Customer portal
Articles Tagged with

SOS Intelligence

Investigation

De-anonymising Tor Hidden Services: How Misconfigurations Expose the Dark Web

Introduction

Tor hidden services exist for one reason: anonymity. The entire architecture of onion routing is designed to ensure that a visitor cannot determine where a service is physically hosted, and that the hosting provider’s real IP address never leaks. In theory, this makes hidden services untraceable. In practice, it does not.

The gap between theory and practice is where threat intelligence gets interesting. Over the past decade, researchers, law enforcement, and OSINT practitioners have demonstrated repeatedly that the anonymity of Tor hidden services can be undermined not by breaking the cryptography or the network protocol, but by exploiting something far simpler: misconfiguration.

At SOS Intelligence, we crawl and index dark web content continuously through our DARKSEARCH platform. As part of that work, we encounter misconfigured hidden services regularly. Some expose their real server IP addresses through default web server configurations. Others leak identifying information through debug pages, status endpoints, or metadata embedded in the content they serve. In this article, we will walk through the most common ways that Tor hidden services inadvertently reveal their clearweb identity, how intelligence analysts can use these techniques ethically, and what this means for anyone running or monitoring hidden services.

De-anonymising Tor Hidden Services: How Misconfigurations Expose the Dark Web

How Tor Hidden Services Are Supposed to Work

Before we get into the failures, it is worth understanding what a properly configured hidden service looks like. When a Tor hidden service is set up correctly, the web server (Apache, Nginx, or whatever is being used) binds exclusively to localhost, typically 127.0.0.1. The Tor daemon running on the same machine creates a virtual tunnel, accepting incoming connections from the Tor network and forwarding them to the local web server.

The critical point is that the web server should never be listening on a public-facing IP address. If it only listens on 127.0.0.1, the only way to reach it is through the Tor daemon. The server’s real IP address is never exposed to the visitor because the visitor’s traffic is routed through the Tor network and terminates at the Tor daemon, not at the web server directly.

This is the theory. The reality is that many hidden service operators, whether through ignorance, laziness, or haste, fail to configure their servers this way. And when they fail, they leave behind digital breadcrumbs that can be followed all the way back to a clearweb IP address, a hosting provider, and often a physical location.

The Classic: Apache mod_status

The most well-documented and arguably most devastating misconfiguration involves Apache’s mod_status module. This has been a known issue since at least 2001, but it continues to surface on Tor hidden services in 2026.

So here is how it works. On most Linux distributions, Apache ships with mod_status enabled by default. This module provides a real-time status page at /server-status that displays diagnostic information about the running web server. The information it exposes includes the server’s uptime, current connections, the IP addresses of connected clients, the URLs being requested, virtual host configurations, and critically, the server name and IP address of the machine itself.

On a standard ClearWeb server, access to /server-status is typically restricted to localhost or specific IP ranges via Apache’s configuration. But here is where the misconfiguration occurs: when the Tor daemon forwards traffic to the local Apache instance, that traffic arrives from 127.0.0.1 (because the Tor daemon is local). This means it passes the default access restriction. The /server-status page becomes accessible to anyone connecting via Tor.

What Gets Exposed

When an analyst successfully accesses /server-status on a misconfigured Tor hidden service, the data returned can be remarkably detailed. The server name field often contains the server’s real hostname, which may resolve directly to a clearweb IP. The virtual host configuration can reveal other domains being hosted on the same machine. Active connection details may show clearweb IP addresses of other visitors or the server’s own outbound connections. In some cases, the page reveals the exact Apache version, operating system, and loaded modules, giving a complete fingerprint of the server.

During our DARKSEARCH crawls, we have identified numerous Tor hidden services returning Apache error pages (403 Forbidden, 404 Not Found) that include server signature information in the response headers:

  • hxxp://cii64fki62v2mudocjvgarzlmnpqrfp6xb7korapmdd7qmjpnccgduyd[.]onion
    • returned a standard 403 Forbidden page during our crawl on 3 March 2026, including the server signature in the response.
  • hxxp://hmxt5u75kj5qxqjqhckgaoda6zndgxcazleersyioat4iuq3ldgmkcid[.]onion and hxxp://pbbeck4xcy3jzbu6lv5db3c5n3n44wngmpb5jj3yo4px32mlznziwbid[.]onion
    • displayed similar Apache error patterns.

While these are less severe than a fully exposed /server-status page, they still leak server version information that can be cross-referenced with Shodan, Censys, or similar clearweb scanning databases to narrow down the server’s identity.

Real-World Prevalence

PHP Information Disclosure: phpinfo() and Friends

PHP’s built-in phpinfo() function is another classic source of information leaks on Tor hidden services. Developers routinely create test pages (often info.php, phpinfo.php, or test.php) that call phpinfo() to verify their server configuration. The problem is that these pages are frequently left in production, and on a hidden service, they can be accessed by anyone.

The phpinfo() output is extraordinarily detailed. It includes the server’s IP address (in the SERVER_ADDR variable), the server’s hostname (SERVER_NAME), the document root path (which may contain revealing directory structures), all loaded PHP extensions, environment variables that may contain database credentials or API keys, and the exact PHP and operating system versions.

The SERVER_ADDR field is particularly damaging. On a properly configured hidden service, this should show 127.0.0.1. But if the web server is bound to a public IP (the misconfiguration we keep coming back to), SERVER_ADDR will show the server’s real clearweb IP address, directly. No correlation or inference required.

Searching for phpinfo() Pages

Using our DARKSEARCH API, analysts can search for common phpinfo page titles and content patterns across indexed Tor content. The search is straightforward: look for pages containing strings like ‘PHP Version’, ‘SERVER_ADDR’, ‘DOCUMENT_ROOT’, or the characteristic phpinfo() HTML table structure. Our crawls regularly index pages that match these patterns across the onion network.

Beyond phpinfo(), similar information can be leaked by debug frameworks and error reporting configurations. PHP applications running in development mode may display detailed stack traces that include file paths, database connection strings, and server IP addresses. Laravel’s debug page, for instance, is notorious for exposing the full application configuration, including environment variables, when APP_DEBUG is set to true.

SSL/TLS Certificate Leaks

This is one of the more elegant de-anonymisation techniques and was documented extensively by researcher Yonathan Klijnsma. The core issue is that some hidden service operators install SSL/TLS certificates on their Tor-hosted web servers, often for the same domain they use on the clearweb.

So when a hidden service operator obtains an SSL certificate (whether from Let’s Encrypt, Comodo, or any other CA), that certificate is logged in public Certificate Transparency (CT) logs. These logs are searchable using tools like crt.sh. If the same certificate is used on both the hidden service and a clearweb server, or if the certificate’s Subject Alternative Names (SANs) include the server’s clearweb domain, the link between the .onion address and the clearweb identity becomes trivial to establish.

Even without direct domain overlap, the certificate itself contains metadata. The organisation name, the country, the issuance date, and the certificate serial number can all be used as pivot points. Cross-referencing certificate fingerprints with databases like crt.sh, Censys, or Shodan’s SSL certificate search can reveal other services using the same certificate, potentially including clearweb servers.

Why This Keeps Happening

The reason this misconfiguration persists is partly a misunderstanding of what SSL does in the context of Tor. The Tor protocol already encrypts traffic between the client and the hidden service. Adding SSL on top of this does not improve security in any meaningful way for a .onion service. But operators who are accustomed to clearweb hosting habits often install SSL certificates out of habit or because their web application framework requires HTTPS.

The more dangerous scenario is when an operator runs a dual-stack configuration: the same server hosts both a clearweb site and a hidden service. If the SSL certificate covers both, the link is immediate. But even single-stack hidden services can be compromised if the certificate was previously used on a clearweb server, because CT logs are permanent.

Default Pages, Error Messages, and Server Signatures

Not every de-anonymisation technique requires accessing a special endpoint. Sometimes, the information leaks from the most basic server responses.

Default Installation Pages

When our DARKSEARCH crawlers encounter a Tor hidden service showing the default Nginx welcome page, the default Apache test page, or a framework’s default landing page, this tells us several things. First, the operator likely set up the service quickly and did not complete the configuration. Second, the default page often reveals the exact server software version. Third, the default configuration files associated with these pages may have additional endpoints enabled (like /server-status for Apache or /stub_status for Nginx).

We have observed this pattern repeatedly in our crawl data. Onion addresses serving generic 403 Forbidden or 404 Not Found pages with Apache or Nginx signatures in the response body are surprisingly common:

  • hxxp://eme7o5bdqwsqvdcj4j6ore6exvxnh6jv3d3nkieopmxfbmdxtrhiljqd[.]onion
    • Returned a 404 Not Found message stating ‘Not Found. The requested URL was not found on this server.’ with clear server identification in the response headers, indexed during our March 2026 DARKSEARCH crawl.

Each of these reveals the web server software and often the version number, which becomes a fingerprint.

Verbose Error Pages

Application-level errors can be even more revealing. A misconfigured Django application will display a detailed debug page showing the settings module, installed middleware, database engine, and file paths. A Node.js application crashing with an unhandled exception may dump stack traces containing absolute file paths. A misconfigured PHP application might display MySQL connection errors that include the database host (which could be a clearweb IP if the database is hosted externally).

Each of these error patterns provides pivot points. File paths can reveal operating system details and directory structures. Database connection strings can point to external clearweb services. Stack traces can reveal the application framework and version, which can be correlated with publicly accessible source code repositories.

HTTP Response Headers

Even when the page content itself reveals nothing, the HTTP response headers can leak information. Common leaky headers include X-Powered-By (reveals the backend technology), Server (reveals the web server and version), X-AspNet-Version (reveals the .NET framework version), and custom headers that may include internal hostnames or IP addresses. The Via header, used by proxies, can sometimes reveal the chain of servers the request passed through, potentially including clearweb infrastructure.

Exposed Administration Interfaces

One of the most directly exploitable categories of misconfiguration involves web-based administration panels that were intended to be accessible only from localhost but end up being exposed via the Tor service.

Common Exposed Services

The pattern here is consistent. Services that bind to 0.0.0.0 (all interfaces) by default become accessible through Tor when the hidden service is configured to forward traffic to the server’s local port. An operator who sets up a hidden service and also runs phpMyAdmin for database management may not realise that phpMyAdmin is now accessible to the entire Tor network.

During our research, we found numerous onion addresses serving content that strongly suggests exposed administration interfaces. WordPress login pages on hidden services, for example, are extremely common in our DARKSEARCH index. While a WordPress login page alone does not expose a clearweb IP, the WordPress installation itself may contain metadata (in uploaded images, in theme files, in plugin configurations) that references clearweb URLs. We also observed directory listing capabilities on some services:

  • hxxp://ylf6u5gurfisvhgheevy4rxzcw36gyp4r55crqlmiydmzwi2xkvmhcad[.]onion
    • (Go Go Onion directory)
  • hxxp://wikipenntwqezw7ycy72zmblcxh6fodtqb6yyyfyz55uoh4fx6wqciid[.]onion
    • (HiddenWiki)

which index and expose other onion services and their details.

Metadata and Content-Based Leaks

Beyond server configuration issues, the content hosted on a hidden service can itself contain identifying information.

EXIF Data in Images

Images uploaded to hidden services may contain EXIF metadata including GPS coordinates, camera make and model, software used to process the image, timestamps, and in some cases, the original filename that may reference a clearweb domain or username. Tools like OnionScan, developed by Sarah Jamie Lewis, specifically check for EXIF data in images hosted on hidden services. Our DARKSEARCH platform includes a similar capability, allowing analysts to identify images with residual metadata that can be correlated with clearweb sources.

Embedded Clearweb Resources

A hidden service page that loads JavaScript libraries, CSS stylesheets, images, or fonts from clearweb CDNs creates a tracking vector. When a visitor loads the hidden service page, their browser (or, in our case, our crawler) can observe the external resource requests. More importantly, the CDN operator can log the timing of those requests, and the hidden service operator has implicitly revealed that they control the account on the CDN from which the resources are served.

The reverse is also true: if a hidden service’s HTML source contains hardcoded clearweb URLs (perhaps the developer copied the template from their clearweb site), those URLs can directly identify the operator. We have seen this in our crawls, where onion-hosted pages reference clearweb domains in their source code, style sheets, or embedded scripts:

  • hxxp://bfdxjkv5e2z3ilrifzbnvxxvhbzsj67akjpj3zc6smzr4vv6oz565gyd[.]onion
    • (observed as a XenForo forum)
  • hxxp://33333337u3npxstc4rrx2z2o5z5cvmbbdr4maqzlutpgmgcqobnxxuqd[.]onion
    • (VicePaste service)

sometimes reveal resource references in their indexable content.

DNS Leaks

If the hidden service’s server makes outbound DNS requests (for example, to resolve a database server hostname, to check for updates, or to load external content), those DNS queries go through the server’s regular network stack, not through Tor. An observer with access to the DNS infrastructure can see the server’s real IP address, making those queries. This is not directly detectable through our DARKSEARCH crawls, but it is a significant vector that complements the other techniques discussed here.

Using the SOS Intelligence API for Tor Service Analysis

At SOS Intelligence, our DARKSEARCH API provides programmatic access to our indexed dark web content, including Tor hidden service data. Analysts can use this to systematically search for the misconfiguration patterns described in this article.

DARKSEARCH Endpoint

The DARKSEARCH endpoint (GET /api/v2/darksearch/new) accepts search queries and returns indexed content from Tor hidden services. By searching for terms like ‘server-status’, ‘phpinfo’, ‘wp-login’, or specific error message patterns, analysts can identify potentially misconfigured services at scale. Each result includes the onion hostname, the page title, the indexed content, and timestamps showing when the page was crawled.

Practical Search Patterns

Tor Metadata Endpoints

Beyond DARKSEARCH, our Tor API endpoints provide metadata about onion services, including path information that can reveal directory structures and exposed endpoints. By analysing the paths crawled on a given onion service, analysts can identify non-standard endpoints that may correspond to administrative interfaces or debug pages.

Defensive Guidance: Hardening Hidden Services

While this article has focused on offensive OSINT techniques, the defensive side is equally important. If your organisation runs legitimate hidden services (for example, for secure whistleblowing, censorship circumvention, or privacy-preserving communication), the following configuration practices are essential.

Web Server Configuration

Bind to localhost only. Your web server must listen exclusively on 127.0.0.1. In Apache, this means setting Listen 127.0.0.1:80 in the main configuration. In Nginx, use listen 127.0.0.1:80. Never use 0.0.0.0 or *.

Disable mod_status and mod_info. In Apache, explicitly disable these modules with a2dismod status and a2dismod info. Do not rely on access controls alone.

Remove default pages and test files. Delete index.html default pages, phpinfo.php test files, and any other diagnostic scripts before going live.

Suppress server signatures. In Apache, set ServerTokens Prod and ServerSignature Off. In Nginx, add server_tokens off to the http block.

Strip revealing headers. Remove X-Powered-By and other headers that reveal your technology stack.

Application Configuration

Never run in debug or development mode. Ensure your application is running in production mode with detailed error reporting disabled for end users.

Do not use SSL certificates. Tor already provides end-to-end encryption. Adding SSL to a hidden service only creates a de-anonymisation vector through Certificate Transparency logs.

Avoid loading external resources. Host all JavaScript, CSS, fonts, and images locally. Do not reference clearweb CDNs.

Strip EXIF data from images. Process all uploaded images to remove metadata before serving them.

Infrastructure Security

Isolate the hidden service. Run it in a dedicated container or VM that has no other services exposed. Do not host a clearweb site and a hidden service on the same machine.

Block outbound connections. Configure firewall rules so the hidden service machine can only communicate through Tor. This prevents DNS leaks and outbound connections that could reveal the real IP.

Audit regularly. Use tools like OnionScan to check your own hidden service for information leaks. Treat this as part of your regular security review process.

The Intelligence Value of Misconfigured Services

For threat intelligence teams, the techniques described in this article are not theoretical. They produce actionable results. When a dark web marketplace, ransomware leak site, or fraud operation is hosted on a misconfigured Tor hidden service, the exposed clearweb IP can lead to a hosting provider, a jurisdiction, and potentially an individual.

Even partial information has value. A server version fingerprint can narrow the search space from billions of IPs to thousands. A leaked hostname can be resolved and cross-referenced. A certificate fingerprint can be tracked across multiple services. An exposed admin panel username can be correlated with clearweb accounts. The cumulative effect of multiple small leaks is often enough to identify the operator.

Law enforcement agencies have used exactly these techniques in major dark web takedowns. The Silk Road investigation benefited from a server misconfiguration that leaked the site’s IP address via its CAPTCHA server. The Hansa Market takedown involved Dutch National Police exploiting similar configuration errors to identify and eventually operate the marketplace. These are not exotic attacks. They are straightforward OSINT techniques applied to poorly configured servers.

Appendix: Observed Indicators from DARKSEARCH

The following table documents real onion addresses observed during DARKSEARCH crawls in March 2026 that exhibit the misconfiguration patterns discussed in this article. These services were indexed through our standard crawling process and represent active examples of the threat vectors described throughout this report. All onion addresses are defanged for security purposes (dots replaced with [.]).

The presence of these indicators in our DARKSEARCH index demonstrates that misconfiguration de-anonymisation techniques remain effective against real-world Tor hidden services. Each category of indicator (error page signatures, directory listings, resource references) represents a distinct attack vector that threat intelligence teams can operationalise at scale using the DARKSEARCH API.

External References and Tools

The following resources provide additional context, methodologies, and tooling for Tor hidden service analysis and de-anonymisation research:

Academic and Research Papers

  • Klijnsma, Y. (2015). ‘HTTPS: The Wrong Side of History’ documented SSL certificate de-anonymisation techniques and Certificate Transparency log analysis methods for identifying hidden service operators.
  • Lewis, S. J. (2014). ‘OnionScan: Automated OSINT for Tor Hidden Services’ introduced methodologies for systematic scanning and metadata extraction from onion services.

Law Enforcement Case Studies

  • Silk Road Investigation: Federal law enforcement identified Ross Ulbricht’s infrastructure partly through misconfiguration vectors, including a CAPTCHA server that leaked IP address information due to poor isolation from the Tor service.
  • Hansa Market Takedown: Dutch National Police (Politie) identified and eventually operated the Hansa marketplace by exploiting similar misconfiguration patterns, including exposed administrative interfaces and information disclosure vulnerabilities.

Publicly Available Tools

  • OnionScan (by Sarah Jamie Lewis): Automated tool for scanning Tor hidden services and extracting metadata, EXIF data, and server information. Source available on GitHub.
  • crt.sh: Certificate Transparency search engine allowing analysts to query public CT logs for SSL certificates. Useful for linking .onion services to clearweb domains.
  • Shodan (shodan.io): Internet-wide scanning database that indexes server banners, headers, and metadata. Can be used to cross-reference server fingerprints and configurations.
  • Censys: Internet scanning and certificate database providing similar capabilities to Shodan, with particular strength in certificate transparency log analysis.
  • DARKSEARCH API (SOS Intelligence): Programmatic access to indexed dark web content, including Tor hidden services. Supports systematic searching for misconfiguration patterns and metadata extraction.

Related Reading

  • Greensill, J. & Aldridge, J. (2019). ‘Cryptomarkets and the Future of Illicit Drug Markets’ discusses operational security practices and common failures of dark web services.
  • NIST Cybersecurity Framework: Provides defensive guidance for organisation-wide security hardening, including principles applicable to Tor hidden service deployment.

Conclusion

The anonymity provided by Tor is only as strong as the weakest configuration on the server. The Tor network itself remains robust, but the humans running hidden services make mistakes. They leave debug pages enabled. They install SSL certificates that link back to their identity. They run web servers with default configurations that expose status pages. They load resources from clearweb CDNs. They forget to strip metadata from images.

For threat intelligence professionals, these mistakes are opportunities. They provide a way to peer behind the curtain of anonymity and identify the infrastructure, and sometimes the individuals, behind dark web operations. The techniques are well-documented, the tools are freely available, and the results are frequently actionable.

At SOS Intelligence, we provide the raw data and search capability that makes this kind of analysis possible at scale. Our DARKSEARCH platform indexes dark web content continuously, and our API gives analysts programmatic access to search for the exact patterns described in this article. If you are running a threat intelligence programme, and you are not systematically checking for these misconfigurations, you are missing intelligence.

Header photo by Rafael Garcin on Unsplash.

Hidden door photo by Stefan Steinbauer on Unsplash

"SOS
CVE Top 10

The SOS Intelligence CVE Chatter Weekly Top Ten – 08 June 2026

 

This weekly blog post is from via our unique intelligence collection pipelines. We are your eyes and ears online, including the Dark Web.

There are thousands of vulnerability discussions each week. SOS Intelligence gathers a list of the most discussed Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures (CVE) online for the previous week.

We make every effort to ensure the accuracy of the data presented. As this is an automated process some errors may creep in.

If you are feeling generous please do make us aware of anything you spot, feel free to follow us on Twitter @sosintel and DM us. Thank you!

 


 

1.  CVE-2026-31431

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:

crypto: algif_aead – Revert to operating out-of-place

This mostly reverts commit 72548b093ee3 except for the copying of
the associated data.

There is no benefit in operating in-place in algif_aead since the
source and destination come from different mappings. Get rid of
all the complexity added for in-place operation and just copy the
AD directly.

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-31431

 


 

2. CVE-2026-45185

Deserialization of untrusted data in Windows Server Update Service allows an unauthorized attacker to execute code over a network.

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-45185

 


 

3. CVE-2025-50708

Deserialization of untrusted data in Windows Server Update Service allows an unauthorized attacker to execute code over a network.

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2025-50708

 


 

4. CVE-2024-34102

Deserialization of untrusted data in Windows Server Update Service allows an unauthorized attacker to execute code over a network.

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-34102

 


 

5. CVE-2024-38063

Deserialization of untrusted data in Windows Server Update Service allows an unauthorized attacker to execute code over a network.

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-38063

 


 

6. CVE-2024-49113

Deserialization of untrusted data in Windows Server Update Service allows an unauthorized attacker to execute code over a network.

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-49113

 


 

7. CVE-2026-32746

Deserialization of untrusted data in Windows Server Update Service allows an unauthorized attacker to execute code over a network.

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-32746

 


 

8. CVE-2025-0368

Deserialization of untrusted data in Windows Server Update Service allows an unauthorized attacker to execute code over a network.

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2025-0368

 


 

9. CVE-2022-21227

Deserialization of untrusted data in Windows Server Update Service allows an unauthorized attacker to execute code over a network.

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2022-21227

 


 

10. CVE-2021-40539

Deserialization of untrusted data in Windows Server Update Service allows an unauthorized attacker to execute code over a network.

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2021-40539

 


"SOS
CVE Top 10

The SOS Intelligence CVE Chatter Weekly Top Ten – 01 June 2026

 

This weekly blog post is from via our unique intelligence collection pipelines. We are your eyes and ears online, including the Dark Web.

There are thousands of vulnerability discussions each week. SOS Intelligence gathers a list of the most discussed Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures (CVE) online for the previous week.

We make every effort to ensure the accuracy of the data presented. As this is an automated process some errors may creep in.

If you are feeling generous please do make us aware of anything you spot, feel free to follow us on Twitter @sosintel and DM us. Thank you!

 


 

1.  CVE-2026-45185

Adobe Commerce versions 2.4.7, 2.4.6-p5, 2.4.5-p7, 2.4.4-p8 and earlier are affected by an Improper Restriction of XML External Entity Reference (‘XXE’) vulnerability that could result in arbitrary code execution. An attacker could exploit this vulnerability by sending a crafted XML document that references external entities. Exploitation of this issue does not require user interaction.

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-45185

 


 

2. CVE-2025-68613

Adobe Commerce versions 2.4.7, 2.4.6-p5, 2.4.5-p7, 2.4.4-p8 and earlier are affected by an Improper Restriction of XML External Entity Reference (‘XXE’) vulnerability that could result in arbitrary code execution. An attacker could exploit this vulnerability by sending a crafted XML document that references external entities. Exploitation of this issue does not require user interaction.

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2025-68613

 


 

3. CVE-2021-40539

Adobe Commerce versions 2.4.7, 2.4.6-p5, 2.4.5-p7, 2.4.4-p8 and earlier are affected by an Improper Restriction of XML External Entity Reference (‘XXE’) vulnerability that could result in arbitrary code execution. An attacker could exploit this vulnerability by sending a crafted XML document that references external entities. Exploitation of this issue does not require user interaction.

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2021-40539

 


 

4. CVE-2022-21227

Adobe Commerce versions 2.4.7, 2.4.6-p5, 2.4.5-p7, 2.4.4-p8 and earlier are affected by an Improper Restriction of XML External Entity Reference (‘XXE’) vulnerability that could result in arbitrary code execution. An attacker could exploit this vulnerability by sending a crafted XML document that references external entities. Exploitation of this issue does not require user interaction.

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2022-21227

 


 

5. CVE-2024-34102

Adobe Commerce versions 2.4.7, 2.4.6-p5, 2.4.5-p7, 2.4.4-p8 and earlier are affected by an Improper Restriction of XML External Entity Reference (‘XXE’) vulnerability that could result in arbitrary code execution. An attacker could exploit this vulnerability by sending a crafted XML document that references external entities. Exploitation of this issue does not require user interaction.

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-34102

 


 

6. CVE-2024-38063

Adobe Commerce versions 2.4.7, 2.4.6-p5, 2.4.5-p7, 2.4.4-p8 and earlier are affected by an Improper Restriction of XML External Entity Reference (‘XXE’) vulnerability that could result in arbitrary code execution. An attacker could exploit this vulnerability by sending a crafted XML document that references external entities. Exploitation of this issue does not require user interaction.

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-38063

 


 

7. CVE-2024-49113

Adobe Commerce versions 2.4.7, 2.4.6-p5, 2.4.5-p7, 2.4.4-p8 and earlier are affected by an Improper Restriction of XML External Entity Reference (‘XXE’) vulnerability that could result in arbitrary code execution. An attacker could exploit this vulnerability by sending a crafted XML document that references external entities. Exploitation of this issue does not require user interaction.

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-49113

 


 

8. CVE-2025-0368

Adobe Commerce versions 2.4.7, 2.4.6-p5, 2.4.5-p7, 2.4.4-p8 and earlier are affected by an Improper Restriction of XML External Entity Reference (‘XXE’) vulnerability that could result in arbitrary code execution. An attacker could exploit this vulnerability by sending a crafted XML document that references external entities. Exploitation of this issue does not require user interaction.

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2025-0368

 


 

9. CVE-2025-14847

Adobe Commerce versions 2.4.7, 2.4.6-p5, 2.4.5-p7, 2.4.4-p8 and earlier are affected by an Improper Restriction of XML External Entity Reference (‘XXE’) vulnerability that could result in arbitrary code execution. An attacker could exploit this vulnerability by sending a crafted XML document that references external entities. Exploitation of this issue does not require user interaction.

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2025-14847

 


 

10. CVE-2025-21204

Adobe Commerce versions 2.4.7, 2.4.6-p5, 2.4.5-p7, 2.4.4-p8 and earlier are affected by an Improper Restriction of XML External Entity Reference (‘XXE’) vulnerability that could result in arbitrary code execution. An attacker could exploit this vulnerability by sending a crafted XML document that references external entities. Exploitation of this issue does not require user interaction.

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2025-21204

 


"SOS
CVE Top 10

The SOS Intelligence CVE Chatter Weekly Top Ten – 25 May 2026

 

This weekly blog post is from via our unique intelligence collection pipelines. We are your eyes and ears online, including the Dark Web.

There are thousands of vulnerability discussions each week. SOS Intelligence gathers a list of the most discussed Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures (CVE) online for the previous week.

We make every effort to ensure the accuracy of the data presented. As this is an automated process some errors may creep in.

If you are feeling generous please do make us aware of anything you spot, feel free to follow us on Twitter @sosintel and DM us. Thank you!

 


 

1.  CVE-2026-45185

Exim before 4.99.3, in certain GnuTLS configurations, has a remotely reachable use-after-free in the BDAT body parsing path. It is triggered when a client sends a TLS close_notify mid-body during a CHUNKING transfer, followed by a final cleartext byte on the same TCP connection. This can lead to heap corruption. An unauthenticated network attacker exploiting this vulnerability could execute arbitrary code.

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-45185

 


 

2. CVE-2025-54100

The package sqlite3 before 5.0.3 are vulnerable to Denial of Service (DoS) which will invoke the toString function of the passed parameter. If passed an invalid Function object it will throw and crash the V8 engine.

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2025-54100

 


 

3. CVE-2024-34102

The package sqlite3 before 5.0.3 are vulnerable to Denial of Service (DoS) which will invoke the toString function of the passed parameter. If passed an invalid Function object it will throw and crash the V8 engine.

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-34102

 


 

4. CVE-2024-38063

The package sqlite3 before 5.0.3 are vulnerable to Denial of Service (DoS) which will invoke the toString function of the passed parameter. If passed an invalid Function object it will throw and crash the V8 engine.

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-38063

 


 

5. CVE-2024-49113

The package sqlite3 before 5.0.3 are vulnerable to Denial of Service (DoS) which will invoke the toString function of the passed parameter. If passed an invalid Function object it will throw and crash the V8 engine.

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-49113

 


 

6. CVE-2025-0368

The package sqlite3 before 5.0.3 are vulnerable to Denial of Service (DoS) which will invoke the toString function of the passed parameter. If passed an invalid Function object it will throw and crash the V8 engine.

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2025-0368

 


 

7. CVE-2025-14847

The package sqlite3 before 5.0.3 are vulnerable to Denial of Service (DoS) which will invoke the toString function of the passed parameter. If passed an invalid Function object it will throw and crash the V8 engine.

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2025-14847

 


 

8. CVE-2025-21204

The package sqlite3 before 5.0.3 are vulnerable to Denial of Service (DoS) which will invoke the toString function of the passed parameter. If passed an invalid Function object it will throw and crash the V8 engine.

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2025-21204

 


 

9. CVE-2025-24118

The package sqlite3 before 5.0.3 are vulnerable to Denial of Service (DoS) which will invoke the toString function of the passed parameter. If passed an invalid Function object it will throw and crash the V8 engine.

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2025-24118

 


 

10. CVE-2025-50708

The package sqlite3 before 5.0.3 are vulnerable to Denial of Service (DoS) which will invoke the toString function of the passed parameter. If passed an invalid Function object it will throw and crash the V8 engine.

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2025-50708

 


"SOS
CVE Top 10

The SOS Intelligence CVE Chatter Weekly Top Ten – 18 May 2026

 

This weekly blog post is from via our unique intelligence collection pipelines. We are your eyes and ears online, including the Dark Web.

There are thousands of vulnerability discussions each week. SOS Intelligence gathers a list of the most discussed Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures (CVE) online for the previous week.

We make every effort to ensure the accuracy of the data presented. As this is an automated process some errors may creep in.

If you are feeling generous please do make us aware of anything you spot, feel free to follow us on Twitter @sosintel and DM us. Thank you!

 


 

1.  CVE-2024-34102

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:

crypto: algif_aead – Revert to operating out-of-place

This mostly reverts commit 72548b093ee3 except for the copying of
the associated data.

There is no benefit in operating in-place in algif_aead since the
source and destination come from different mappings. Get rid of
all the complexity added for in-place operation and just copy the
AD directly.

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-34102

 


 

2. CVE-2026-31431

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:

xfrm: esp: avoid in-place decrypt on shared skb frags

MSG_SPLICE_PAGES can attach pages from a pipe directly to an skb. TCP
marks such skbs with SKBFL_SHARED_FRAG after skb_splice_from_iter(),
so later paths that may modify packet data can first make a private
copy. The IPv4/IPv6 datagram append paths did not set this flag when
splicing pages into UDP skbs.

That leaves an ESP-in-UDP packet made from shared pipe pages looking
like an ordinary uncloned nonlinear skb. ESP input then takes the no-COW
fast path for uncloned skbs without a frag_list and decrypts in place
over data that is not owned privately by the skb.

Mark IPv4/IPv6 datagram splice frags with SKBFL_SHARED_FRAG, matching
TCP. Also make ESP input fall back to skb_cow_data() when the flag is
present, so ESP does not decrypt externally backed frags in place.
Private nonlinear skb frags still use the existing fast path.

This intentionally does not change ESP output. In esp_output_head(),
the path that appends the ESP trailer to existing skb tailroom without
calling skb_cow_data() is not reachable for nonlinear skbs:
skb_tailroom() returns zero when skb->data_len is nonzero, while ESP
tailen is positive. Thus ESP output will either use the separate
destination-frag path or fall back to skb_cow_data().

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-31431

 


 

3. CVE-2025-43520

A memory corruption issue was addressed with improved memory handling. This issue is fixed in iOS 18.7.2 and iPadOS 18.7.2, iOS 26.1 and iPadOS 26.1, macOS Sequoia 15.7.2, macOS Sonoma 14.8.2, macOS Tahoe 26.1, tvOS 26.1, visionOS 26.1, watchOS 26.1. A malicious application may be able to cause unexpected system termination or write kernel memory.

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2025-43520

 


 

4. CVE-2025-43510

A memory corruption issue was addressed with improved memory handling. This issue is fixed in iOS 18.7.2 and iPadOS 18.7.2, iOS 26.1 and iPadOS 26.1, macOS Sequoia 15.7.2, macOS Sonoma 14.8.2, macOS Tahoe 26.1, tvOS 26.1, visionOS 26.1, watchOS 26.1. A malicious application may be able to cause unexpected system termination or write kernel memory.

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2025-43510

 


 

5. CVE-2017-8759

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:

crypto: algif_aead – Revert to operating out-of-place

This mostly reverts commit 72548b093ee3 except for the copying of
the associated data.

There is no benefit in operating in-place in algif_aead since the
source and destination come from different mappings. Get rid of
all the complexity added for in-place operation and just copy the
AD directly.

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2017-8759

 


 

6. CVE-2025-8088

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:

crypto: algif_aead – Revert to operating out-of-place

This mostly reverts commit 72548b093ee3 except for the copying of
the associated data.

There is no benefit in operating in-place in algif_aead since the
source and destination come from different mappings. Get rid of
all the complexity added for in-place operation and just copy the
AD directly.

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2025-8088

 


 

7. CVE-2025-68613

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:

crypto: algif_aead – Revert to operating out-of-place

This mostly reverts commit 72548b093ee3 except for the copying of
the associated data.

There is no benefit in operating in-place in algif_aead since the
source and destination come from different mappings. Get rid of
all the complexity added for in-place operation and just copy the
AD directly.

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2025-68613

 


 

8. CVE-2025-59528

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:

crypto: algif_aead – Revert to operating out-of-place

This mostly reverts commit 72548b093ee3 except for the copying of
the associated data.

There is no benefit in operating in-place in algif_aead since the
source and destination come from different mappings. Get rid of
all the complexity added for in-place operation and just copy the
AD directly.

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2025-59528

 


 

9. CVE-2025-59287

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:

crypto: algif_aead – Revert to operating out-of-place

This mostly reverts commit 72548b093ee3 except for the copying of
the associated data.

There is no benefit in operating in-place in algif_aead since the
source and destination come from different mappings. Get rid of
all the complexity added for in-place operation and just copy the
AD directly.

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2025-59287

 


 

10. CVE-2025-58434

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:

crypto: algif_aead – Revert to operating out-of-place

This mostly reverts commit 72548b093ee3 except for the copying of
the associated data.

There is no benefit in operating in-place in algif_aead since the
source and destination come from different mappings. Get rid of
all the complexity added for in-place operation and just copy the
AD directly.

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2025-58434

 


"SOS
CVE Top 10

The SOS Intelligence CVE Chatter Weekly Top Ten – 11 May 2026

 

This weekly blog post is from via our unique intelligence collection pipelines. We are your eyes and ears online, including the Dark Web.

There are thousands of vulnerability discussions each week. SOS Intelligence gathers a list of the most discussed Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures (CVE) online for the previous week.

We make every effort to ensure the accuracy of the data presented. As this is an automated process some errors may creep in.

If you are feeling generous please do make us aware of anything you spot, feel free to follow us on Twitter @sosintel and DM us. Thank you!

 


 

1.  CVE-2026-31431

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:

crypto: algif_aead – Revert to operating out-of-place

This mostly reverts commit 72548b093ee3 except for the copying of
the associated data.

There is no benefit in operating in-place in algif_aead since the
source and destination come from different mappings. Get rid of
all the complexity added for in-place operation and just copy the
AD directly.

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-31431

 


 

2. CVE-2024-34102

Mismatched length fields in Zlib compressed protocol headers may allow a read of uninitialized heap memory by an unauthenticated client. This issue affects all MongoDB Server v7.0 prior to 7.0.28 versions, MongoDB Server v8.0 versions prior to 8.0.17, MongoDB Server v8.2 versions prior to 8.2.3, MongoDB Server v6.0 versions prior to 6.0.27, MongoDB Server v5.0 versions prior to 5.0.32, MongoDB Server v4.4 versions prior to 4.4.30, MongoDB Server v4.2 versions greater than or equal to 4.2.0, MongoDB Server v4.0 versions greater than or equal to 4.0.0, and MongoDB Server v3.6 versions greater than or equal to 3.6.0.

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-34102

 


 

3. CVE-2016-10033

Mismatched length fields in Zlib compressed protocol headers may allow a read of uninitialized heap memory by an unauthenticated client. This issue affects all MongoDB Server v7.0 prior to 7.0.28 versions, MongoDB Server v8.0 versions prior to 8.0.17, MongoDB Server v8.2 versions prior to 8.2.3, MongoDB Server v6.0 versions prior to 6.0.27, MongoDB Server v5.0 versions prior to 5.0.32, MongoDB Server v4.4 versions prior to 4.4.30, MongoDB Server v4.2 versions greater than or equal to 4.2.0, MongoDB Server v4.0 versions greater than or equal to 4.0.0, and MongoDB Server v3.6 versions greater than or equal to 3.6.0.

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2016-10033

 


 

4. CVE-2017-8759

Mismatched length fields in Zlib compressed protocol headers may allow a read of uninitialized heap memory by an unauthenticated client. This issue affects all MongoDB Server v7.0 prior to 7.0.28 versions, MongoDB Server v8.0 versions prior to 8.0.17, MongoDB Server v8.2 versions prior to 8.2.3, MongoDB Server v6.0 versions prior to 6.0.27, MongoDB Server v5.0 versions prior to 5.0.32, MongoDB Server v4.4 versions prior to 4.4.30, MongoDB Server v4.2 versions greater than or equal to 4.2.0, MongoDB Server v4.0 versions greater than or equal to 4.0.0, and MongoDB Server v3.6 versions greater than or equal to 3.6.0.

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2017-8759

 


 

5. CVE-2021-40539

Mismatched length fields in Zlib compressed protocol headers may allow a read of uninitialized heap memory by an unauthenticated client. This issue affects all MongoDB Server v7.0 prior to 7.0.28 versions, MongoDB Server v8.0 versions prior to 8.0.17, MongoDB Server v8.2 versions prior to 8.2.3, MongoDB Server v6.0 versions prior to 6.0.27, MongoDB Server v5.0 versions prior to 5.0.32, MongoDB Server v4.4 versions prior to 4.4.30, MongoDB Server v4.2 versions greater than or equal to 4.2.0, MongoDB Server v4.0 versions greater than or equal to 4.0.0, and MongoDB Server v3.6 versions greater than or equal to 3.6.0.

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2021-40539

 


 

6. CVE-2022-21227

Mismatched length fields in Zlib compressed protocol headers may allow a read of uninitialized heap memory by an unauthenticated client. This issue affects all MongoDB Server v7.0 prior to 7.0.28 versions, MongoDB Server v8.0 versions prior to 8.0.17, MongoDB Server v8.2 versions prior to 8.2.3, MongoDB Server v6.0 versions prior to 6.0.27, MongoDB Server v5.0 versions prior to 5.0.32, MongoDB Server v4.4 versions prior to 4.4.30, MongoDB Server v4.2 versions greater than or equal to 4.2.0, MongoDB Server v4.0 versions greater than or equal to 4.0.0, and MongoDB Server v3.6 versions greater than or equal to 3.6.0.

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2022-21227

 


 

7. CVE-2024-38063

Mismatched length fields in Zlib compressed protocol headers may allow a read of uninitialized heap memory by an unauthenticated client. This issue affects all MongoDB Server v7.0 prior to 7.0.28 versions, MongoDB Server v8.0 versions prior to 8.0.17, MongoDB Server v8.2 versions prior to 8.2.3, MongoDB Server v6.0 versions prior to 6.0.27, MongoDB Server v5.0 versions prior to 5.0.32, MongoDB Server v4.4 versions prior to 4.4.30, MongoDB Server v4.2 versions greater than or equal to 4.2.0, MongoDB Server v4.0 versions greater than or equal to 4.0.0, and MongoDB Server v3.6 versions greater than or equal to 3.6.0.

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-38063

 


 

8. CVE-2024-49113

Mismatched length fields in Zlib compressed protocol headers may allow a read of uninitialized heap memory by an unauthenticated client. This issue affects all MongoDB Server v7.0 prior to 7.0.28 versions, MongoDB Server v8.0 versions prior to 8.0.17, MongoDB Server v8.2 versions prior to 8.2.3, MongoDB Server v6.0 versions prior to 6.0.27, MongoDB Server v5.0 versions prior to 5.0.32, MongoDB Server v4.4 versions prior to 4.4.30, MongoDB Server v4.2 versions greater than or equal to 4.2.0, MongoDB Server v4.0 versions greater than or equal to 4.0.0, and MongoDB Server v3.6 versions greater than or equal to 3.6.0.

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-49113

 


 

9. CVE-2025-0368

Mismatched length fields in Zlib compressed protocol headers may allow a read of uninitialized heap memory by an unauthenticated client. This issue affects all MongoDB Server v7.0 prior to 7.0.28 versions, MongoDB Server v8.0 versions prior to 8.0.17, MongoDB Server v8.2 versions prior to 8.2.3, MongoDB Server v6.0 versions prior to 6.0.27, MongoDB Server v5.0 versions prior to 5.0.32, MongoDB Server v4.4 versions prior to 4.4.30, MongoDB Server v4.2 versions greater than or equal to 4.2.0, MongoDB Server v4.0 versions greater than or equal to 4.0.0, and MongoDB Server v3.6 versions greater than or equal to 3.6.0.

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2025-0368

 


 

10. CVE-2025-14847

Mismatched length fields in Zlib compressed protocol headers may allow a read of uninitialized heap memory by an unauthenticated client. This issue affects all MongoDB Server v7.0 prior to 7.0.28 versions, MongoDB Server v8.0 versions prior to 8.0.17, MongoDB Server v8.2 versions prior to 8.2.3, MongoDB Server v6.0 versions prior to 6.0.27, MongoDB Server v5.0 versions prior to 5.0.32, MongoDB Server v4.4 versions prior to 4.4.30, MongoDB Server v4.2 versions greater than or equal to 4.2.0, MongoDB Server v4.0 versions greater than or equal to 4.0.0, and MongoDB Server v3.6 versions greater than or equal to 3.6.0.

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2025-14847

 


"SOS
CVE Top 10

The SOS Intelligence CVE Chatter Weekly Top Ten – 04 May 2026

 

This weekly blog post is from via our unique intelligence collection pipelines. We are your eyes and ears online, including the Dark Web.

There are thousands of vulnerability discussions each week. SOS Intelligence gathers a list of the most discussed Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures (CVE) online for the previous week.

We make every effort to ensure the accuracy of the data presented. As this is an automated process some errors may creep in.

If you are feeling generous please do make us aware of anything you spot, feel free to follow us on Twitter @sosintel and DM us. Thank you!

 


 

1.  CVE-2026-26322

OpenClaw is a personal AI assistant. Prior to version 2026.1.29, there is an OS command injection vulnerability via the Project Root Path in sshNodeCommand. The sshNodeCommand function constructed a shell script without properly escaping the user-supplied project path in an error message. When the cd command failed, the unescaped path was interpolated directly into an echo statement, allowing arbitrary command execution on the remote SSH host. The parseSSHTarget function did not validate that SSH target strings could not begin with a dash. An attacker-supplied target like -oProxyCommand=… would be interpreted as an SSH configuration flag rather than a hostname, allowing arbitrary command execution on the local machine. This issue has been patched in version 2026.1.29.

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-26322

 


 

2. CVE-2026-24763

OpenClaw is a personal AI assistant. Prior to version 2026.1.29, there is an OS command injection vulnerability via the Project Root Path in sshNodeCommand. The sshNodeCommand function constructed a shell script without properly escaping the user-supplied project path in an error message. When the cd command failed, the unescaped path was interpolated directly into an echo statement, allowing arbitrary command execution on the remote SSH host. The parseSSHTarget function did not validate that SSH target strings could not begin with a dash. An attacker-supplied target like -oProxyCommand=… would be interpreted as an SSH configuration flag rather than a hostname, allowing arbitrary command execution on the local machine. This issue has been patched in version 2026.1.29.

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-24763

 


 

3. CVE-2026-25157

OpenClaw is a personal AI assistant. Prior to version 2026.1.29, there is an OS command injection vulnerability via the Project Root Path in sshNodeCommand. The sshNodeCommand function constructed a shell script without properly escaping the user-supplied project path in an error message. When the cd command failed, the unescaped path was interpolated directly into an echo statement, allowing arbitrary command execution on the remote SSH host. The parseSSHTarget function did not validate that SSH target strings could not begin with a dash. An attacker-supplied target like -oProxyCommand=… would be interpreted as an SSH configuration flag rather than a hostname, allowing arbitrary command execution on the local machine. This issue has been patched in version 2026.1.29.

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-25157

 


 

4. CVE-2026-25253

OpenClaw is a personal AI assistant. Prior to version 2026.1.29, there is an OS command injection vulnerability via the Project Root Path in sshNodeCommand. The sshNodeCommand function constructed a shell script without properly escaping the user-supplied project path in an error message. When the cd command failed, the unescaped path was interpolated directly into an echo statement, allowing arbitrary command execution on the remote SSH host. The parseSSHTarget function did not validate that SSH target strings could not begin with a dash. An attacker-supplied target like -oProxyCommand=… would be interpreted as an SSH configuration flag rather than a hostname, allowing arbitrary command execution on the local machine. This issue has been patched in version 2026.1.29.

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-25253

 


 

5. CVE-2026-25475

OpenClaw is a personal AI assistant. Prior to version 2026.1.29, there is an OS command injection vulnerability via the Project Root Path in sshNodeCommand. The sshNodeCommand function constructed a shell script without properly escaping the user-supplied project path in an error message. When the cd command failed, the unescaped path was interpolated directly into an echo statement, allowing arbitrary command execution on the remote SSH host. The parseSSHTarget function did not validate that SSH target strings could not begin with a dash. An attacker-supplied target like -oProxyCommand=… would be interpreted as an SSH configuration flag rather than a hostname, allowing arbitrary command execution on the local machine. This issue has been patched in version 2026.1.29.

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-25475

 


 

6. CVE-2026-26329

OpenClaw is a personal AI assistant. Prior to version 2026.1.29, there is an OS command injection vulnerability via the Project Root Path in sshNodeCommand. The sshNodeCommand function constructed a shell script without properly escaping the user-supplied project path in an error message. When the cd command failed, the unescaped path was interpolated directly into an echo statement, allowing arbitrary command execution on the remote SSH host. The parseSSHTarget function did not validate that SSH target strings could not begin with a dash. An attacker-supplied target like -oProxyCommand=… would be interpreted as an SSH configuration flag rather than a hostname, allowing arbitrary command execution on the local machine. This issue has been patched in version 2026.1.29.

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-26329

 


 

7. CVE-2026-27001

OpenClaw is a personal AI assistant. Prior to version 2026.1.29, there is an OS command injection vulnerability via the Project Root Path in sshNodeCommand. The sshNodeCommand function constructed a shell script without properly escaping the user-supplied project path in an error message. When the cd command failed, the unescaped path was interpolated directly into an echo statement, allowing arbitrary command execution on the remote SSH host. The parseSSHTarget function did not validate that SSH target strings could not begin with a dash. An attacker-supplied target like -oProxyCommand=… would be interpreted as an SSH configuration flag rather than a hostname, allowing arbitrary command execution on the local machine. This issue has been patched in version 2026.1.29.

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-27001

 


 

8. CVE-2026-31431

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:

crypto: algif_aead – Revert to operating out-of-place

This mostly reverts commit 72548b093ee3 except for the copying of
the associated data.

There is no benefit in operating in-place in algif_aead since the
source and destination come from different mappings. Get rid of
all the complexity added for in-place operation and just copy the
AD directly.

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-31431

 


 

9. CVE-2026-27940

llama.cpp is an inference of several LLM models in C/C++. Prior to b8146, the gguf_init_from_file_impl() in gguf.cpp is vulnerable to an Integer overflow, leading to an undersized heap allocation. Using the subsequent fread() writes 528+ bytes of attacker-controlled data past the buffer boundary. This is a bypass of a similar bug in the same file – CVE-2025-53630, but the fix overlooked some areas. This vulnerability is fixed in b8146.

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-27940

 


 

10. CVE-2025-53630

llama.cpp is an inference of several LLM models in C/C++. Prior to b8146, the gguf_init_from_file_impl() in gguf.cpp is vulnerable to an Integer overflow, leading to an undersized heap allocation. Using the subsequent fread() writes 528+ bytes of attacker-controlled data past the buffer boundary. This is a bypass of a similar bug in the same file – CVE-2025-53630, but the fix overlooked some areas. This vulnerability is fixed in b8146.

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2025-53630

 


"SOS
CVE Top 10

The SOS Intelligence CVE Chatter Weekly Top Ten –

 

This weekly blog post is from via our unique intelligence collection pipelines. We are your eyes and ears online, including the Dark Web.

There are thousands of vulnerability discussions each week. SOS Intelligence gathers a list of the most discussed Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures (CVE) online for the previous week.

We make every effort to ensure the accuracy of the data presented. As this is an automated process some errors may creep in.

If you are feeling generous please do make us aware of anything you spot, feel free to follow us on Twitter @sosintel and DM us. Thank you!

 


 

1. 

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/

 


 

2.

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/

 


 

3.

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/

 


 

4.

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/

 


 

5.

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/

 


 

6.

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/

 


 

7.

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/

 


 

8.

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/

 


 

9.

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/

 


 

10.

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/

 


"SOS
Investigation, Opinion, The Dark Web

Dark Web Services: current Average Prices (2026 Update)

Dark Web Services: current Average Prices (2026 Update)

Introduction

Back in 2022, I published our first deep dive into dark web pricing. At the time, the landscape was already complex, but it was still possible to draw fairly clean lines between the categories of goods and services being traded. Four years on, those lines have blurred considerably.

The underground economy has matured. Prices have shifted, new product categories have emerged, and the operational sophistication of threat actors has increased significantly. Ransomware-as-a-Service is now an established business model. AI-generated phishing kits are being sold alongside traditional credential dumps. Crypto drainers have become a category in their own right. And stealer log subscriptions are now one of the fastest-growing products on the dark web.

13th May 3pm UK Time

Webinar: 2026 Dark Web Pricing Report

For this updated report, we conducted an exhaustive crawl using our own SOS Intelligence DARKSEARCH platform, scanning active dark web marketplaces, forums, and paste sites throughout Q1 2026. We supplemented this with direct marketplace access via Tor and cross-referenced our findings against published industry research from PrivacySharks, DeepStrike, Privacy Affairs, and Trustwave. This time around, we have also expanded our scope significantly, covering narcotics, firearms, counterfeit goods, cryptocurrency fraud tools, and forged documents alongside the traditional cyber-focused categories. The result is what I believe to be one of the most comprehensive snapshots of dark web pricing available today.

So whether you are a security researcher, an MSSP building threat briefings, or a CISO trying to quantify the risk exposure your organisation faces, this should give you a solid, data-backed foundation.

Methodology

Our approach follows the intelligence cycle: direction, collection, processing, analysis, and dissemination. The direction phase was straightforward: understand what is being sold on the dark web in 2026 and at what price points.

For collection, we used the SOS Intelligence API v2 to run targeted keyword searches across our indexed dark web corpus. This includes content from over 50 active marketplaces, forums, paste sites, and Telegram channels. We queried across 20+ distinct product categories, including stolen financial instruments, identity documents, hacking services, malware, access brokers, narcotics (cocaine, heroin, methamphetamine, cannabis, MDMA, and prescription drugs), firearms, counterfeit goods, cryptocurrency fraud tools, and forged documents. We also accessed active Tor marketplaces directly to verify listed prices against real product pages. Key marketplaces analysed include Tor Market, Tor Amazon, Abacus Market, TheBreakingBad, Gun and Shell Factory, and several standalone vendor storefronts.

During processing and analysis, we normalised prices to USD (where vendors listed in EUR, GBP, or cryptocurrency) and calculated averages across multiple vendors where possible. Where a product category had significant variance (for example, initial access pricing can range from $500 to $50,000+), we present the typical range rather than a misleading average.

One thing worth noting: prices on the dark web are not static. They fluctuate based on supply, demand, law enforcement activity, and even seasonal patterns. What we present here is a snapshot, accurate to Q1 2026, and should be treated as indicative rather than definitive.

Stolen Financial Instruments

Financial data remains the bread and butter of dark web commerce. Credit card data, bank account credentials, and payment platform logins continue to dominate marketplace listings. The availability is enormous, driven in large part by the explosion in stealer log infections and large-scale data breaches.

Credit card data with CVV (card-not-present fraud) remains cheap and abundant. A single card with CVV typically sells for $10 to $40, depending on the issuing bank, card type, and associated balance. Cards with higher balances or from premium issuers command a premium. Cloned physical cards with PIN are a different proposition entirely, typically ranging from $100 for a single card with a $2,500 to $3,500 balance, up to $600 for a batch of 10 cards with a combined balance of $33,000 to $35,000.

ProductPrice Range (USD)Source/Notes
Credit card with CVV$10 – $40Per card, card-not-present
Cloned card with PIN (single)$100 – $250$2,500 – $3,500 balance
Cloned cards (batch of 10)$450 – $600$30,000 – $35,000 combined
AMEX Prepaid (EUR 2,500)$105 – $510Price varies by vendor
Bank login (US)$35 – $500Depends on bank and balance
Bank login (UK/EU)$50 – $1,000+Premium for verified accounts
Bank transfer service ($10K)$500Vendor guarantees delivery
PayPal account (verified)$15 – $55Balance $2,500 – $25,000
Crypto exchange account (Kraken)$249Fully verified
Crypto exchange account (general)$90 – $250Coinbase, Binance, etc.

Compared to our 2022 findings, the average price of stolen credit card data has dropped slightly, reflecting oversupply. Bank account credentials, on the other hand, have held steady or increased, particularly for UK and EU accounts where strong customer authentication (SCA) requirements make compromised credentials more valuable to attackers who can bypass these controls.

Identity Documents and Fullz

Fullz, complete identity packages containing name, date of birth, SSN, address, and often more, remain a staple of dark web commerce. The pricing here has been remarkably consistent over the years, which suggests stable supply chains, likely fed by the steady stream of data breaches affecting organisations globally.

Bulk purchasing drives the per-unit cost down significantly. A batch of 1,000 Social Security Numbers was listed on Tor Market at $65. Business fullz (company identity packages with EIN numbers) go for around $95 for a set of 10, which is particularly concerning for organisations worried about business identity theft and fraudulent corporate filings.

ProductPrice Range (USD)Notes
Individual fullz (US)$20 – $100Per identity, includes SSN
SSN batch (1,000 records)$65Bulk purchase, specific regions
Business fullz with EIN (10 pack)$95Corporate identity packages
US passport scan$100Digital copy only
US physical passport (forged)$3,000 – $3,800High-quality forgery
UK driver’s licence (forged)$500Physical document
EU national ID (forged)$300 – $700Varies by country
Medical records$50 – $500+Depends on completeness
Selfie with ID (for KYC bypass)$50 – $100Growing demand

A notable trend in 2026 is the growing market for KYC bypass packages. These typically include a stolen identity paired with a matching selfie (often obtained from stealer logs that capture webcam images), sold specifically to bypass Know Your Customer verification on financial platforms. This is a direct response to tightened identity verification requirements, and it represents an uncomfortable escalation in the identity fraud ecosystem.

DDoS and Hacking Services

DDoS-for-hire remains one of the most accessible attack services on the dark web. Entry-level DDoS attacks can be purchased for as little as $10 per hour, making it trivially cheap for anyone with a grudge and a cryptocurrency wallet. Monthly subscription packages for sustained DDoS capability go up to $850, though most listings cluster around $200 to $500 per month.

Hacking services for hire are more variable in pricing, reflecting the range of complexity involved. Simple social media account compromises sit at the lower end, while corporate network penetration and database extraction commands significantly higher fees.

ServicePrice Range (USD)Notes
DDoS attack (per hour)$10 – $50Basic layer 4/7 attack
DDoS subscription (monthly)$200 – $850Sustained capability
Social media account hack$25 – $100Facebook, Instagram, etc.
Email account compromise$100 – $500Corporate email higher
Website hacking$200 – $3,000Depends on target complexity
Corporate network access$500 – $10,000+Overlaps with IAB market
Phone hacking/spyware install$300 – $1,500Remote installation
Doxing service$25 – $200Varies by depth of research

The DDoS market has become increasingly commoditised. In 2022 we reported an average DDoS service price of around $382. That number has come down, driven by competition between providers and the proliferation of botnet infrastructure. The real concern is not the price itself but how easy it has become to launch these attacks with minimal technical knowledge.

Malware, Exploit Kits, and Phishing

This is where the dark web economy has seen some of its most significant evolution since our last report. The malware-as-a-service model is now firmly established, with vendors offering everything from basic RATs (Remote Access Trojans) through to sophisticated banking trojans and zero-day exploits.

Phishing kits have become particularly interesting. AI-generated phishing templates are now being sold at a premium, with vendors marketing their kits as capable of bypassing modern email security filters. The quality of these templates has improved dramatically, making traditional security awareness training less effective than it was even two years ago.

ProductPrice Range (USD)Notes
RAT (Remote Access Trojan)$45 – $500Off-the-shelf, basic features
Banking trojan$500 – $1,800Targeted at specific banks
Ransomware-as-a-Service kit$500 – $5,000Includes builder and panel
Stealer log subscription$100 – $1,024/moRedline, Raccoon, Vidar
Phishing kit (standard)$50 – $300Includes templates and hosting
Phishing kit (AI-generated)$200 – $800Bypass modern filters
Zero-day exploit (general)$5,000 – $200,000+Price varies enormously
Exploit kit (browser)$100 – $2,000Pre-packaged exploitation
Botnet rental (1,000 bots)$50 – $200/dayFor spam or DDoS
Keylogger$25 – $150Basic to advanced features

The Ransomware-as-a-Service (RaaS) market deserves special attention. Our platform currently tracks over 100 active ransomware groups, many of which operate affiliate programmes where the actual ransomware deployment is carried out by affiliates who pay a percentage (typically 20-30%) of the ransom to the RaaS operator. The barrier to entry for launching a ransomware campaign has never been lower, and this is reflected in the sustained growth of ransomware incidents globally.

Crypto Drainers and Mixers

This is a category that barely existed in 2022 and is now a significant segment of the dark web economy. Crypto drainers are tools designed to empty cryptocurrency wallets, typically deployed via phishing sites that mimic legitimate Web3 platforms and trick users into connecting their wallets and signing malicious transactions.

Our DARKSEARCH data turned up active listings on DNA Forums and other threat actor communities, with prices ranging from $50 for basic tutorials through to $1,000 for fully operational Solana drainer toolkits. The Tron Trap drainer tool was listed at $300, while general-purpose drainer kits sat around $200 to $500.

ProductPrice Range (USD)Notes
Crypto drainer kit (general)$200 – $500Multi-chain support
Solana drainer$1,000Chain-specific tooling
Tron Trap drainer$300Listed on DNA Forums
Crypto drainer tutorial$50 – $100DIY approach
Crypto mixing/tumbling service1-3% of amountPer transaction fee
Crypto cashout service15-25% of amountConversion to fiat

The emergence of drainer-as-a-service mirrors the RaaS model. Operators provide the tooling and infrastructure, affiliates drive traffic to phishing sites, and profits are split. Some drainer operators take a 20-30% cut of every wallet drained. For context, wallet drainer attacks stole hundreds of millions of dollars in cryptocurrency during 2025 alone, making this one of the highest-growth criminal sectors.

Initial Access Brokers

Initial Access Brokers (IABs) continue to be a critical part of the threat landscape. These are threat actors who specialise in gaining access to corporate networks and then selling that access to other criminals, typically ransomware operators. The IAB market is essentially the supply chain for ransomware.

Pricing varies enormously based on the target organisation’s size, industry, and the type of access being sold. VPN credentials for a small company might go for $500, while domain admin access to a large enterprise can command $10,000 or more. Our 2022 report found an average of around $7,700 for initial network access. In 2026, the range has widened as the market has matured, but the median sits around $2,000 to $5,000 for mid-market targets.

Access TypePrice Range (USD)Notes
VPN credentials (SME)$200 – $1,000Single organisation
RDP access (dedicated server)$10 – $100Commodity pricing
Domain admin (enterprise)$5,000 – $50,000+High-value targets
Web shell access$50 – $500Depends on target
cPanel/hosting access$10 – $50Bulk available
Database access (customer data)$500 – $10,000Depends on record count
Cloud infrastructure access$1,000 – $20,000AWS, Azure, GCP

Cloud infrastructure access is the emerging high-value category here. As organisations continue their migration to cloud platforms, compromised cloud credentials have become increasingly sought after. A set of AWS root account credentials for an enterprise can be worth significantly more than traditional on-premise network access, reflecting the potential blast radius of a cloud compromise.

Stolen Accounts and Subscriptions

The market for compromised online accounts remains massive, covering everything from streaming services to social media to gaming platforms. These are largely driven by credential stuffing attacks leveraging the billions of username/password pairs available from historical breaches, combined with the output of stealer log infections.

Account TypePrice Range (USD)Notes
Netflix/Disney+/streaming$4 – $25Per account, often shared
Spotify Premium$3 – $10Bulk available
Facebook account$25 – $45Higher for aged accounts
Instagram account$25 – $45Followers affect price
LinkedIn Premium$30 – $50Professional accounts
Gaming accounts (Steam, Epic)$10 – $100Game library affects price
Food delivery (Uber Eats, etc.)$5 – $20With stored payment
Email accounts (bulk)$2 – $10Per account
VPN service accounts$5 – $15NordVPN, ExpressVPN, etc.

What strikes me about this category is how cheap everything is. A Netflix account for $4, a Facebook account for $25. The low prices reflect the sheer volume of compromised credentials available. For most consumers, the inconvenience of having an account compromised is minor. But for organisations, compromised employee accounts, particularly email and LinkedIn, can be the starting point for targeted social engineering campaigns.

Counterfeit Currency and Documents

Counterfeit physical currency continues to be traded, though the market has evolved. Our crawl of Robinhood Market found fake Euro banknotes listed from $300 for a small batch up to $1,200 for larger quantities. Western Union transfer services were listed at $200 for a $2,000 transfer, representing a 10% fee.

Bank cheque templates have also become a notable category, with templates available from as little as $5 for basic designs up to $600 for comprehensive kits that include matching security features and printing instructions.

ProductPrice Range (USD)Notes
Counterfeit EUR banknotes$300 – $1,200Various denominations
Counterfeit USD banknotes$350 – $1,500Quality varies significantly
Western Union transfer ($2,000)$20010% fee structure
MoneyGram transfer$150 – $300Similar fee structure
Bank cheque templates$5 – $600Including security features
Counterfeit branded goods (guides)$20 – $200Manufacturing instructions

In our 2022 report, counterfeit currency averaged around $396 per $1,000 face value. The current rates are broadly similar, suggesting this market has reached a stable equilibrium. The real shift is towards digital fraud, with physical counterfeiting becoming a smaller proportion of overall dark web commerce.

Proxy and Hosting Infrastructure

Bulletproof hosting and residential proxy services continue to be essential infrastructure for cybercriminal operations. These services provide the anonymous, abuse-tolerant hosting that enables everything from phishing campaigns to command and control servers.

ServicePrice Range (USD)Notes
Bulletproof hosting (monthly)$50 – $500Abuse-tolerant, offshore
Residential proxy (monthly)$200 – $645Pool of residential IPs
SOCKS5 proxy (per IP)$1 – $10Single use or short-lived
VPN service (criminal-oriented)$5 – $30/moNo-log guarantees
Dedicated server (offshore)$100 – $400/moFull admin access
Domain + hosting bundle$20 – $100For phishing campaigns

Residential proxy pricing has actually increased since 2022, when we reported an average of $645 per month. The current range starts lower but premium services now charge more, reflecting growing demand from threat actors who need residential IP addresses to bypass fraud detection systems and CAPTCHAs.

AI-Enabled Criminal Services

This is entirely new territory since our 2022 report. The commoditisation of large language models has created a new category of criminal tooling that simply did not exist four years ago. Dark web forums now host discussions and sales of jailbroken AI models, custom-trained chatbots for social engineering, and AI-powered tools for generating convincing phishing content at scale.

While we did not find as many standardised price points for AI services as for other categories (the market is still maturing), the trend is clear. AI is being integrated into existing criminal workflows, particularly around social engineering, phishing content generation, and code development for malware. Some vendors are marketing “FraudGPT” and “WormGPT” style tools, essentially LLM wrappers with the safety guardrails removed, at subscription prices of $200 to $1,700 per month.

The implications here are significant. AI lowers the barrier to entry for technically unsophisticated threat actors, increases the quality and scale of social engineering attacks, and makes it harder for defenders to distinguish malicious content from legitimate communications.

Narcotics and Controlled Substances

Dark web drug marketplaces remain one of the most active sectors of the underground economy. Our DARKSEARCH crawls in Q1 2026 revealed multiple operational marketplaces with extensive product catalogues, professional vendor storefronts, and established escrow systems. The sophistication of these operations is notable: vendor pages include lab-testing claims, customer reviews, volume discount tiers, and next-day delivery (NDD) options for domestic shipments.

Three marketplaces stood out during our research. TheBreakingBad, a dedicated vendor storefront operating with a full e-commerce style interface, offered a comprehensive catalogue of stimulants, opiates, and dissociatives with granular volume pricing. Abacus Market, a multi-vendor marketplace, carried similar inventory with slightly different pricing. Tor Market, which operates as a broader multi-category darknet marketplace (also listing firearms, documents, and hacking tools), hosted 47 drug products across multiple vendors at the time of our crawl.

Stimulants

Cocaine remains the most commonly listed stimulant. Colombian cocaine claiming 94%+ purity was available across multiple markets. Crystal methamphetamine was the second most prevalent stimulant listing, with a notably well-developed volume pricing structure from European vendors. Amphetamine paste, particularly popular on European markets, was available in both standard (74%) and premium (94%) purity grades.

ProductPrice RangeVolume PricingSource Market
Colombian Cocaine 94%+$50 – $80/gBulk from $35/g at 100g+Tor Market, Abacus
Crystal Meth 94% (Mexican)€10/g€80/10g, €700/100g, €5,500/kgTheBreakingBad
Crystal Meth (ICE)$99/10g$249/25g, $1,000/100gAbacus Market
Speed Amphetamine 94%€22/10g€90/100g, €700/kgTheBreakingBad
Speed Amphetamine 74%€10/10g€77/100g, €555/kgTheBreakingBad
3-MMC (Metaphedrone)€10/g€350/100g, €3,000/kgTheBreakingBad
MDMA Champagne 84%+$6.50 – $18/g$8/g at 250g bulkAbacus Market
XTC Pills 250mg MDMA€12.50/10 pills€80/100, €750/1,000 pillsTheBreakingBad
XTC Pills (240mg, various)$135 – $200/10 pillsMultiple brands availableTor Market

Opiates and Opioids

Heroin remained available from specialist vendors, with Iranian-sourced uncut product marketed as the premium option. The pricing structure on TheBreakingBad was particularly detailed, offering nine quantity tiers from a single gram to a full kilogram. This level of volume pricing suggests these vendors are servicing both individual users and mid-level distributors.

Prescription opioids also featured prominently. Oxycontin (40mg tablets) and Percocet (5/325mg) were listed on Tor Market, though exact per-unit pricing was often obscured behind “add to cart” interfaces that required account creation to view.

ProductPrice RangeVolume PricingSource Market
Heroin Uncut (Iranian)€22.50/g€175/10g, €1,600/100g, €13,500/kgTheBreakingBad
Heroin #3 (60-70%)$50 – $55/3gMid-grade, EU sourcedTor Market
Oxycontin 40mg (20ct)$120 – $200Prescription tabsTor Market
Percocet 5/325mg (70ct)$150 – $250Price per bottle est.Tor Market
Fentanyl patches/pills$50 – $150Limited listings (high risk)Various

Cannabis

Cannabis products dominated by volume of listings. UK-based vendors advertised next-day delivery (NDD) on multiple strains, essentially running a delivery service comparable to legitimate e-commerce. Listings included premium strains such as OG Cookies, Super Silver Haze, Gorilla Glue, and Amnesia Haze, with clear quantity tiers.

ProductPrice RangeVolume/NotesSource Market
Gorilla Glue (7g)£42 (~$53)UK NDD availableAbacus Market
OG Cookies (various)$50 – $120/quarterMultiple vendorsTor Market
Amnesia Haze (100g)$400 – $600Bulk listingAbacus Market
Super Silver Haze$35 – $80/quarterDutch sourcedTor Market
Cannabis (French market)Varies192 products listedFR marketplace

Psychedelics and Dissociatives

The psychedelics market showed strong activity, with psilocybin products packaged in consumer-friendly formats (chocolate edibles, microdose capsules) and ketamine available from multiple vendors. LSD pricing was harder to pin down through DARKSEARCH alone, but cross-referencing with forum discussions suggests typical street-equivalent pricing in the $5 to $15 per tab range.

ProductPrice RangeNotesSource Market
Psilocybin Chocolate (4g)$40Consumer-packaged edibleTor Market
Psilocybin Capsules 150mg (x100)$80 – $150Microdose formatTor Market
Ketamine S-Isomer€10/g€175/50g, €1,850/kgTheBreakingBad
LSD Tabs$5 – $15/tabForum pricing cross-refMultiple
XTC/MDMA (ecstasy, various)€12.50 – $200/10 pillsBrand-dependent pricingMultiple markets

Prescription Pharmaceuticals

Beyond controlled opioids, a range of prescription medications was available. Benzodiazepines (particularly Xanax and Rivotril) were listed at a fraction of pharmacy prices. Erectile dysfunction medications (Cialis) appeared as bulk listings, likely diverted or counterfeit product.

ProductPrice RangeNotesSource Market
Xanax 2mg (50 pills)€5 – €25Alprazolam, likely pressedAbacus Market
Rivotril 2mg (20 pills)$15 – $40ClonazepamTor Market
Cialis (50 tabs)$120 – $200Bulk pack, likely generic/counterfeitTor Market

The drug marketplace in 2026 functions like a professional retail operation. Escrow, customer reviews, volume discounts, refund policies, and domestic stealth shipping are standard. The operational maturity here mirrors what we have seen in the cyber services space, with vendor reputation systems driving quality competition.

Firearms and Ammunition

Firearms remain one of the most sensitive categories on the dark web. Our DARKSEARCH queries returned listings from multiple sources, including a dedicated storefront called “Gun and Shell Factory” and the firearms category on Tor Market (which carried 10 products at the time of our crawl). A vendor called “GlockZ” was also active with 7 listed products.

It is worth noting that firearms sales on the dark web carry the highest scam risk of any category. Law enforcement honeypot operations are well-documented in this space, and many “vendors” simply take payment and never deliver. That said, the listings themselves are informative for understanding what threat actors believe constitutes a reasonable market price, and the availability of these listings is itself a data point worth tracking.

Handguns

FirearmListed Price (USD)CalibreSource
Glock 17 Gen 4$4999mmTor Market
Glock 19$4509mmGun and Shell Factory
Glock 26$3509mmGun and Shell Factory
SIG Sauer P320$6009mmGun and Shell Factory
SIG Sauer P220$680 (sale from $800).45 ACPTor Market
Desert Eagle$899 (sale from $1,000).44 MagnumTor Market
Beretta M9$2499mmTor Market
Ed Brown Kobra$499.45 ACPGun and Shell Factory
CZ TS 2$8999mmGun and Shell Factory

Long Guns and Submachine Guns

FirearmListed Price (USD)TypeSource
AK-47$800 – $1,200Assault RifleGun and Shell Factory
AR-15$700 – $1,000Semi-Auto RifleGun and Shell Factory
UZI Pro$740Submachine GunGun and Shell Factory

Ammunition was also listed separately, though pricing data was less granular in our crawl results. The presence of both firearms and ammunition on the same marketplaces that sell drugs, stolen data, and hacking tools underscores the breadth of these platforms. Tor Market, for instance, carries categories for Counterfeits, Credit Card/CVV/Dumps, Documents, Drugs (47 products), Firearms and Ammo (10 products), Gadgets, and Hacking (13 products), all under one marketplace roof.

Compared to legitimate retail prices, dark web firearms are generally listed at a discount of 30% to 60% from retail, which reflects the risk premium inverted: buyers on the dark web are willing to pay less because of the high risk of scam, non-delivery, or law enforcement interception. From a threat intelligence perspective, the persistence of these listings indicates ongoing demand from individuals who cannot or will not purchase through legitimate channels.

Expanded Counterfeit and Fraud Services

Beyond the identity documents and financial instruments covered earlier, the dark web hosts a broader ecosystem of counterfeit goods and fraud services. Our expanded DARKSEARCH crawl revealed categories including counterfeit luxury goods, forged academic credentials, cryptocurrency fraud tools, and casino bonus exploitation kits.

Counterfeit Luxury Goods
Tor Market listed counterfeit luxury watches, with a Rolex Submariner Non-Date 41mm (model 124060) featured as a promoted product. Counterfeit luxury goods have historically been a smaller dark web category compared to clearnet operations, but their presence on multi-category darknet marketplaces suggests vendors are expanding their offerings to capture cross-selling opportunities from buyers already on the platform for other products.

Cryptocurrency Fraud Tools

Cryptocurrency fraud tools were among the most expensive single-item listings we encountered. The “Tor Amazon” marketplace (operating since 2019) offered an extensive catalogue including stolen Bitcoin wallets, fake USDT senders, wallet cracking tools, and compromised exchange accounts. The pricing here is particularly instructive.

ProductPrice (USD)DetailsSource
Stolen BTC Wallet (599 BTC)$42,000 – $59,900Priced at ~0.1% of wallet balanceTor Amazon
Atomic Wallet 1BTC+$4,000Pre-loaded compromised walletTor Amazon
Bitcoin Wallet w/ Seeds$1,500 – $6,500Wallet.dat with passphraseTor Amazon
Wallet.dat Passphrase Cracker$400Brute-force toolTor Amazon
Flash/Fake USDT Sender$300 – $500Spoofed transactionsTor Amazon
BTC Mnemonic Brute Tool£550 (~$690)12-phrase wallet crackerStandalone store
BTC Reverse Transaction Tool$400 – $600Transaction reversal exploitStandalone store
Leaked Data (16B accounts)$121,484Apple, Google, Binance etc.Tor Amazon

Financial Fraud and Money Movement

The money movement ecosystem on the dark web continues to grow. Services for laundering funds through compromised payment platforms, cloned cards, and bank transfer services were widely available. The Tor Amazon marketplace offered ATM-cloned cards with guaranteed balances, stolen Visa CC/CVV data, Binance account transfers, PayPal-to-Bitcoin conversion services, and casino bonus exploitation kits.

ProductPrice (USD)DetailsSource
ATM Cloned Card ($15K balance)$900Physical card, PIN includedTor Amazon
VISA CC/CVV ($8K balance)$400Virtual card with full detailsTor Amazon
PayPal $7K Verified Transfer$600 (sale from $700)Within 20 minutes worldwideTor Market
Visa Prepaid Clone ($7.5K)$630 (sale from $750)Physical + online usableTor Market
Binance Account Transfer$300 – $500BTC/ETH/USDT transfersTor Amazon
Paxful Accounts ($5.5K)$250 – $400Guaranteed balanceTor Amazon
Casino Bonus Exploit$150 – $350$3K-$10K bonus exploitationTor Amazon
Bank Flash SQR Tool$800 (sale from $1,500)Bank manipulation softwareTor Amazon
Aviator Predictor Hack AI$400Casino/gambling exploit toolTor Amazon
Gold Bars 100g (Pre-Owned)$8,500Physical delivery, escrowTor Amazon

Forged Documents and Credentials

Forged documents ranged from academic credentials (diplomas, degrees, professional certificates) to government-issued identity documents. Tor Market listed a dedicated Documents category with 4 products, while Tor Amazon carried a broader selection under their Documents department. The “USA Documents” product on Tor Amazon was rated 4.85 out of 5 and priced between $600 and $3,500, covering various forms of US identification.

ProductPrice Range (USD)NotesSource
USA Identity Documents (ID Card)$600 – $3,500Multiple ID types availableTor Amazon
Forged Diploma/Degree$200 – $800Various institutionsMultiple markets
Professional Certificates$150 – $500IT, medical, trade certsMultiple markets
Counterfeit COVID Certificates$50 – $150Declining demandForum listings
Deepfake Service$100 – $500Video/image manipulationTor directories

The breadth of these offerings paints a picture of a mature underground economy that mirrors, and in some ways parodies, legitimate commerce. Marketplaces offer escrow protection, customer reviews, vendor ratings, return policies, and even promotional sales events. Tor Amazon, for example, displays a running shopping cart total (one snapshot showed a cart worth $154,514), tracks “verified sellers” with sales counts, and runs sale pricing on multiple products. This operational maturity makes these platforms resilient and, from a threat intelligence perspective, worth continuous monitoring.

Pricing Comparison: 2022 vs 2026

The table below compares our 2022 findings with the current 2026 data across key categories. Prices are typical midpoint values.

Category2022 Average2026 AverageTrend
Credit card with CVV$243$15 – $40Decreased (oversupply)
Counterfeit currency (per $1K)$396$350 – $450Stable
DDoS service (monthly)$382$200 – $500Decreased (commoditised)
Residential proxy (monthly)$645$200 – $645Wider range, lower entry
Initial network access$7,700$2,000 – $5,000Decreased (median)
Ransomware kitN/A$500 – $5,000New category tracked
Crypto drainer kitN/A$200 – $1,000New category
Stealer log subscriptionN/A$100 – $1,024/moNew category
AI criminal toolsN/A$200 – $1,700/moNew category
Cocaine (per gram)$150 – $300$50 – $80Decreased (dark web discount)
Crystal Meth (per gram)$50 – $100$10 – $15Decreased significantly
Heroin (per gram)$100 – $200$22 – $55Decreased (direct sourcing)
Handgun (Glock 17)$1,500 – $2,500$450 – $500Decreased (high scam risk)
Stolen BTC WalletN/A$4,000 – $59,900New category
Forged ID Documents (US)$250 – $1,000$600 – $3,500Increased (quality premium)

The overarching trend is clear: established product categories have become cheaper as supply has increased, while new, more sophisticated offerings (RaaS, drainers, AI tools) have emerged at premium price points. The dark web economy is following the same pattern as legitimate tech markets, with commodity products racing to the bottom while innovation commands a premium.

Key Takeaways

The barrier to entry keeps falling. DDoS attacks for $10, phishing kits for $50, stolen accounts for a few dollars. The tools for cybercrime are cheaper and more accessible than ever. This has direct implications for the volume of attacks organisations should expect to face.

Stealer logs are the new oil. The stealer log economy has grown enormously. These logs, harvested from malware infections on individual machines, contain browser-saved passwords, session cookies, crypto wallet data, and more. They feed almost every other category: account takeover, initial access brokering, financial fraud, and identity theft.

Ransomware is a mature industry. With over 100 active groups tracked on our platform and well-established affiliate models, ransomware has moved from being an emerging threat to a structural feature of the threat landscape. The supply chain (IABs to RaaS operators to affiliates to money launderers) is well-oiled and efficient.

AI is an accelerant. While AI has not yet created fundamentally new attack types, it is making existing attacks more effective, more scalable, and more convincing. The appearance of AI-enabled tools as a distinct product category on the dark web is a development every security team should be tracking.

Crypto is the preferred battlefield. The emergence of crypto drainers as a major product category, combined with the growth in compromised exchange accounts, tells us that cryptocurrency users and platforms are now firmly in the crosshairs. The pseudonymous nature of crypto transactions makes this an attractive and growing target.

Drug marketplaces operate like professional retailers. The dark web drug economy has reached a level of operational maturity that mirrors legitimate e-commerce. Escrow, customer reviews, next-day delivery, volume discounts, lab-testing claims, and refund policies are now standard. Prices have dropped significantly compared to street equivalents, reflecting the efficiency of direct vendor-to-buyer models that bypass traditional distribution chains.

Firearms listings persist despite high scam risk. While firearms are consistently available on dark web marketplaces, this category carries the highest scam risk and is a known target for law enforcement honeypot operations. The listed prices (30% to 60% below retail) reflect this risk. The intelligence value here is less about the prices themselves and more about the persistent demand signal from individuals seeking to acquire weapons outside regulated channels.

The dark web is a one-stop shop. Multi-category marketplaces like Tor Market (drugs, firearms, counterfeits, hacking tools, documents, and financial fraud under one roof) and Tor Amazon (hacking, financial, electronics, documents, drugs, and guns) demonstrate that the underground economy has consolidated. A single marketplace visit can service everything from identity theft to substance procurement to weapon acquisition. This consolidation has implications for law enforcement, intelligence analysts, and risk modelling.

Don’t miss out!

Webinar: 2026 Dark Web Pricing Report

Conclusion

The dark web economy in 2026 is bigger, more diverse, and more sophisticated than it was in 2022. Prices for commodity products have dropped while new, higher-value categories have emerged. The professionalism of threat actors continues to increase, with customer support, affiliate programmes, and quality guarantees now standard across many marketplaces.

What has changed most since our 2022 report is the breadth. The dark web is no longer just a marketplace for stolen data and hacking tools. It is a fully integrated underground economy spanning narcotics, firearms, counterfeit goods, identity documents, cryptocurrency fraud, and digital services. Multi-category marketplaces have consolidated these offerings under single platforms, complete with escrow systems, vendor ratings, and promotional campaigns that would not look out of place on a legitimate e-commerce site.

For defenders and intelligence professionals, the key takeaway is that the cost of attacking your organisation, or acquiring the tools to do so, is low and getting lower. The investment needed to mount a credible phishing campaign, launch a DDoS attack, purchase a weapon, or obtain fraudulent identity documents is trivial compared to the potential payoff. This asymmetry is the fundamental challenge, and understanding the economics of the dark web is essential to building effective defences and informing policy.

At SOS Intelligence, we monitor these marketplaces continuously so our customers do not have to. Our DARKSEARCH platform indexes content across 50+ active dark web sources, and our analysts track emerging threats, new marketplace activity, and pricing trends in real time. If you want to understand what is being said about your organisation on the dark web, or if you need intelligence on any of the categories covered in this report, our platform gives you that visibility.

Passport photo by Kit (formerly ConvertKit) on Unsplash

Crypto Photo by Pierre Borthiry – Peiobty on Unsplash

Drugs photo by Colin Davis on Unsplash

Money hoto by Dmytro Glazunov on Unsplash

Gun photo by Tom Def on Unsplash

"SOS
CVE Top 10

The SOS Intelligence CVE Chatter Weekly Top Ten – 20 April 2026

 

This weekly blog post is from via our unique intelligence collection pipelines. We are your eyes and ears online, including the Dark Web.

There are thousands of vulnerability discussions each week. SOS Intelligence gathers a list of the most discussed Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures (CVE) online for the previous week.

We make every effort to ensure the accuracy of the data presented. As this is an automated process some errors may creep in.

If you are feeling generous please do make us aware of anything you spot, feel free to follow us on Twitter @sosintel and DM us. Thank you!

 


 

1.  CVE-2026-25253

OpenClaw is a personal AI assistant. Prior to version 2026.1.29, there is an OS command injection vulnerability via the Project Root Path in sshNodeCommand. The sshNodeCommand function constructed a shell script without properly escaping the user-supplied project path in an error message. When the cd command failed, the unescaped path was interpolated directly into an echo statement, allowing arbitrary command execution on the remote SSH host. The parseSSHTarget function did not validate that SSH target strings could not begin with a dash. An attacker-supplied target like -oProxyCommand=… would be interpreted as an SSH configuration flag rather than a hostname, allowing arbitrary command execution on the local machine. This issue has been patched in version 2026.1.29.

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-25253

 


 

2. CVE-2026-25157

OpenClaw is a personal AI assistant. Prior to version 2026.1.29, there is an OS command injection vulnerability via the Project Root Path in sshNodeCommand. The sshNodeCommand function constructed a shell script without properly escaping the user-supplied project path in an error message. When the cd command failed, the unescaped path was interpolated directly into an echo statement, allowing arbitrary command execution on the remote SSH host. The parseSSHTarget function did not validate that SSH target strings could not begin with a dash. An attacker-supplied target like -oProxyCommand=… would be interpreted as an SSH configuration flag rather than a hostname, allowing arbitrary command execution on the local machine. This issue has been patched in version 2026.1.29.

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-25157

 


 

3. CVE-2026-24763

OpenClaw is a personal AI assistant. Prior to version 2026.1.29, there is an OS command injection vulnerability via the Project Root Path in sshNodeCommand. The sshNodeCommand function constructed a shell script without properly escaping the user-supplied project path in an error message. When the cd command failed, the unescaped path was interpolated directly into an echo statement, allowing arbitrary command execution on the remote SSH host. The parseSSHTarget function did not validate that SSH target strings could not begin with a dash. An attacker-supplied target like -oProxyCommand=… would be interpreted as an SSH configuration flag rather than a hostname, allowing arbitrary command execution on the local machine. This issue has been patched in version 2026.1.29.

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-24763

 


 

4. CVE-2026-25475

OpenClaw is a personal AI assistant. Prior to version 2026.1.29, there is an OS command injection vulnerability via the Project Root Path in sshNodeCommand. The sshNodeCommand function constructed a shell script without properly escaping the user-supplied project path in an error message. When the cd command failed, the unescaped path was interpolated directly into an echo statement, allowing arbitrary command execution on the remote SSH host. The parseSSHTarget function did not validate that SSH target strings could not begin with a dash. An attacker-supplied target like -oProxyCommand=… would be interpreted as an SSH configuration flag rather than a hostname, allowing arbitrary command execution on the local machine. This issue has been patched in version 2026.1.29.

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-25475

 


 

5. CVE-2026-26322

OpenClaw is a personal AI assistant. Prior to version 2026.1.29, there is an OS command injection vulnerability via the Project Root Path in sshNodeCommand. The sshNodeCommand function constructed a shell script without properly escaping the user-supplied project path in an error message. When the cd command failed, the unescaped path was interpolated directly into an echo statement, allowing arbitrary command execution on the remote SSH host. The parseSSHTarget function did not validate that SSH target strings could not begin with a dash. An attacker-supplied target like -oProxyCommand=… would be interpreted as an SSH configuration flag rather than a hostname, allowing arbitrary command execution on the local machine. This issue has been patched in version 2026.1.29.

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-26322

 


 

6. CVE-2026-27001

OpenClaw is a personal AI assistant. Prior to version 2026.1.29, there is an OS command injection vulnerability via the Project Root Path in sshNodeCommand. The sshNodeCommand function constructed a shell script without properly escaping the user-supplied project path in an error message. When the cd command failed, the unescaped path was interpolated directly into an echo statement, allowing arbitrary command execution on the remote SSH host. The parseSSHTarget function did not validate that SSH target strings could not begin with a dash. An attacker-supplied target like -oProxyCommand=… would be interpreted as an SSH configuration flag rather than a hostname, allowing arbitrary command execution on the local machine. This issue has been patched in version 2026.1.29.

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-27001

 


 

7. CVE-2026-26329

OpenClaw is a personal AI assistant. Prior to version 2026.1.29, there is an OS command injection vulnerability via the Project Root Path in sshNodeCommand. The sshNodeCommand function constructed a shell script without properly escaping the user-supplied project path in an error message. When the cd command failed, the unescaped path was interpolated directly into an echo statement, allowing arbitrary command execution on the remote SSH host. The parseSSHTarget function did not validate that SSH target strings could not begin with a dash. An attacker-supplied target like -oProxyCommand=… would be interpreted as an SSH configuration flag rather than a hostname, allowing arbitrary command execution on the local machine. This issue has been patched in version 2026.1.29.

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-26329

 


 

8. CVE-2025-43510

A memory corruption issue was addressed with improved memory handling. This issue is fixed in iOS 18.7.2 and iPadOS 18.7.2, iOS 26.1 and iPadOS 26.1, macOS Sequoia 15.7.2, macOS Sonoma 14.8.2, macOS Tahoe 26.1, tvOS 26.1, visionOS 26.1, watchOS 26.1. A malicious application may be able to cause unexpected system termination or write kernel memory.

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2025-43510

 


 

9. CVE-2026-20700

A memory corruption issue was addressed with improved memory handling. This issue is fixed in iOS 18.7.2 and iPadOS 18.7.2, iOS 26.1 and iPadOS 26.1, macOS Sequoia 15.7.2, macOS Sonoma 14.8.2, macOS Tahoe 26.1, tvOS 26.1, visionOS 26.1, watchOS 26.1. A malicious application may be able to cause unexpected system termination or write kernel memory.

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-20700

 


 

10. CVE-2025-43529

A memory corruption issue was addressed with improved memory handling. This issue is fixed in iOS 18.7.2 and iPadOS 18.7.2, iOS 26.1 and iPadOS 26.1, macOS Sequoia 15.7.2, macOS Sonoma 14.8.2, macOS Tahoe 26.1, tvOS 26.1, visionOS 26.1, watchOS 26.1. A malicious application may be able to cause unexpected system termination or write kernel memory.

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2025-43529

 


1 2 3 32 33
Privacy Settings
We use cookies to enhance your experience while using our website. If you are using our Services via a browser you can restrict, block or remove cookies through your web browser settings. We also use content and scripts from third parties that may use tracking technologies. You can selectively provide your consent below to allow such third party embeds. For complete information about the cookies we use, data we collect and how we process them, please check our Privacy Policy
Youtube
Consent to display content from - Youtube
Vimeo
Consent to display content from - Vimeo
Google Maps
Consent to display content from - Google
Spotify
Consent to display content from - Spotify
Sound Cloud
Consent to display content from - Sound