Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:NSummary
CVE-2026-33664 is a high-severity Cross-site Scripting (CWE-79) vulnerability in Kestra Kestra. Its CVSS base score is 7.3 (High).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Browser Session Hijacking (T1185); ranked at the 17th percentile by exploit likelihood (below the median); it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog; a public proof-of-concept is referenced.
The strongest mitigations our analysis identified map to SA-11 (Developer Testing and Evaluation) and SI-10 (Information Input Validation) — see the control section below for these in your framework.
Deeper analysis AI-assisted summary
Synthesised by an AI model from the NVD description and linked references — a reading aid, not an authoritative source.
CVE-2026-33664 is a cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability (CWE-79) affecting Kestra, an open-source event-driven orchestration platform, in versions up to and including 1.3.3. The issue arises because user-supplied flow YAML metadata fields—specifically description, inputs[].displayName, and inputs[].description—are rendered through the Markdown.vue component with html: true enabled. The resulting HTML is then injected into the DOM using Vue's v-html directive without any sanitization, allowing malicious payloads to be executed.
A flow author with low privileges (PR:L) can exploit this by embedding arbitrary JavaScript in the affected YAML fields. When any user views or interacts with the flow in their browser, the JavaScript executes in that user's context. Exploitation requires low attack complexity over the network (AV:N/AC:L/UI:R) but some user interaction, with potential for high confidentiality and integrity impacts (C:H/I:H). Notably, inputs[].displayName enables zero-click execution upon viewing.
The GitHub security advisory (GHSA-v2mc-8q95-g7hp) details the vulnerability, distinguishing it from CVE-2026-29082/GHSA-r36c-83hm-pc8j, which affects different components (FilePreview.vue) and data sources with higher interaction requirements. As of publication, it remains unclear if a patch is available for this issue.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2026-16430
Vulnerability Data
Kestra is an open-source, event-driven orchestration platform Versions up to and including 1.3.3 render user-supplied flow YAML metadata fields — description, inputs[].displayName, inputs[].description — through the Markdown.vue component instantiated with html: true. The resulting HTML is injected into the DOM…
more
via Vue's v-html without any sanitization. This allows a flow author to embed arbitrary JavaScript that executes in the browser of any user who views or interacts with the flow. This is distinct from GHSA-r36c-83hm-pc8j / CVE-2026-29082, which covers only FilePreview.vue rendering .md files from execution outputs. The present finding affects different components, different data sources, and requires significantly less user interaction (zero-click for input.displayName). As of time of publication, it is unclear if a patch is available.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
—
V1.1.2V1.3.2
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Developer testing and evaluation can discover missing or incorrect input neutralization through targeted web-application tests.
Input validation directly enforces neutralization of untrusted data before it reaches web output generation.
Output filtering can catch or sanitize unneutralized script content before it is served to users.
Mitigating Controls (NIST CSF 2.0) AI
Derived directly from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry via our AI-authored CWE→CSF cross-walk (authority under review) — links open the control.
Secure SDLC practices directly target introduction of XSS via coding standards/testing (mostly), yet the single broad outcome leaves many specific neutralization vectors unaddressed (partial).
Patching and EOL replacement can remediate known XSS instances in libraries or frameworks (partial) but do nothing to enforce input neutralization in application code (none).
Mitigating Controls (ISO/IEC 27001:2022 Annex A) AI
Derived directly from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry via our AI-authored CWE→ISO cross-walk (authority under review) — links open the control.
Secure-coding testing and automated code-analysis tools are applied to detect improper neutralization of script-related content during web-page generation.
Knowledge exchange on emerging attack techniques and patches reduces the likelihood that cross-site scripting flaws remain unaddressed in deployed applications.
Operational indicators of compromise for web-application attacks can be incorporated into WAF or input-filtering rules, lowering the likelihood that unsanitized data reaches the browser.
Requiring language-specific secure-coding standards and automated scanning during the SDLC catches missing output encoding or improper neutralization of untrusted data before the software reaches production.
Secure-coding standards, SAST scans and removal of insecure code samples together eliminate the failure to neutralize script content that produces cross-site scripting flaws.
Webpage malware scanning and block-listing of known malicious sites reduce the likelihood that reflected or stored script payloads reach a user’s browser.