Five factors.
One honest answer about perimeter security.
How cooked is your perimeter posture? RAP knows. Volume and severity is self explanatory. Exploitation shows real-world risk. MTTR and engagement show how the vendor responds. Only together do they tell a story about your perimeter security.
Risk Accepted Perimeter is not a bashing site. It visualises data that is already public (CVE records, KEV catalogues, EPSS, vendor advisories) and puts it into one consistent, transparent picture. Every vendor on this list ships vulnerabilities; the point is to see how many, how severe, how exploited and how the vendor responds, side by side. The aim is transparency that helps decision makers and engineers choose, operate and challenge their perimeter stack with facts instead of marketing. The methodology, scope and sources are open; if you spot an error or have a suggestion for improvement, write to RAP@johanneskresse.com.
Positive scale, higher is better. Every factor score and the total run from 0 to 100. 100 = no pain, 0 = maximum pain. Rank #1 is the best vendor with the least perimeter pain in 2026; the last place has the most.
Volume: fewer CVEs = higher. Severity: fewer Critical/High, pre-auth RCE and auth bypass = higher. Exploitation: fewer KEV entries, lower EPSS = higher. MTTR proxy: more fixes at disclosure, shorter coordination = higher. Engagement: more verified criteria = higher.
CVEs, Crit/High, pre-auth RCE, auth bypass, KEV, avg EPSS, bypass: lower is better (marked ↓). Fix ref: higher is better (↑). Coord. days: shorter is better (↓).
Weighting
Composite ranking under the current weighting
Leaderboard 2026 (Jan 1 to 2026-10-17)
| # | Vendor | Total↑ | Volume↑ | Severity↑ | Exploitation↑ | MTTR (proxy)↑ | Engagement↑ | CVEs↓ | Crit/High↓ | Pre-auth RCE↓ | Auth bypass↓ | KEV↓ | Avg EPSS↓ | Fix ref↑ | Coord. days↓ | Bypass↓ |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 01 | Netgear | 81.7 | 32 | 95 | 99 | 72 | 80 | 47 | 2% | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0.003 | 98% | 63 | 0 |
| 02 | TP-Link | 75.8 | 23 | 59 | 98 | 89 | 80 | 81 | 63% | 2 | 4 | 0 | 0.011 | 100% | 27 | 0 |
| 03 | Nokia low data | 74.7 | 50 | 85 | 100 | 50 | 73 | 3 | 33% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0.003 | 100% | 140 | 0 |
| 04 | Fortinet | 72.7 | 34 | 53 | 89 | 95 | 67 | 42 | 29% | 2 | 10 | 1 | 0.025 | 98% | 7 | 0 |
| 05 | F5 | 72.1 | 30 | 47 | 94 | 95 | 67 | 53 | 72% | 4 | 2 | 1 | 0.005 | 100% | 13 | 0 |
| 06 | HPE Aruba | 71.1 | 3 | 35 | 99 | 89 | 100 | 254 | 67% | 20 | 32 | 0 | 0.005 | 100% | 27 | 0 |
| 07 | Zyxel | 67.5 | 47 | 65 | 84 | 62 | 67 | 20 | 55% | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0.008 | 80% | 55 | 0 |
| 08 | Arista | 67.3 | 23 | 54 | 88 | 86 | 53 | 80 | 59% | 4 | 5 | 3 | 0.004 | 100% | 34 | 0 |
| 09 | Palo Alto | 66.9 | 26 | 69 | 78 | 50 | 100 | 66 | 8% | 1 | 11 | 3 | 0.023 | 100% | 248 | 0 |
| 10 | Juniper | 66.3 | 6 | 39 | 99 | 93 | 53 | 216 | 86% | 19 | 7 | 0 | 0.005 | 100% | 16 | 0 |
| 11 | Ubiquiti | 63.8 | 35 | 35 | 74 | 92 | 67 | 41 | 100% | 1 | 4 | 3 | 0.028 | 100% | 19 | 0 |
| 12 | DrayTek | 63.2 | 35 | 45 | 97 | 89 | 13 | 41 | 93% | 2 | 1 | 0 | 0.018 | 98% | 16 | 0 |
| 13 | SonicWall | 59.8 | 37 | 39 | 53 | 92 | 67 | 35 | 63% | 2 | 5 | 4 | 0.016 | 100% | 18 | 0 |
| 14 | Cisco | 59.7 | 2 | 56 | 72 | 50 | 100 | 265 | 53% | 10 | 22 | 13 | 0.023 | 100% | 168 | 0 |
| 15 | Linksys | 48.8 | 53 | 26 | 97 | 43 | 13 | 14 | 86% | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0.021 | 43% | 1 | 0 |
| 16 | NetScaler | 46 | 45 | 10 | 15 | 93 | 80 | 22 | 91% | 10 | 2 | 6 | 0.018 | 100% | 17 | 0 |
| 17 | Ivanti low data | 41.8 | 50 | 0 | 2 | 97 | 80 | 9 | 89% | 3 | 4 | 2 | 0.207 | 100% | 8 | 0 |
| 18 | Check Point | 40.3 | 50 | 3 | 0 | 98 | 67 | 16 | 81% | 6 | 6 | 5 | 0.187 | 100% | 6 | 0 |
| 19 | MikroTik | 37.5 | 50 | 25 | 23 | 74 | 13 | 16 | 56% | 2 | 4 | 4 | 0.013 | 88% | 20 | 1 |
| 20 | D-Link | 34.5 | 13 | 29 | 96 | 0 | 13 | 146 | 71% | 25 | 5 | 0 | 0.024 | 17% | 1 | 0 |
| -- | Huawei not ranked | n/a | 50 | n/a | n/a | n/a | 87 | 0 | No 2026 CVE for network products in the sources used (Only HarmonyOS and EMUI CVEs published in 2026; no network-product records. CSAF provider listed in the BSI CSAF aggregator.) | |||||||
| -- | AVM not ranked | n/a | 50 | n/a | n/a | n/a | 13 | 0 | No 2026 CVE for network products in the sources used (No CVE records for FRITZ! products published in 2026 in the sources used.) | |||||||
| -- | Barracuda not ranked | n/a | 50 | n/a | n/a | n/a | 40 | 0 | No 2026 CVE for network products in the sources used (Not a CNA; recent Barracuda CVEs were assigned by VulnCheck. Long-running Bugcrowd programme for appliances (bounties limited to high-impact classes). Pledge signed as Barracuda Networks.) | |||||||
| -- | Sophos not ranked | n/a | 50 | n/a | n/a | n/a | 80 | 0 | No 2026 CVE for network products in the sources used (No CVE records for Sophos Firewall or network products published in 2026 in the sources used.) | |||||||
Scorecards: all five factors per vendor
My perimeter
Monthly disclosures 2026
Four risk factors in one picture
Volume as an indicator
Top 10 most painful CVEs of 2026
| # | CVE | Vendor | Title | CVSS↓ | EPSS↓ | KEV | Flags | Pain↓ |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 01 | CVE-2026-20131 | Cisco Cisco Secure Firewall Management Center (FMC) | Cisco Secure Firewall Management Center Software Remote Code Execution Vulnerability | 10.0 | 43.2% | KEV 2026-03-19 | pre-auth RCE ransomware | 125 |
| 02 | CVE-2026-104935 | Ivanti Connect Secure | Authentication bypass by spoofing in ICS before version 25.1.3.0 allows a remote unauthenticated attacker to execute arbitrary commands. Thi | 8.6 | 26.0% | KEV 2026-10-13 | pre-auth RCE auth bypass | 115.8 |
| 03 | CVE-2026-50751 | Check Point Quantum Security Gateway, Spark Firewalls | User Authentication Bypass in VPN Remote Access and Mobile Access | 9.3 | 85.3% | KEV 2026-06-08 | auth bypass ransomware | 112.9 |
| 04 | CVE-2026-34910 | Ubiquiti EFG, Express 7, UCG-Fiber | A malicious actor with access to the network could exploit an Improper Input Validation vulnerability found in UniFi OS devices to execute a | 10.0 | 45.8% | KEV 2026-06-23 | pre-auth RCE | 110 |
| 05 | CVE-2026-10520 | Ivanti Sentry | An OS Command Injection vulnerability in Ivanti Sentry before the R10.5.2, R10.6.2 and R10.7.1 versions allows a remote unauthenticated user | 10.0 | 99.9% | KEV 2026-06-11 | pre-auth RCE | 110 |
| 06 | CVE-2026-85102 | Check Point Quantum Security Gateway | Improper Certificate Validation in Quantum Security Gateway | 9.8 | 50.4% | KEV 2026-09-22 | pre-auth RCE | 109.4 |
| 07 | CVE-2026-0257 | Palo Alto Cloud NGFW, PAN-OS, Prisma Access | PAN-OS: GlobalProtect Authentication Bypass Vulnerabilities | 7.8 | 96.9% | KEV 2026-05-29 | auth bypass ransomware | 108.4 |
| 08 | CVE-2026-15409 | SonicWall SMA1000 | A Server-side request forgery (SSRF) vulnerability has been identified in the SMA1000 Appliance Work Place interface. A remote unauthenticat | 10.0 | 6.8% | KEV 2026-07-14 | auth bypass ransomware | 101.8 |
| 09 | CVE-2026-94127 | F5 BIG-IP | BIG-IP APM OAuth vulnerability | 9.3 | 2.2% | KEV 2026-09-22 | pre-auth RCE auth bypass | 100.1 |
| 10 | CVE-2026-20127 | Cisco Cisco Catalyst SD-WAN Manager | Cisco Catalyst SD-WAN Controller Authentication Bypass Vulnerability | 10.0 | 88.5% | KEV 2026-02-25 | auth bypass | 100 |
Pain clock
PAN-OS: Authenticated Remote Code Execution (RCE) in the Management I…
Authentication bypass by spoofing in ICS before version 25.1.3.0 allo…
Memory overflow vulnerability leading to Denial of Service
Cisco Catalyst SD-WAN Manager System Account Authorization Bypass Vul…
SSH Pre-Authentication Rekey State Bypass in MikroTik RouterOS
Heap-based Buffer Overflow in VPN Certificate ASN.1 Decoding
Security Advisory 0183
BIG-IP APM OAuth vulnerability
A stack-based buffer overflow vulnerability in the CGI program of Zyx…
A Pre-authentication SSRF vulnerability exists in the SMA1000 Applian…
A malicious actor with access to the network could exploit an Imprope…
An Authentication Bypass Using an Alternate Path or Channel vulnerabi…
No KEV entry in 2026: Juniper, Nokia, TP-Link, Netgear, D-Link, Linksys, HPE Aruba, DrayTek
EPSS alert zone: what gets exploited next
| # | CVE | Vendor | Title | EPSS↓ | CVSS↓ | Published | Flags |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 01 | CVE-2026-10523 | Ivanti Sentry | An Authentication Bypass vulnerability (CWE-288) in Ivanti Sentry before the R10.5.2, R10.6.2 and R10.7.1 versions allows a remote unauthent | 53.1% | 9.9 | 2026-06-09 | auth bypass |
| 02 | CVE-2026-22557 | Ubiquiti UniFi Network Application | A malicious actor with access to the network could exploit a Path Traversal vulnerability found in the UniFi Network Application to access f | 28.1% | 10.0 | 2026-03-19 | none |
| 03 | CVE-2026-21902 | Juniper Junos OS Evolved | Junos OS Evolved: PTX Series: A vulnerability allows a unauthenticated, network-based attacker to execute code as root | 18.4% | 9.3 | 2026-02-25 | none |
| 04 | CVE-2026-1125 | D-Link DIR-823X | D-Link DIR-823X set_wifidog_settings sub_412E7C command injection | 15.7% | 6.9 | 2026-01-18 | none |
| 05 | CVE-2026-20147 | Cisco Cisco ISE Passive Identity Connector, Cisco Identity Services Engine Software | Cisco Identity Services Engine Remote Code Execution Vulnerability | 10.4% | 9.9 | 2026-04-15 | none |
| 06 | CVE-2026-20181 | Cisco Cisco ISE Passive Identity Connector, Cisco Identity Services Engine Software | Cisco Identity Services Engine Remote Code Execution Vulnerability | 8.9% | 9.1 | 2026-06-17 | none |
| 07 | CVE-2026-6992 | Linksys MR9600 | Linksys MR9600 JNAP Action run_central2.sh BTRequestGetSmartConnectStatus os command injection | 8.0% | 8.6 | 2026-04-25 | none |
| 08 | CVE-2026-4558 | Linksys MR9600 | Linksys MR9600 SmartConnect.lua smartConnectConfigure os command injection | 7.8% | 8.7 | 2026-03-22 | none |
| 09 | CVE-2026-3040 | DrayTek Vigor 300B | DrayTek Vigor 300B Web Management uploadlangs cgiGetFile os command injection | 7.3% | 5.1 | 2026-02-23 | EOL / no fix |
| 10 | CVE-2026-3485 | D-Link DIR-868L | D-Link DIR-868L SSDP Service sub_1BF84 os command injection | 6.7% | 9.3 | 2026-03-03 | pre-auth RCE EOL / no fix |
| 11 | CVE-2026-2142 | D-Link DIR-823X | D-Link DIR-823X set_qos sub_420688 os command injection | 6.6% | 8.6 | 2026-02-08 | none |
| 12 | CVE-2026-2163 | D-Link DIR-600 | D-Link DIR-600 ssdp.cgi command injection | 6.6% | 5.1 | 2026-02-08 | EOL / no fix |
| 13 | CVE-2026-20148 | Cisco Cisco ISE Passive Identity Connector, Cisco Identity Services Engine Software | Cisco Identity Services Engine Path Traversal Vulnerability | 6.5% | 4.9 | 2026-04-15 | none |
| 14 | CVE-2026-2081 | D-Link DIR-823X | D-Link DIR-823X set_password os command injection | 6.4% | 5.1 | 2026-02-07 | none |
| 15 | CVE-2026-20029 | Cisco Cisco Identity Services Engine Software | Cisco Identity Services Engine XML External Entity Processing Information Disclosure Vulnerability | 6.2% | 4.9 | 2026-01-07 | none |
| 16 | CVE-2026-5844 | D-Link DIR-882 | D-Link DIR-882 HNAP1 SetNetworkSettings prog.cgi sprintf os command injection | 6.2% | 8.6 | 2026-04-09 | EOL / no fix |
| 17 | CVE-2026-20180 | Cisco Cisco Identity Services Engine Software | Cisco Identity Services Engine Multiple Remote Code Execution Vulnerability | 6.0% | 9.9 | 2026-04-15 | none |
| 18 | CVE-2026-2082 | D-Link DIR-823X | D-Link DIR-823X set_mac_clone os command injection | 5.9% | 5.1 | 2026-02-07 | none |
| 19 | CVE-2026-1448 | D-Link DIR-615 | D-Link DIR-615 Web Management wiz_policy_3_machine.php os command injection | 5.8% | 8.6 | 2026-01-26 | EOL / no fix |
| 20 | CVE-2026-19586 | TP-Link DR3150 v1, DR3220v-4G v1, DR3650v v1 | Pre-Authentication OS Command Injection in Omada Gateways on OpenVPN Server in Omada Gateways | 5.7% | 9.3 | 2026-08-20 | pre-auth RCE |
| 21 | CVE-2026-20186 | Cisco Cisco Identity Services Engine Software | Cisco Identity Services Engine Multiple Authenticated Remote Code Execution Vulnerability | 5.6% | 9.9 | 2026-04-15 | none |
| 22 | CVE-2026-1506 | D-Link DIR-615 | D-Link DIR-615 MAC Filter Configuration adv_mac_filter.php os command injection | 5.6% | 8.6 | 2026-01-28 | EOL / no fix |
| 23 | CVE-2026-2152 | D-Link DIR-615 | D-Link DIR-615 Web Configuration adv_routing.php os command injection | 5.4% | 8.6 | 2026-02-08 | EOL / no fix |
| 24 | CVE-2026-2151 | D-Link DIR-615 | D-Link DIR-615 DMZ Host Feature adv_firewall.php os command injection | 5.3% | 8.6 | 2026-02-08 | EOL / no fix |
| 25 | CVE-2026-2063 | D-Link DIR-823X | D-Link DIR-823X Web Management set_ac_server os command injection | 5.3% | 5.1 | 2026-02-06 | none |
Patch-or-pray timeline 2026
Zombie index
0% (no EOL or no-fix records in 2026): Cisco, Fortinet, Palo Alto, Ivanti, Juniper, Nokia, Arista, MikroTik, Ubiquiti, TP-Link, Linksys, SonicWall, Check Point, F5, NetScaler, HPE Aruba
How each factor is measured
| Factor | Metric | Score direction | Sources |
|---|---|---|---|
| Volume | CVEs published in 2026 for in-scope network products, log-normalised (0 CVEs = 100, 300 CVEs = 0); vendors with fewer than 10 CVEs get a neutral 50 | Higher = fewer CVEs = better | CVE List V5 (CNA affected data), NVD 2026 feed |
| Severity | Share of Critical/High (CNA CVSS v4/v3, NVD fallback), pre-auth RCE (AV:N, PR:N, RCE pattern or CWE, high impact), remote auth bypass (pattern or CWE-287/288/306/798) | Higher = fewer serious bugs = better | CVE List V5, NVD |
| Exploitation | KEV share (CISA plus ENISA KEV), mean EPSS at data run, CVEs with known ransomware use | Higher = less exploited = better | CISA KEV, ENISA EUVD KEV dump, FIRST EPSS |
| MTTR (proxy) | Share of CVEs with a vendor fix or advisory reference, scaled by the CVE reserved-to-published window as coordination time (120 days = no bonus), penalties for workaround-only and patch-bypass records. Clearly a proxy: public databases do not contain the date a vendor was first notified | Higher = more fixes at disclosure, faster = better | CVE List V5 reference tags and dates |
| Engagement | Verifiable criteria only: CNA (3.0), CSAF/API (1.5), disclosure policy (1.0), bug bounty for products (1.0), CISA Secure by Design pledge (1.0) | Higher = more verified criteria = better | CVE List V5 assigner, CSAF provider-metadata and BSI aggregator, PSIRT pages and security.txt, HackerOne/Bugcrowd and vendor bounty pages, CISA signers list |
Product scope per vendor (included / excluded)
Excluded: Webex, RoomOS, Unity Connection, UCS, Secure Endpoint, Secure Email, Unified CM, Duo, AppDynamics, Smart Licensing
Excluded: FortiSandbox, FortiSOAR, FortiSIEM, FortiPAM, FortiDeceptor, FortiNDR, FortiMail, FortiClient EMS, FortiEDR
Excluded: Cortex, Prisma Browser, Prisma Cloud, Checkov, Conjur, Idira, Trust Protection Foundation
Excluded: Endpoint Manager, EPMM, Xtraction, Neurons for ITSM, Patch
Excluded: none
Excluded: HarmonyOS, EMUI, consumer devices, openBMC, cloud
Excluded: none
Excluded: none
Excluded: third-party hotspot software
Excluded: UniFi Protect, NVR, NAS, Access, Talk, Connect, Play
Excluded: Tapo, Kasa, VIGI cameras, smart home
Excluded: ReadyNAS, Arlo, Meural
Excluded: DNS/DNR storage, DCS cameras, adapters
Excluded: unrelated records matching the string AVM
Excluded: none
Excluded: Email Security, Capture Client
Excluded: none
Excluded: Harmony Endpoint, Harmony Email, Harmony Mobile, CloudGuard posture, ZoneAlarm
Excluded: Endpoint, Intercept X, Home, Mobile, Email, MDR/XDR
Engagement evidence per vendor
- Cisco: ✓ CNA · ✓ CSAF/API · ✓ Disclosure policy · ✓ Bug bounty · ✓ SbD pledge · evidence: csaf, policy, bounty
Bug bounty covers Meraki and cloud-managed Catalyst products (Bugcrowd); other product lines private programmes. CSAF via openVuln API. - Fortinet: ✓ CNA · ✗ CSAF/API · ✓ Disclosure policy · ✗ Bug bounty · ✓ SbD pledge · evidence: policy, securitytxt
RSS feed only, no CSAF provider found. No bug bounty programme found. - Palo Alto Networks: ✓ CNA · ✓ CSAF/API · ✓ Disclosure policy · ✓ Bug bounty · ✓ SbD pledge · evidence: csaf, policy, bounty
JSON API plus CSAF document per advisory (security.paloaltonetworks.com/csaf/<CVE>). - Ivanti: ✓ CNA · ✗ CSAF/API · ✓ Disclosure policy · ✓ Bug bounty · ✓ SbD pledge · evidence: policy, bounty, securitytxt
Private bug bounty (Bugcrowd/HackerOne) with Connect Secure and Policy Secure in scope. - Juniper Networks: ✓ CNA · ✗ CSAF/API · ✓ Disclosure policy · ✗ Bug bounty · ✗ SbD pledge · evidence: policy
Advisories behind support portal search; no public CSAF or API found. Not on CISA pledge list. - Huawei: ✓ CNA · ✓ CSAF/API · ✓ Disclosure policy · ✓ Bug bounty · ✗ SbD pledge · evidence: csaf, policy, bounty, securitytxt
Only HarmonyOS and EMUI CVEs published in 2026; no network-product records. CSAF provider listed in the BSI CSAF aggregator. - Nokia: ✓ CNA · ✓ CSAF/API · ✓ Disclosure policy · ✗ Bug bounty · ✗ SbD pledge · evidence: csaf, policy, securitytxt
- Arista Networks: ✓ CNA · ✗ CSAF/API · ✓ Disclosure policy · ✗ Bug bounty · ✗ SbD pledge · evidence: policy
- MikroTik: ✗ CNA · ✗ CSAF/API · ✓ Disclosure policy · ✗ Bug bounty · ✗ SbD pledge · evidence: policy, securitytxt
2026 RouterOS CVEs assigned by VulnCheck, CERT-PL, ICS-CERT and others, not by MikroTik. - Ubiquiti: ✓ CNA · ✗ CSAF/API · ✓ Disclosure policy · ✓ Bug bounty · ✗ SbD pledge · evidence: policy, bounty, securitytxt
About 60% of 2026 CVEs assigned via HackerOne CNA, the rest by Ubiquiti itself. - TP-Link: ✓ CNA · ✗ CSAF/API · ✓ Disclosure policy · ✓ Bug bounty · ✓ SbD pledge · evidence: policy, bounty
TP-Link Systems states it sponsors a bug bounty programme; regional product-security pages still say no bounty is operated. Counted on the basis of the vendor statement. - Netgear: ✓ CNA · ✗ CSAF/API · ✓ Disclosure policy · ✓ Bug bounty · ✓ SbD pledge · evidence: policy, bounty, securitytxt
- D-Link: ✗ CNA · ✗ CSAF/API · ✓ Disclosure policy · ✗ Bug bounty · ✗ SbD pledge · evidence: policy
2026 CVEs almost entirely assigned by VulDB; only 17% of records carry a vendor fix reference. - AVM (FRITZ!): ✗ CNA · ✗ CSAF/API · ✓ Disclosure policy · ✗ Bug bounty · ✗ SbD pledge · evidence: policy
No CVE records for FRITZ! products published in 2026 in the sources used. - Linksys: ✗ CNA · ✗ CSAF/API · ✓ Disclosure policy · ✗ Bug bounty · ✗ SbD pledge · evidence: policy
2026 CVEs assigned by VulDB and ENISA. - SonicWall: ✓ CNA · ✗ CSAF/API · ✓ Disclosure policy · ✗ Bug bounty · ✓ SbD pledge · evidence: policy
PSIRT portal is a JavaScript application; no CSAF provider or documented API found. - Zyxel: ✓ CNA · ✗ CSAF/API · ✓ Disclosure policy · ✗ Bug bounty · ✓ SbD pledge · evidence: policy, securitytxt
- Check Point: ✓ CNA · ✗ CSAF/API · ✓ Disclosure policy · ✗ Bug bounty · ✓ SbD pledge · evidence: policy, bounty
Private HackerOne programme covers the customer portal only; products are explicitly out of scope, so bounty is not counted. - F5: ✓ CNA · ✗ CSAF/API · ✓ Disclosure policy · ✗ Bug bounty · ✓ SbD pledge · evidence: policy, securitytxt, pledge
Reports accepted via form, e-mail and HackerOne, but F5 stated on 2026-10-14 that a paid bug bounty programme will be launched in the coming weeks; not counted until live. Advisories behind MyF5 (K-articles), no public CSAF provider. - Citrix / NetScaler: ✓ CNA · ✗ CSAF/API · ✓ Disclosure policy · ✓ Bug bounty · ✓ SbD pledge · evidence: policy, bounty
CVE IDs assigned under the NetScaler and Citrix CNAs (Cloud Software Group). Public NetScaler bug bounty on HackerOne since September 2025. Pledge signed as Cloud Software Group - Citrix. No CSAF found. - HPE Aruba Networking: ✓ CNA · ✓ CSAF/API · ✓ Disclosure policy · ✓ Bug bounty · ✓ SbD pledge · evidence: csaf, policy, bounty, securitytxt
Scope limited to HPE Aruba Networking products (AOS-CX, AOS-S, ArubaOS, EdgeConnect, ClearPass, Instant On, Fabric Composer, Comware, iMC); servers and storage excluded. CSAF JSON per advisory on csaf.arubanetworking.hpe.com (no provider-metadata.json). Public Bugcrowd programme for networking products. - Barracuda: ✗ CNA · ✗ CSAF/API · ✓ Disclosure policy · ✓ Bug bounty · ✓ SbD pledge · evidence: policy, bounty
Not a CNA; recent Barracuda CVEs were assigned by VulnCheck. Long-running Bugcrowd programme for appliances (bounties limited to high-impact classes). Pledge signed as Barracuda Networks. - DrayTek: ✗ CNA · ✗ CSAF/API · ✓ Disclosure policy · ✗ Bug bounty · ✗ SbD pledge · evidence: policy
Not a CNA (2026 CVEs assigned by VulnCheck and VulDB). Public PSIRT disclosure policy with 90-day fix target; rewards are letters and gifts, no HackerOne or Bugcrowd programme. Not on the CISA Secure by Design pledge list. - Sophos: ✓ CNA · ✗ CSAF/API · ✓ Disclosure policy · ✓ Bug bounty · ✓ SbD pledge · evidence: policy, bounty
No CVE records for Sophos Firewall or network products published in 2026 in the sources used.
Known limits of the 2026 data
- NVD CPE enrichment lags months behind for 2026; vendor and product matching therefore uses the CNA affected data from CVE List V5. Records where the CNA left vendor as "n/a" are missed.
- Vendors that are not CNAs (MikroTik, D-Link, AVM, Linksys, Barracuda) have their CVEs assigned by third parties such as VulDB, VulnCheck or CERT-PL; descriptions and fix references are often thinner, which affects the MTTR proxy.
- Huawei, AVM, Barracuda and Sophos have no 2026 CVE records for network products in the sources; Huawei publishes mainly HarmonyOS and EMUI CVEs, Sophos published one endpoint CVE, the only Barracuda record concerns the RMM tool. They are shown unranked.
- F5 counts BIG-IP, BIG-IQ, BIG-IP Next and SSL Orchestrator only; NGINX is excluded as web-server software. HPE counts HPE Aruba Networking products only (AOS-CX, ArubaOS, EdgeConnect, ClearPass, Instant On, Fabric Composer); servers and storage are excluded. Citrix counts NetScaler ADC, Gateway and the Secure Access client.
- Cisco and Palo Alto Networks reserve CVE IDs in bulk long before publication; their coordination window is therefore long for structural reasons, which lowers their MTTR proxy even though fixes ship at disclosure.
- Pre-auth RCE and auth bypass are detected heuristically from CVSS vector, CWE and description text. Manual review may change individual classifications.
Data run log
- Vendors added: DrayTek
- 41 new CVE records in scope
- Rank changes (default weights): SonicWall #12 -> #13; Cisco #13 -> #14; Linksys #14 -> #15; NetScaler #15 -> #16; Ivanti #16 -> #17; Check Point #17 -> #18; MikroTik #18 -> #19; D-Link #19 -> #20
- Vendors added: F5, NetScaler, HPE Aruba, Barracuda
- CVE records in scope: 1097 -> 1426; KEV: 39 -> 46
- Rank changes (default weights): Zyxel #5 -> #7; Arista #6 -> #8; Palo Alto #7 -> #9; Juniper #8 -> #10; Ubiquiti #9 -> #11; SonicWall #10 -> #12; Cisco #11 -> #13; Linksys #12 -> #14; Ivanti #13 -> #16; Check Point #14 -> #17; MikroTik #15 -> #18; D-Link #16 -> #19
- Initial public data run: 19 vendors, network products only, CVE List V5 + NVD 2026 + CISA/ENISA KEV + EPSS
- Low-data rule introduced: vendors with fewer than 10 CVEs get a neutral volume score of 50
Disclaimer and sources
Data is never fully current. Upstream databases publish, enrich and correct records with a delay of hours to weeks. NVD scoring and CPE mapping in particular lag the original disclosure, sometimes by months. Vendor advisories are revised after publication. Any view therefore reflects the state of the sources at the last data run (2026-10-17), shown on the page, and not the situation at the moment you read it. Never use this site as your only basis for patching decisions. Always consult the vendor advisory.
Period. All figures cover CVEs published between 2026-01-01 and 2026-10-17. The year is incomplete; counts and shares will change until the final run for 2026.
No warranty, no liability. riskacceptedperimeter.com is a non-commercial, independent research project. All information is provided "as is" without warranty of any kind, express or implied, including accuracy, completeness, timeliness, fitness for a particular purpose and non-infringement. To the extent permitted by law, the operator accepts no liability for any direct, indirect or consequential damage arising from the use of, or reliance on, this site, including procurement, security or investment decisions. Liability for intent and gross negligence and under mandatory statutory provisions remains unaffected.
Not an endorsement, not a security rating. Scores are statistical aggregates of public disclosure data. A low score does not mean a product is insecure, and a high score does not mean it is secure. The index measures what has been disclosed and how vendors handled it, nothing more. This site is not affiliated with, sponsored by or endorsed by any vendor listed here.
Method limits. This index shows the presence of vulnerabilities, never their absence. CVE counts reflect disclosure behaviour, research attention and CNA status as much as product quality. MTTR is a labelled proxy, not a measured notification-to-patch time. Scores are derived values with documented weightings and can change when sources are corrected or enriched retrospectively.
Feedback and complaints. Suggestions for improvement, corrections, complaints and vendor responses go to RAP@johanneskresse.com. Reported errors are reviewed and, where justified, corrected with a visible changelog entry.
Sources. All raw data comes from the public sources below. We do not alter source records; we aggregate, normalise and weight them according to the published method. Where sources contradict each other, the vendor CNA record takes precedence for affected versions and severity, NVD is the fallback, and the conflict is flagged. Source terms of use and licences apply to the underlying data.
| Source | Used for | URL |
|---|---|---|
| NIST National Vulnerability Database, 2026 data feed and API 2.0 | NVD CVSS where no CNA score exists, CPE cross-check | nvd.nist.gov |
| CVE Program, CVE List V5 (GitHub mirror) | Authoritative CVE records: affected vendor and product, CNA CVSS, CWE, dates reserved and published, reference tags, assigning CNA | github.com |
| CVE Program, CNA partner list | Cross-check of CNA status | www.cve.org |
| ENISA European Vulnerability Database, KEV dump | EU known exploited vulnerabilities, merged with CISA KEV | euvdservices.enisa.europa.eu |
| CISA Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog (JSON feed) | Active exploitation, KEV dates, ransomware use | www.cisa.gov |
| FIRST EPSS, daily bulk scores | Exploit probability per CVE | www.first.org |
| BSI CSAF aggregator | Verification of CSAF providers | wid.cert-bund.de |
| CISA Secure by Design pledge signers | Engagement criterion pledge | www.cisa.gov |
| HackerOne and Bugcrowd programme pages, vendor bounty policies | Engagement criterion bug bounty | hackerone.com |
| Cisco PSIRT openVuln API and advisories | CSAF/API check, disclosure policy | developer.cisco.com |
| Fortinet PSIRT (FortiGuard) | Disclosure policy, RSS feed | www.fortiguard.com |
| Palo Alto Networks Security Advisories (JSON and CSAF) | CSAF/API check, disclosure policy, bounty | security.paloaltonetworks.com |
| Ivanti Security Advisories and bug bounty policy | Disclosure policy, bounty | www.ivanti.com |
| Juniper SIRT | Disclosure policy | support.juniper.net |
| Huawei PSIRT (CSAF provider) | CSAF check, disclosure policy, bounty | www.huawei.com |
| Nokia Product Security (CSAF provider) | CSAF check, disclosure policy | www.nokia.com |
| Arista Product Security | Disclosure policy | www.arista.com |
| MikroTik security announcements | Disclosure policy | mikrotik.com |
| Ubiquiti security page and HackerOne programme | Disclosure policy, bounty | ui.com |
| TP-Link product security | Disclosure policy, bounty statement | www.tp-link.com |
| Netgear security page and Bugcrowd programme | Disclosure policy, bounty | www.netgear.com |
| D-Link security announcements | Disclosure policy | supportannouncement.us.dlink.com |
| AVM security information | Disclosure policy | avm.de |
| Linksys security page | Disclosure policy | www.linksys.com |
| SonicWall PSIRT | Disclosure policy | www.sonicwall.com |
| Zyxel security advisories and reporting policy | Disclosure policy | www.zyxel.com |
| Check Point report security issue and bounty policy | Disclosure policy, bounty scope | www.checkpoint.com |
| Sophos responsible disclosure policy and Bugcrowd programme | Disclosure policy, bounty | www.sophos.com |
Vendor names and trademarks belong to their respective owners and are used for identification only. Data from NVD, CISA and FIRST is public domain or published under open licences; CVE List data is used under the CVE Program terms of use; vendor pages are referenced by link only. Scores and aggregates of this site may be reused under CC BY 4.0 with attribution to Risk Accepted Perimeter. Vendors who believe a record about them is wrong can request a review at RAP@johanneskresse.com; we answer within a reasonable time and document corrections.
Legal notice (Impressum)
Johannes Kresse
Kiefernweg 10
04552 Borna
Germany
DE328240430
pursuant to § 27a German VAT Act (UStG)
Johannes Kresse
pursuant to § 18 (2) MStV, address as above
Liability for content. The contents of this site were created with great care. No guarantee is given for the accuracy, completeness or timeliness of the content. As a service provider we are responsible for our own content under general law; we are not obliged to monitor transmitted or stored third-party information.
Liability for links. This site contains links to external third-party websites over whose content we have no influence. The respective provider or operator is always responsible for the content of linked pages. Illegal content was not identifiable at the time of linking. Should we become aware of legal violations, such links will be removed immediately.