CVE-2026-57895
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 · uneditedIncorrect default permissions issue exists in Pupsman versions prior to 3.9.0. An attacker can place a malicious executable in the installation folder, which results in arbitrary code execution with SYSTEM privilege
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 confidencePupsman versions prior to 3.9.0 have incorrect default permissions on the installation folder, allowing a local attacker to write malicious executables to this location. Because the application runs with SYSTEM privileges, the attacker achieves arbitrary code execution at elevated privilege level.
Verify against the referenced sources before acting — the references below are authoritative for this CVE, this summary is not.
CVSS 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
- Local
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- Low
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.0/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
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.
-
Check Pupsman installed versionUse system utility to view installed software version (e.g., program properties, registry, or 'pupsman --version' command if CLI tool exists). Compare against version 3.9.0.Affected if Installed version is prior to 3.9.0
-
Locate Pupsman installation folderFind the directory where Pupsman is installed - check common installation paths or use system search for the executable.Affected if Cannot locate the installation directory
-
Verify folder permission configurationRight-click the installation folder in Windows Explorer, select Properties > Security tab. Examine permissions for Users orAuthenticated Users group. Alternatively, use 'icacls <folderpath>' command to list effective permissions.Affected if Users or standard user accounts have Write or Modify permissions on the folder
-
Confirm executable write accessAs a non-administrator user (or using icacls), attempt to create a test file or copy an executable into the installation folder. Verify write permission is granted.Affected if Non-privileged users can write files to the installation folder
Environment is affected if Pupsman version is below 3.9.0 AND the installation folder grants write access to non-administrator accounts, allowing potential privilege escalation via SYSTEM-level execution.
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.
dbcve · scopedUpgrade to Pupsman version 3.9.0 or later which contains corrected default permissions. Alternatively, restrict write access to the installation folder to authorized administrators only.
Pupsman 3.9.0
- Identify the current installed version of Pupsman software
- Download Pupsman version 3.9.0 or later from the official Fujielectric website or trusted vendor source
- Before upgrading, backup any existing configuration data and important files
- Run the installer for version 3.9.0 with appropriate administrator privileges
- Verify the installation completed successfully
- Confirm the new version is running by checking the software version information
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation4.0 h
- Testing3.0 h
- Review / QA2.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $3,408.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-57895 — 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-2026-57895 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