A vulnerability marked as problematic has been reported in Your Journey Plugin up to 1.9.8 on WordPress. The impacted element is an unknown function. This manipulation causes cross site scripting. This vulnerability is handled as CVE-2023-3933. The attack can be initiated remotely. There is not any exploit available.

A vulnerability described as problematic has been identified in Winters Plugin up to 1.4.3 on WordPress. This affects an unknown function. Such manipulation leads to cross site scripting. This vulnerability is uniquely identified as CVE-2023-3962. The attack can be launched remotely. No exploit exists.

A vulnerability classified as problematic has been found in nsc Plugin up to 1.0 on WordPress. This impacts an unknown function. Performing a manipulation results in cross site scripting. This vulnerability was named CVE-2023-3965. The attack may be initiated remotely. There is no available exploit.

A vulnerability classified as problematic has been found in Social Media Share Buttons & Social Sharing Icons Plugin up to 2.8.5 on WordPress. Impacted is an unknown function. This manipulation causes cross-site request forgery. The identification of this vulnerability is CVE-2023-5602. It is possible to initiate the attack remotely. There is no exploit available.

A vulnerability classified as problematic has been found in Skype Legacy Buttons Plugin up to 3.1 on WordPress. This affects an unknown function of the component Shortcode Handler. This manipulation causes cross site scripting. This vulnerability is tracked as CVE-2023-5615. The attack is possible to be carried out remotely. No exploit exists.

A vulnerability classified as problematic has been found in Modern Footnotes Plugin up to 1.4.16 on WordPress. This affects an unknown part of the component Shortcode Handler. This manipulation causes cross site scripting. This vulnerability is registered as CVE-2023-5618. Remote exploitation of the attack is possible. No exploit is available.

A vulnerability classified as problematic has been found in Soisy Pagamento Rateale Plugin up to 6.0.1 on WordPress. This affects an unknown function. The manipulation leads to missing authorization. This vulnerability is listed as CVE-2023-5132. The attack may be initiated remotely. There is no available exploit.

A vulnerability was found in SALESmanago Plugin up to 3.2.4 on WordPress. It has been classified as critical. The affected element is an unknown function. This manipulation causes improper output neutralization for logs. This vulnerability appears as CVE-2023-4939. The attacker needs to be present on the local network. There is no available exploit.

A vulnerability was found in Add Custom Body Class Plugin up to 1.4.1 on WordPress and classified as problematic. This vulnerability affects unknown code. The manipulation results in cross site scripting. This vulnerability is cataloged as CVE-2023-5205. The attack may be launched remotely. There is no exploit available.

A vulnerability was found in EventON Plugin up to 2.2.2 on WordPress. It has been declared as problematic. Impacted is an unknown function. Such manipulation leads to cross site scripting. This vulnerability is documented as CVE-2023-4635. The attack can be executed remotely. There is not any exploit available.

A vulnerability was found in Advanced Menu Widget Plugin up to 0.4.1 on WordPress. It has been declared as problematic. This issue affects some unknown processing of the component Shortcode Handler. Executing a manipulation can lead to cross site scripting. The identification of this vulnerability is CVE-2023-5085. The attack may be launched remotely. There is no exploit available.

Breaking the Patch Sound Barrier: Your Vulnerability Remediation Will Not Keep Up With AI Exploit Speed. So?

Many years ago while at Gartner, I wrote a blog post where I defined the concept of the “Patch Sound Barrier.” (original via Archive if you don’t believe that I was that smart back in 2013 :-)) This was an idea of a maximum speed that a given organization could fix a given vulnerability. If you full throttle beyond that, the engines will whirr louder, but the plane won’t fly faster, essentially.

Gemini illustration for this

The discussion arose from people constantly asking about the “optimal” or “desired” speed of patching. In my time as an analyst, I reviewed plenty of policies as well as “operational practices” (which is what people call it when they don’t actually follow their own policy “because reasons” :-)). BTW, I utterly hated “30 days flat” policies that say that vulnerabilities are fixed within 30 days no matter what, and always steered people to more nuanced risk-based policies.

One concept emerged: Given a particular IT environment, there is often a maximum physical speed at which an organization can patch. That is my Patch Sound Barrier.

Why bring this up now? Because the speed of vulnerability discovery is accelerating and so does exploit dev speed, but for many organizations, the speed of remediation simply cannot be accelerated. It is not accelerating, because it cannot. Full stop.

In the past, my guidance was to focus on better vulnerability prioritization so that you fix “real risks” using CISA KEV, EPSS, CVSS (OK, maybe not in the 2020s) and various tools that analyze the data and give you a ranked list.

But today we will have more vulns and prioritization tools won’t save you. If you have 1,000,000 vulns and 1000 are “risky for you” (however defined, let’s say you have the magical tool that reveals the true and real risk for your organization … ha), you can reduce the risk enough by fixing the 1000, if you have the bandwidth to fix the 1000 (in theory). Now, imagine you have 10m vulns (thanks AI!) and say 5000 are risky. But your bandwidth is there to only fix the 1000. So your risk goes up anyway, while you work as hard as before.

Now, you might say, “Anton, you’re making absolute statements. Surely things are flexible given enough money, enough talented engineers, and these days, enough LLM tokens?”

This is true in theory. But notice I said, “given the IT environment.”

There are definitely methods for accelerating remediation in a modern, beautifully and carefully designed environment (check our podcast episode 109 for those ideas).

But let’s review the scoreboard:

• The speed of vulnerability discovery? Increased.
• The speed of exploit development? Increased.
• The speed of remediation in legacy environments? Unchanged.

OK, some of you might still think “cannot” is too harsh. But people at modern organizations — all DevOps, CI/CD, open source and now AI agents — sometimes cannot comprehend what it takes to deal with a 1990s-era “DBA from Hell” who views his beloved database as a pet, not cattle, and will only allow a patch twice a year on a rigid schedule. Don’t even get me started on OT or the sea of unpatched edge appliances out there (there are “forti” millions of them there, I hear …)

So, yes, I spent years providing recommendations on how to deal with this “vulnerability flood.” This isn’t just about the current fascination with AI; at one point, the “boogeyman” was Metasploit, or something else. Or, as old people told me, SATAN / SANTA in the mid-1990s.

The fact remains: there are more risky vulns than you have time / capability. Today. AI can find the bugs in milliseconds, but it still can’t convince a legacy middleware admin to reboot a production server on a Tuesday. Or in July. Or in 2026. Or this freakin’ century …

So far it sounds like a rehash of my past ideas, but I actually want to leverage some thoughts from Phil Venables’ blog series about speed (“Things Are Getting Wild: Re-Tool Everything for Speed” and “Cybersecurity’s Need for Speed & Where To Find It”)

Before we go there, we must remember about reducing risk without remediating vulnerabilities. This was often the most insightful bit I shared with clients back in my analyst days: Sometimes your focus must be on reducing your risk, rather than fixing the bug. Kinda “assume the breach”, but for vulns: “assume you can’t patch” then what?

So, how do you get speed to break through the sound barrier (alert: these do NOT apply to everybody):

• Brutally destroy legacy systems; if it cannot be patched quickly and safely, don’t use it. Think “SaaS and Chromebooks” (and cloud) world. Don’t think 1980s ERP crap.
• Modernize. Kill pets. Grow cattle. Ideally, get replaceable tiny insects as cattle. They are simpler, more replaceable and less cute. Think “pets -> cattle -> insects.” [P.S. I do not recall where I got this idea, if I stole this from you, I am sorry — happy to restore credit if you tell me]
• Evolve IT culture to accept automatic patching, everywhere. If Chrome can autopatch 1b systems safely for 10 years, perhaps there is a way to do it, eh?
• Eliminate the risk entirely (e.g., via micro-segmentation or data avoidance) when patching is impossible. If you cannot remove the vuln, remove the connection, the system or the entire business process.
• Shift focus from patching to overall IT lifecycle velocity by decoupling the application from infrastructure. In faster IT, patching is faster. Fight friction, just like you fight toil.

These are some ideas on how to shift from “floor the gas” to “build a supersonic plane” to break the patch sound barrier! Are you still debating patch cycles, or are you architecting your way out of the need for them? Please share more!

Enjoy … living in interesting times!

Breaking the Patch Sound Barrier: Your Vulnerability Remediation Will Not Keep Up With AI Exploit… was originally published in Anton on Security on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.

The post Breaking the Patch Sound Barrier: Your Vulnerability Remediation Will Not Keep Up With AI Exploit… appeared first on Security Boulevard.

A vulnerability was found in getarcaneapp arcane up to 1.17.2 and classified as critical. This impacts an unknown function of the file /api/templates/fetch. Such manipulation of the argument url leads to server-side request forgery. This vulnerability is listed as CVE-2026-40242. The attack may be performed from remote. There is no available exploit. It is suggested to upgrade the affected component.

A vulnerability has been found in labring FastGPT up to 4.14.10.4 and classified as critical. This affects an unknown function. This manipulation causes improper access controls. This vulnerability is tracked as CVE-2026-40252. The attack is possible to be carried out remotely. No exploit exists. The affected component should be upgraded.

A vulnerability, which was classified as problematic, was found in Microsoft Edge on Android. The impacted element is an unknown function. The manipulation results in clickjacking. This vulnerability is identified as CVE-2026-33119. The attack can be executed remotely. There is not any exploit available. You should upgrade the affected component.

A vulnerability, which was classified as critical, has been found in temporal up to 1.28.3/1.29.5/1.30.3. The affected element is an unknown function of the file streaming AdminService/StreamWorkflowReplicationMessages endpoint. The manipulation leads to missing authentication. This vulnerability is referenced as CVE-2026-5724. Remote exploitation of the attack is possible. No exploit is available. It is advisable to upgrade the affected component.

A vulnerability classified as problematic was found in phpseclib up to 1.0.27/2.0.52/3.0.50. Impacted is the function SSH2::get_binary_packet. Executing a manipulation can lead to observable timing discrepancy. The identification of this vulnerability is CVE-2026-40194. The attack may be launched remotely. There is no exploit available. Upgrading the affected component is advised.

A vulnerability classified as problematic has been found in Microsoft Edge. This issue affects some unknown processing. Performing a manipulation results in an unknown weakness. This vulnerability was named CVE-2026-33118. The attack may be initiated remotely. There is no available exploit. It is recommended to upgrade the affected component.

A vulnerability was found in SonicWall SMA1000. It has been classified as problematic. This impacts an unknown function of the component SSL VPN. The manipulation leads to observable response discrepancy. This vulnerability is referenced as CVE-2026-4113. Remote exploitation of the attack is possible. No exploit is available.