Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:HCVSS and EPSS are reproduced from their sources (NVD, FIRST EPSS). Risk Priority is our own derived reading, not an NVD score.
Summary
CVE-2026-42524 is a high-severity Cross-site Scripting (CWE-79) vulnerability in Jenkins Html Publisher. Its CVSS base score is 8.0 (High).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Browser Session Hijacking (T1185); ranked at the 20th percentile by exploit likelihood (below the median); it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog.
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-2026-42524 is a stored cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability, classified under CWE-79, affecting the Jenkins HTML Publisher Plugin in versions 427 and earlier. The flaw arises because the plugin does not properly escape job names and URLs when generating the legacy wrapper file, enabling attackers to inject malicious scripts that persist in the published HTML content.
Attackers with Item/Configure permission on a Jenkins job can exploit this vulnerability over the network with low complexity by configuring a job with a maliciously crafted name or URL. When users with access to the job view the resulting HTML publication in their browser, the unescaped content triggers XSS execution in the victim's session. The CVSS v3.1 base score of 8.0 (AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H) reflects high confidentiality, integrity, and availability impacts, though it requires user interaction and low privileges.
The official Jenkins security advisory at https://www.jenkins.io/security/advisory/2026-04-29/#SECURITY-3706 provides guidance on mitigation and patching for this issue, published on 2026-04-29.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2026-26226
Vulnerability Data
Jenkins HTML Publisher Plugin 427 and earlier does not escape job name and URL in the legacy wrapper file, resulting in a stored cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability exploitable by attackers with Item/Configure permission.
- 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.