CVE-2026-22918
Official description Straight from the sourceThe vendor's or NVD's own wording, published unedited. Authoritative, but often terse — it says what broke, rarely what to do.
NVD · uneditedAn attacker may exploit missing protection against clickjacking by tricking users into performing unintended actions through maliciously crafted web pages, leading to the extraction of sensitive data.
Technical summary Written by usOur analysis, written from the advisory, the CVSS vector and the affected-version data. It adds context the advisory leaves out, and never invents facts that are not in the source.
dbcve analysis · moderate confidenceThis is a clickjacking vulnerability where the application lacks proper frame-busting protections. An attacker can embed the target application in a transparent iframe on a malicious page, tricking users into clicking hidden buttons or links to perform unintended actions like data extraction or account manipulation. The missing X-Frame-Options header or Content-Security-Policy frame-ancestors directive allows cross-origin framing.
Verify against the referenced sources before acting — the references below are authoritative for this CVE, this summary is not.
Affected products & versions What the vendor confirmedThe version ranges the vendor confirmed as vulnerable. If your version sits inside a range here, treat yourself as exposed until you have upgraded.
NVD · CPE dataall versionsCVSS breakdown How the score is builtThe industry scoring standard. It rates how the flaw is reached, what it takes to exploit, and what an attacker gains — the score is derived from those, not the other way round.
From the vector- Attack vector
- Network
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- Required
- Scope
- Changed
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- Low
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:H/I:L/A:N
Am I affected? How to checkSteps we derive from the advisory and the affected-version data, so you can decide whether this CVE reaches your setup. They are a guide, not a scan — your own configuration is the authority.
dbcve checksWork through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.
-
Access the device web interfaceConnect to the Sick Tdc X401gl web interface via HTTP or HTTPS (typically on the default port) and capture the HTTP response headers using a browser dev tool, curl, or similar. Example: curl -I http://<device-ip>Affected if The device serves a web interface accessible over HTTP/HTTPS
-
Inspect for X-Frame-Options headerExamine the HTTP response headers from the device for the presence of X-Frame-Options header. Look for values such as DENY or SAMEORIGIN.Affected if The X-Frame-Options header is missing, or is set to a permissive value such as ALLOW-FROM (deprecated) or is absent entirely
-
Inspect for CSP frame-ancestors directiveExamine the Content-Security-Policy header in the response for the frame-ancestors directive. Check if it restricts framing to trusted origins or is absent.Affected if The Content-Security-Policy header is missing, or does not include the frame-ancestors directive, or allows all origins (*)
If the device's HTTP responses lack both the X-Frame-Options header and a properly configured Content-Security-Policy frame-ancestors directive, the application can be embedded in iframes by any site and is vulnerable to clickjacking attacks.
Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.
Remediation Closing itWhat it takes to close this. Where a vendor fix exists we point at it; where none exists we say so plainly, and can build one. Effort estimates are scoped from the advisory, not from your codebase.
From vendor dataAdd the X-Frame-Options header with value DENY or SAMEORIGIN, or configure Content-Security-Policy with frame-ancestors directive to restrict framing to trusted origins only.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation2.0 h
- Testing1.0 h
- Review / QA1.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $1,744.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-22918 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.
References Go to the primary sourcePrimary sources — vendor advisories, patches and trackers. Where our summary and a reference disagree, the reference wins.
Primary sourcesPractitioner notes
ContributedPeer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2026-22918 in production — separate from our analysis above.
The advisory tells you what broke. It rarely tells you what actually worked. If you’ve dealt with this one, that detail is what the next engineer is searching for.
- The version that genuinely resolved it — not the one the vendor claimed
- A config change or rule that shut the vector down
- A gotcha in the upgrade path that cost you an afternoon
No notes yet
Be the first to add a field note for this CVE — a mitigation you’ve verified, a version caveat, or a link to a working fix. Sign in above to contribute.
A place for practitioners to share what actually worked: a mitigation you’ve tested, a configuration change, a version- or environment-specific caveat, or a link to a verified patch. The most useful notes rise to the top as peers upvote them, so the signal stays high.
- Verified mitigations, workarounds, and config changes
- Version or environment caveats, and links to real fixes
- No weaponised exploit code, or anything meant to cause harm
- No spam, self-promotion, credentials, or personal data