Attack ChainAIDerived
Hypothetical attack flow derived from CVE metadata – not a confirmed exploit chain
-
AccessIdentify exposed PowerJob server transport port
-
DeliverySend crafted request to /friend/process
-
ExploitBypass absent authentication on endpoint
-
ExecutionTrigger RCE in Server-Worker transport handler
-
PersistExecute arbitrary commands as server process
-
ImpactPivot to workers and scheduled jobs
Vulnerability Assessment
| Weakness |
CWE
OWASP Top 10:2025
A07:2025 - Authentication Failures
ASVS 5.0
V6 - Authentication Authentication mechanism validation
MITRE ATT&CK
2 techniques across 2 tactics: Defense Evasion, Initial Access The technique list with ATT&CK links and the kill-chain view is part of the Basic plan and up. |
| Exploitation Conditions | Exploitation requires network reachability to the PowerJob server's Server-Worker transport layer (the port the server exposes for worker communication, commonly deployed via the project's docker-compose). The specific attack surface is the /friend/process endpoint, which performs no authentication - so any actor able to reach that port can send the malicious payload against default configurations of PowerJob 4.x through 5.1.2. The primary limiting factor is exposure: in well-segmented deployments the server-worker transport port is internal and not internet-facing, so realistic risk concentrates on flat networks, cloud deployments that expose the port, or post-perimeter attackers. No authentication, user interaction, or non-default feature toggle is required once the endpoint is reachable. |
| Impact | This is a high-priority issue with strongly self-consistent signals. The provided CVSS 3.1 vector (AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H = 9.8) describes unauthenticated, low-complexity network RCE, which the description directly corroborates ('unauthenticated remote code execution' in the /friend/process endpoint of the Server-Worker transport layer). Unlike many inflated 9.8 kernel/UAF ratings, the CVSS here appears well-calibrated: a real RCE in an unauthenticated internal transport endpoint genuinely yields C:H/I:H/A:H. Publicly available exploit code exists (a PoC gist and a dedicated GitHub PoC repo, github.com/unpredictable21/CVE-2026-75429_PowerJob_friend_process_RCE), which raises real-world weaponization potential. EPSS is only 0.62% (47th percentile), which is modest - this reflects PowerJob's narrower deployment footprint relative to ubiquitous software rather than low exploitability, and typically lags fresh PoC publication. No CISA KEV entry and no SSVC data were provided. Note two data-quality caveats: CWE-287 (authentication bypass) understates the true weakness class (an RCE, likely deserialization/CWE-502 or code injection/CWE-94 reachable because the endpoint is unauthenticated), and the CPE/affected-version fields are junk placeholders ('n/a'), so precise version boundaries rely solely on the description string (4.x through 5.1.2). |
| Exploit ScenarioDerived | An attacker locates a PowerJob server whose Server-Worker transport port is reachable and sends a crafted request to the unauthenticated /friend/process endpoint, triggering code execution on the server host. Because the endpoint requires no authentication and public exploit code exists (PoC gist and GitHub repo), an attacker can adapt working proof-of-concept rather than developing an exploit from scratch. Successful exploitation yields full command execution in the context of the PowerJob server process, enabling scheduler takeover and pivoting to connected workers. |
Get an e-mail when this CVE is exploited, patched or re-scored. Free account.
Alert meAnalysisAIv1 – Sep 16, 2026
Unauthenticated remote code execution in PowerJob 4.x through 5.1.2 lets any actor that can reach the server's Server-Worker transport port send crafted messages to the /friend/process endpoint and execute arbitrary code in the PowerJob process context; the assessed CVSS 3.1 base score is 9.8 (AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H) and the root cause class is CWE-287 improper authentication. Publicly available exploit code exists (a PoC repository and a gist are linked from the CVE record), but the CVE is not listed in CISA KEV, so active exploitation is not confirmed; EPSS is 0.62% (47th percentile), notably low relative to the 9.8 severity because exploitation is gated by network exposure rather than by any authentication or user-interaction prerequisite. Realistic risk therefore concentrates on flat networks, cloud deployments that publish the transport port (including default docker-compose setups), and post-perimeter attackers, while well-segmented deployments that keep worker communication internal are substantially less exposed.
RemediationAI
No vendor-released patch is identified at time of analysis and no exact fixed version appears in the available data, so PowerJob 4.x through 5.1.2 should be treated as vulnerable until an upstream fix is published; track https://github.com/PowerJob/PowerJob and the NVD/EUVD/VulDB advisories (https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-75429, EUVD-2026-71453, https://vuldb.com/vuln/398901) for a patched release and upgrade as soon as one is tagged, verifying the exact version against the vendor's own release notes rather than assuming 5.1.3 or any other number. Until then, the primary and most effective control is to remove network reachability to the Server-Worker transport port: bind the listener to an internal interface, restrict it via host firewall or cloud security-group rules to the known worker CIDRs, and strip any port publishing from docker-compose or Kubernetes manifests (the upstream docker-compose.yml at https://github.com/PowerJob/PowerJob/blob/master/docker-compose.yml is a useful baseline for identifying exposed ports) - with the trade-off that static allowlists break dynamic or autoscaling worker pools and require a service-discovery or overlay-network substitute. Secondary controls include monitoring and alerting on unexpected peers connecting to /friend/process, and rotating or decommissioning any instance whose transport port has been internet-exposed; note that a generic HTTP WAF is unlikely to help reliably because the endpoint belongs to a custom transport protocol, so signature-based filtering should not be treated as a substitute for network isolation. Because exploitation requires no authentication, no user interaction, and no non-default feature enablement, restricting the port is deterministic and verifiable, whereas behaviour-based detection of crafted protocol traffic is best-effort.
Affected VersionsENISA
Affects your stack
Find out whether the stacks and servers you run are on an affected version.
Checking this CVE against your own stacks and servers is part of the Basic plan and up.
Technical ContextAI · show details
PowerJob is a Java-based distributed job scheduling and distributed computing framework built around a Server-Worker architecture, in which workers register with the server, exchange heartbeats, and receive task dispatch over a dedicated Server-Worker transport layer rather than over the public management API. CVE-2026-75429 affects the transport layer's /friend/process endpoint, which handles peer-side protocol traffic (worker registration/heartbeat/task-related messages) and, per the assigned CWE-287 (Improper Authentication), performs no authentication or identity verification of the calling peer. Because the endpoint both accepts and processes attacker-supplied protocol messages, an unauthenticated network peer can present itself as a trusted participant and drive server-side logic to achieve remote code execution, which matches the CVSS vector's PR:N and full C:H/I:H/A:H impact on a single, unmodified scope (S:U). All 4.x releases through 5.1.2 are in scope per the description; the intelligence feeds do not populate CPE or EUVD affected-version fields (cpe:2.3:a:n/a:n/a... and EUVD versions 'n/a n/a'), so version enumeration rests on the CVE description plus the linked project repository and its docker-compose.yml, which illustrates the default port layout that makes the transport layer reachable in containerized deployments. Given that only network reachability is required, the practical security boundary is deployment topology: any host that can route to the PowerJob transport port-laterally or from the internet-can exercise the flaw without credentials, tooling beyond the published exploit references, or a non-default configuration toggle.
Know when Powerjob gets its next vulnerability
- Watch products and get an email when something new is published
- Check this CVE against your own stack and servers
- Exploit and PoC references, threat intelligence from 22 sources
No credit card · 7-day full trial
Severity by source
AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
Description confirms unauthenticated (PR:N) network RCE on a no-auth transport endpoint (AV:N/AC:L), yielding full code execution and thus C:H/I:H/A:H.
Primary rating from Vendor (mitre).
CVSS VectorVendor: mitre
Lifecycle Timeline
3DescriptionCVE.org
PowerJob versions 4.x through 5.1.2 contain an unauthenticated remote code execution vulnerability in the /friend/process endpoint of the Server-Worker transport layer
Executive ViewAI
PowerJob versions 4.x through 5.1.2 - an orchestration platform used to schedule and execute distributed jobs - contain a critical unauthenticated remote code execution flaw that any party able to reach the Server-Worker transport port can trigger, allowing arbitrary code to run inside the PowerJob server process. Because no vendor patch exists, affected environments cannot be remediated by upgrading today, and the realistic exposure is concentrated in flat internal networks, cloud deployments that publish the transport port (including default docker-compose configurations), and any deployment where an attacker has already crossed the perimeter. Leadership should treat this as an urgent architectural containment problem rather than a patch-management item, since exploitation yields full control of a system that typically holds credentials and can execute workloads across the estate.
No vendor-released patch identified at time of analysis. Interim mitigations: block or allowlist the Server-Worker transport port so it is reachable only from trusted worker hosts; remove PowerJob transport-port exposure from internet-facing and default docker-compose deployments; segment the worker communication plane away from user and general-purpose networks; restrict /friend/process access at the reverse proxy or WAF layer; monitor and alert on unexpected source addresses hitting the transport port or /friend/process; and treat PowerJob server hosts as sensitive, rotating any credentials, tokens, or secrets they can reach.
Threat Intelligence Overview
How this decision was reached
The engine reads each signal below and applies a fixed list of rules from top to bottom. The first rule that matches sets the recommended action – like a statement, every line is shown.
What every action level means
SSVC AssessmentENISA
Priority Score
Attack Technique
Authentication bypass attacks exploit flaws in the verification mechanisms that control access to systems and applications.
Remote Code Execution represents the critical moment when an attacker successfully runs arbitrary code on a target system without physical access.
PowerJob v4.3.3 was discovered to contain a remote command execution (RCE) vulnerability via the instanceId parameter at
Unauthenticated remote code execution in PowerJob Worker 5.1.2 (and likely earlier) stems from the /worker/deployContain
Powerjob >= 3.20 is vulnerable to SQL injection via the version parameter. Rated critical severity (CVSS 9.8), this vuln
PowerJob V4.3.1 is vulnerable to Incorrect Access Control that allows for remote code execution. Rated critical severity
PowerJob V4.3.2 has unauthorized interface that causes remote code execution. Rated critical severity (CVSS 9.8), this v
Missing authorization in PowerJob through 5.1.2 exposes the /user/list endpoint, allowing remote unauthenticated attacke
PowerJob V4.3.1 is vulnerable to Incorrect Access Control via the create user/save interface. Rated medium severity (CVS
PowerJob V4.3.1 is vulnerable to Insecure Permissions. Rated medium severity (CVSS 5.3), this vulnerability is remotely
PowerJob V4.3.1 is vulnerable to Incorrect Access Control via the create app interface. Rated medium severity (CVSS 5.3)
Remote code execution in PowerJob Server 5.1.2 (and likely earlier releases) stems from a predictable/hardcoded HS256 si
An incorrect access control vulnerability in powerjob 4.3.2 and earlier allows remote attackers to obtain sensitive info
Remote code injection in PowerJob 5.1.0, 5.1.1, and 5.1.2 allows unauthenticated attackers to execute arbitrary code via
EUVD-2026-71453
GHSA-23w6-w5w9-qrj5
NVD
CVE.org
EPSS
VulDB
Exploit-DB