CVE-2026-20316: Cisco Secure FMC Static Credential Zero-Day Exploited

This week in our InSEKurity of the Week series: a vulnerability whose CVSS base score of 5.3 badly undersells it. CVE-2026-20316 is a static credential flaw in Cisco Secure Firewall Management Center (FMC) — the on-premises console that configures, monitors, and pushes policy to entire fleets of Cisco firewalls. Cisco shipped a hard-coded password for a low-privileged account inside the FMC web interface, and an unauthenticated remote attacker who knows it can simply log in. Cisco’s PSIRT found out about the bug the way nobody wants to: by observing active exploitation in the wild in July 2026. CISA added it to the Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog on the day of disclosure with a three-day federal remediation deadline. The reason a “medium” information-disclosure bug earned Cisco’s High Security Impact Rating is chaining: the FMC has a documented history of authentication-bypass and root-command-injection flaws, and a foothold account on the management plane is exactly the ingredient those chains need. If you run an on-premises FMC, treat this as a patch-and-hunt event — not a Patch Tuesday backlog item.

🚨 Summary

CVE ID: CVE-2026-20316
CVSS 3.1 Score: 5.3 Medium (CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N), assigned by Cisco — but Cisco rates the Security Impact Rating as High, and Horizon3.ai, who reported it, scores the real-world risk at 8.9
CWE: CWE-259 (Use of Hard-coded Password)
Affected Software: Cisco Secure Firewall Management Center (FMC) Software, on-premises — release branches 7.0, 7.2, 7.3, 7.4, 7.6, 7.7 and 10.0 without the hotfix
Not affected: Cloud-delivered FMC (cdFMC), Firewall Device Manager (FDM), Secure Firewall ASA Software, Secure Firewall Threat Defense (FTD) Software, and Security Cloud Control (SCC)
Attack Vector: Network — the FMC web interface login
Authentication Required: None — the credentials are the vulnerability
User Interaction: None
Impact: Unauthenticated login as a low-privileged account and access to the sensitive data available to it; Cisco warns it can be combined with other FMC vulnerabilities to elevate privileges
Patch Status: ✅ Hotfixes available via the Cisco Software Center (released July 30, 2026). No workaround exists.
Published: July 29, 2026 (Cisco advisory cisco-sa-fmc-static-cred-BET3Cjh)
Exploitation Status: 🔴 Actively exploited as a zero-day — Cisco PSIRT confirmed in-the-wild attacks in July 2026
CISA KEV: ✅ Listed — added July 29, 2026, federal remediation deadline August 1, 2026
Reported by: Jimi Sebree of Horizon3.ai

🖥️ What is Cisco Secure Firewall Management Center?

Cisco Secure Firewall Management Center — still widely known by its former name Firepower Management Center (FMC) — is the centralized management plane for Cisco’s Secure Firewall portfolio. It is the appliance (physical or virtual) from which administrators configure access-control policies, intrusion-prevention rules, VPN settings, NAT, and URL filtering, and then deploy those policies out to every managed Secure Firewall Threat Defense (FTD) device in the estate. It is also the aggregation point for the security telemetry those firewalls generate: connection events, intrusion events, file and malware events, and the long-term event database behind them.

That combination — policy authority plus complete security telemetry — is what makes the FMC disproportionately valuable to an attacker. A firewall protects one boundary; the FMC governs every boundary it manages. Someone with meaningful access to an FMC can read the exact ruleset that describes where a network’s soft spots are, see which detections fire and which do not, and in the worst case change the policy that everything downstream enforces. It is the same structural problem we keep seeing across the industry: the management plane of a security product is frequently less hardened than the security product itself, yet compromising it is strictly more powerful.

Cisco Secure Firewall is deployed across enterprises, service providers, and the public sector worldwide, and the on-premises FMC remains the standard management option for organizations that will not or cannot move firewall management into a cloud-delivered console. That is a very large installed base of appliances that all shipped with the same embedded account.

Typical Use Cases

Central firewall policy management: authoring and deploying access-control, NAT, VPN, and identity policies to fleets of FTD devices from one console.
Intrusion prevention management: tuning Snort-based IPS policies, rule sets, and variable sets across the estate.
Security event aggregation and reporting: collecting connection, intrusion, file, and malware events for investigation, dashboards, and compliance reporting.
Multi-tenant and multi-site operations: domain-based separation so large organizations or managed service providers can administer segmented environments from a shared console.
Change control for the network edge: staged policy deployment, rollback, and audit logging for firewall changes.

🔍 Technical Analysis

Vulnerability Description

CVE-2026-20316 is not a memory-corruption bug, a parser flaw, or a logic error in an authentication routine. It is far more mundane and, for that reason, far more reliable: the FMC web interface contains static credentials for a low-privileged account that ship with the software itself. The password is not generated per installation, not derived from anything installation-specific, and not rotated — it is embedded in the product. Every unpatched on-premises FMC of an affected release accepts the same secret.

In Cisco’s own words, the vulnerability “could allow an unauthenticated, remote attacker to log in to an affected device using a low-privileged account to access sensitive data.” From the appliance’s perspective nothing anomalous happens. There is no exploit payload, no malformed request, no crash. A valid account presents a valid password over the normal login path and receives a valid session. This is why the CVSS 3.1 vector reads AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N — network reachable, low complexity, no privileges, no user interaction, with low confidentiality impact and no integrity or availability impact on its own.

The word “alone” is doing the heavy lifting. Cisco explicitly raised the Security Impact Rating to High because the access “could also be leveraged in conjunction with other vulnerabilities, potentially allowing attackers to gain elevated privileges.” Horizon3.ai, whose researcher Jimi Sebree reported the flaw, publishes a substantially higher 8.9 risk rating for exactly this reason. Many vulnerabilities in appliance web interfaces are gated behind “an authenticated user can…” — a phrase that quietly assumes attackers do not have accounts. A hard-coded account demolishes that assumption product-wide.

Root Cause Analysis

Hard-coded secret in shipped software (CWE-259): a credential embedded in the product is identical across every installation. It cannot be rotated by the customer, does not vary per deployment, and once it leaks — through reverse engineering, a support bundle, a firmware image, or a leaked internal document — it is permanently burned for the entire installed base simultaneously.
A “low-privileged” account is still an authenticated account: internal service accounts are often created for convenience (health checks, inter-process calls, an internal API consumer) under the assumption that they are unreachable from outside. Exposing that account on the same internet-reachable login surface as administrators turns an implementation detail into a public entry point.
The management plane is reachable at all: the vulnerability is only remotely exploitable because FMC web interfaces are frequently reachable from networks they should not be reachable from. Cisco notes that if the FMC management interface has no public internet access, the attack surface associated with this vulnerability is reduced.
Privilege boundaries inside the appliance are thin: the FMC’s web process runs as the www account but invokes helper scripts through sudo as root. Any bug that lets a low-privileged web session reach one of those helpers converts limited access into root — which is precisely the pattern visible in Cisco’s own indicator of compromise for this campaign.
No customer-side remediation short of a patch: because the credential lives in the software, there is nothing an administrator can disable, firewall off at the application layer, or reconfigure. Cisco states plainly that there are no workarounds.

Attack Vector

The attack requires no exploit development. It requires network access to the FMC web interface and knowledge of a password that is the same everywhere. The diagram below shows the shape of the risk for defenders; it is deliberately not an exploit and contains no credentials.

# Illustrative attack-flow diagram -- NOT a functional exploit.
# No credentials, endpoints, or payloads are reproduced here.

Remote attacker (no account, no exploit code)
      |
      | (1) CVE-2026-20316: authenticate to the FMC web interface using the
      |     low-privilege account that ships inside the software. This is a
      |     normal, successful login -- not a malformed request.
      v
Cisco Secure FMC web interface (management plane)
      |
      | (2) Read whatever that account can see. On a firewall management
      |     console that means security-relevant configuration and event
      |     data -- the material an attacker uses to plan the next step.
      v
Authenticated foothold on the management plane
      |
      | (3) Chain. Cisco warns the access "could be leveraged in conjunction
      |     with other vulnerabilities ... to gain elevated privileges."
      |     The FMC web process (www) invokes helper scripts as root via
      |     sudo -- the boundary an escalation chain aims at.
      v
Root on the FMC  ->  policy authority over every managed FTD firewall

The critical point for risk assessment is that step (1) has no failure mode that looks like an attack. There is no brute force to rate-limit, no anomalous payload for an IPS signature to match, and no crash in a log. A successful authentication is indistinguishable from a legitimate one unless you are specifically watching which account logged in and from where.

Exploitation in the Wild

Cisco learned about it from attacks, not from research disclosure alone. Cisco’s Product Security Incident Response Team became aware of active exploitation of CVE-2026-20316 in July 2026, before the advisory existed. This was a zero-day.
CISA moved the same day. CVE-2026-20316 was added to the Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog on July 29, 2026 — the publication date of the advisory — with a federal remediation deadline of August 1, 2026. A three-day deadline is CISA signalling that the risk is immediate and real.
The published indicator points at privilege escalation, not just reading data. Cisco’s compromise indicator is a sudo log entry showing the web account www invoking the helper script package_info.pl as root against a file at /var/tmp/license.tmp. That is not what an information-disclosure bug looks like on its own — it is the footprint of an actor moving from web-tier access toward root.
Cisco has not attributed the activity. No threat actor has been publicly named, and Cisco has not stated when exploitation began — only that it was ongoing in July 2026.
The escalation ingredient is well documented. In March 2026 Cisco disclosed CVE-2026-20079, a CVSS 10.0 authentication bypass in the same product that allows an unauthenticated attacker to execute script files and obtain root on the underlying OS — also added to CISA KEV. Cisco has stated it is not aware of malicious exploitation of CVE-2026-20079 itself, but the existence of that class of bug in the same web stack is why a “low-privileged” account here is treated as a High-impact problem.

Post-Exploitation Impact

Reconnaissance of the entire perimeter: access to firewall management data reveals policy structure, managed device inventory, and network topology — an attacker learns where the boundaries are and where they are weakest, without touching those boundaries.
Detection-blindness intelligence: visibility into the security telemetry the FMC aggregates tells an attacker which activity gets logged and alerted on, and which does not.
A staging point for privilege escalation: an authenticated session is the precondition for the large class of FMC bugs that are only exploitable post-authentication.
Root on the management plane (via chaining): if escalation succeeds, the attacker controls the console that pushes policy to every managed FTD device.
Policy manipulation: from a privileged FMC position, access-control rules, NAT, and IPS policy can be modified and deployed — an attacker can quite literally open the door and then close it behind them.
Persistence that survives a patch: any credential, key, or certificate held on the appliance must be assumed exposed. Cisco explicitly recommends rotating all user credentials, keys, and certificates on affected FMCs because exploitation has been ongoing — installing the hotfix alone does not undo prior access.

⚠️ Impact Assessment

Immediate Impact

Unauthenticated access to the firewall management plane, requiring no exploit code and no user interaction.
Every unpatched on-premises FMC of an affected branch is equally exploitable — the credential does not vary by installation.
Actively exploited before disclosure, with a three-day CISA remediation deadline.
No workaround. Network restriction reduces exposure but does not remediate; only the hotfix does.
Patching is necessary but not sufficient. Cisco’s own guidance is to rotate all credentials, keys, and certificates on the device.

Affected Versions

Cisco published hotfixes for the following on-premises FMC Software branches:

FMC release branch	Status	Hotfix package
7.0	Vulnerable without hotfix	`Cisco_Firepower_Mgmt_Center_Hotfix_GB-7.0.9.1-3.sh.REL.tar`
7.2	Vulnerable without hotfix	`Cisco_Secure_FW_Mgmt_Center_Hotfix_HL-7.2.11.1-4.sh.REL.tar`
7.4	Vulnerable without hotfix	`Cisco_Secure_FW_Mgmt_Center_Hotfix_HG-7.4.7.1-3.sh.REL.tar`
7.6	Vulnerable without hotfix	`Cisco_Secure_FW_Mgmt_Center_Hotfix_CY-7.6.5.1-2.sh.REL.tar`
7.7	Vulnerable without hotfix	`Cisco_Secure_FW_Mgmt_Center_Hotfix_AM-7.7.12.1-2.sh.REL.tar`
10.0	Vulnerable without hotfix	`Cisco_Secure_FW_Mgmt_Center_Hotfix_P-10.0.1.1-2.sh.REL.tar`
7.3	Listed as vulnerable by Horizon3.ai; no hotfix in Cisco’s table	Migrate to a branch with a hotfix, or contact Cisco TAC

Horizon3.ai enumerates the vulnerable ranges as 7.0.0-7.0.9, 7.2.0-7.2.11, 7.3.0-7.3.1.2, 7.4.0-7.4.7, 7.6.0-7.6.5, 7.7.0-7.7.12 and 10.0.0-10.0.1. Always cross-reference the official Cisco advisory and the Cisco Software Center for the exact package that applies to your deployment before installing anything.

Explicitly not vulnerable: Cloud-delivered Firewall Management Center (cdFMC), Firewall Device Manager (FDM), Secure Firewall ASA Software, Secure Firewall Threat Defense (FTD) Software, and Security Cloud Control (SCC).

Affected Environments

On-premises FMC deployments of any size — the flaw is in the shipped software, not in a configuration choice, so a small single-appliance deployment is as exploitable as a large one.
FMCs reachable beyond a tightly controlled management network: any FMC whose web interface is reachable from the internet, from a broad corporate VLAN, from a VPN pool, or from a partner/vendor network.
Managed service providers and multi-tenant estates: a single FMC managing many customers’ firewalls concentrates the blast radius dramatically.
Environments running older branches: organizations on 7.3, or generally behind on FMC maintenance, have the hardest remediation path.

Attacker Profiles

State-sponsored and espionage actors: network edge and management infrastructure has been a defining target for these groups. Long-term, quiet visibility into a firewall management console is precisely the access they optimize for.
Ransomware operators and initial-access brokers: perimeter and security-management appliances are the preferred initial-access route, and root on an FMC is premium, sellable access.
Opportunistic mass scanners: once a hard-coded credential is public, exploitation collapses to a scripted login attempt against every reachable FMC on the internet. There is no skill barrier.
Insiders and third parties with network reach: because no privileges are required, anyone who can route packets to the management interface is a candidate — including contractors and vendors on a flat management network.

🛡️ Mitigation Strategies

Immediate Actions (Priority 1) ⚡

Determine which FMC version you are running. Log in to the FMC CLI over SSH and use the documented show version command, which reports the model, software version, and build:
```
# On the Cisco Secure FMC CLI (SSH as an admin user).
# 'show version' is a documented FMC CLI command and prints
# Model, Version and Build for the running software.
show version
```
The same information is available in the web interface under Help > About. Compare the result against the hotfix table above.
Install the hotfix for your branch — there is no workaround. Download the correct package from the Cisco Software Center and install it the same way you install a patch, via System > Updates > Product Updates in the FMC web interface. Two rules from Cisco’s own upgrade documentation matter here:
- Do not untar the signed .tar package. Upload it as-is; the FMC verifies the signature.
- Expect the System Updates page to load slowly immediately after upload while the package is verified.
After installation, re-run show version and confirm the build reflects the hotfix.
Take the management interface off any network that does not need it. Cisco notes the attack surface is reduced when the FMC management interface has no public internet access. Verify from outside your management network that TCP/443 on the FMC is not reachable:
```
# From a host OUTSIDE the intended management network, confirm the
# FMC web interface is not reachable. -Pn skips host discovery,
# -p 443 checks only the HTTPS management port.
nmap -Pn -p 443 <fmc-management-ip>
```
A filtered or closed result from untrusted networks is what you want. open from anywhere other than your admin network is a finding in its own right.

Hunt for the published indicator of compromise before you declare victory. Cisco’s IoC is a sudo entry in /var/log/messages showing the web account invoking a helper script as root. From the FMC CLI, enter the Linux shell with the documented expert command and search the system log:

# FMC CLI -> Linux shell. 'expert' is the documented FMC CLI command
# for accessing the underlying Linux shell.
expert

# Cisco's documented IoC check: look for license-related entries in
# the system log. Prefix with sudo if you get "Permission denied".
grep license /var/log/messages

# Same check across rotated system logs, matching the exact IoC string
# as a fixed (non-regex) pattern. -F = fixed string, -H = print filename.
grep -F -H 'package_info.pl /var/tmp/license.tmp' /var/log/messages*

# Does the attacker-staged temp file still exist on disk?
ls -l /var/tmp/license.tmp

The specific line Cisco flags as a possible compromise looks like this:

sudo: www : PWD=/ ; USER=root ; COMMAND=/usr/local/sf/bin/package_info.pl /var/tmp/license.tmp --lsm

The www account is the FMC web process. Seeing it invoke package_info.pl as root with a file under /var/tmp is the signature Cisco published for this campaign.

Rotate every secret the appliance holds. Cisco recommends this for all affected FMCs because exploitation has been ongoing — not only for devices where you find an IoC:
- Reset all user and administrator credentials on the FMC.
- Replace certificates used by the appliance.
- Rotate API keys and registration keys, and any shared secrets configured through the FMC.
If you find evidence of compromise, engage Cisco TAC. Cisco’s guidance is to contact the Technical Assistance Center for recovery support rather than attempting to clean a suspected-compromised management appliance in place.

Detection Measures 🔍

Because exploitation of CVE-2026-20316 is a successful login, detection has to focus on who logged in and from where, plus the escalation footprint afterwards.

# 1) Escalation footprint (Cisco's published IoC), across rotated logs.
#    -F treats the pattern as a fixed string, -H prints the filename,
#    -n prints the line number for follow-up.
grep -F -H -n 'package_info.pl /var/tmp/license.tmp' /var/log/messages*

# 2) Broader view: any sudo invocation by the web account 'www'.
#    -E enables extended regular expressions.
grep -E -H 'sudo: *www *:' /var/log/messages*

# 3) Unexpected files staged in the world-writable temp directory.
#    -l long listing, -t sort by mtime, -r reverse -- so the most
#    recently modified files appear LAST, at the bottom of the output.
ls -ltr /var/tmp

If you forward FMC syslog to a SIEM, alert on the escalation pattern. The following Splunk query looks for the same indicator centrally:

index=* sourcetype=syslog "sudo:" "www" "package_info.pl" "/var/tmp/license.tmp"
| stats count min(_time) as first_seen max(_time) as last_seen by host
| convert ctime(first_seen) ctime(last_seen)

A portable Sigma rule for the same behaviour:

title: Cisco Secure FMC Web Account Escalating via package_info.pl (CVE-2026-20316)
status: experimental
description: >
  Detects the indicator of compromise published by Cisco for CVE-2026-20316:
  the FMC web account (www) invoking the package_info.pl helper script as root
  against a file in /var/tmp.
references:
  - https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/support/docs/csa/cisco-sa-fmc-static-cred-BET3Cjh.html
logsource:
  product: linux
  service: syslog
detection:
  keywords_sudo:
    - 'sudo:'
    - 'www :'
  keywords_ioc:
    - 'package_info.pl'
    - '/var/tmp/license.tmp'
  condition: keywords_sudo and keywords_ioc
falsepositives:
  - Legitimate Cisco licensing operations referencing package_info.pl without the /var/tmp/license.tmp path
level: high

Additional hunting:

Review the FMC audit log (System > Monitoring > Audit in the web interface) for logins from unexpected source addresses, logins outside change windows, and logins by accounts your team does not recognize as human administrators.
Correlate network telemetry: any inbound connection to the FMC management interface from outside your administrative network is worth investigating retroactively, back to at least early July 2026.
Watch for outbound connections from the FMC to unfamiliar destinations — a management appliance should have a very predictable and very small egress profile.
Diff your firewall policy. Compare the currently deployed access-control, NAT, and IPS policy against a known-good export. Policy manipulation is the highest-consequence outcome of an FMC compromise and the easiest to overlook.

Long-term Security Improvements

Isolate management planes by default. Security-product management interfaces belong on a dedicated, tightly filtered out-of-band administration network, reachable only through a jump host with strong authentication — never from a general corporate VLAN, and never from the internet.
Inventory the management plane, not just the data plane. Many organizations track firewall firmware diligently and forget the console that manages it. The FMC needs the same emergency-patch SLA as the firewalls themselves — arguably a faster one.
Assume vendor appliances contain undocumented accounts. Hard-coded credentials are a recurring finding across the entire appliance industry. Where the product supports it, monitor and alert on every successful authentication, including service accounts you did not create.
Harden the appliance shell. Cisco documents the system lockdown FMC CLI command, which removes the expert command and access to the Linux shell. Evaluate it as a hardening measure for production FMCs — while accounting for the fact that it also removes the shell access you need for the IoC hunt above, so run the hunt first.
Make credential rotation a rehearsed procedure. “Rotate all credentials, keys, and certificates” is a sentence that takes minutes to write and days to execute if you have never practised it. Build and test the runbook before you need it.
Include management-plane compromise in incident response exercises. Tabletop the scenario explicitly: what does your team do when the console that controls the firewalls — and holds their telemetry — can no longer be trusted?
Demand credential hygiene in procurement. Ask vendors directly whether their product contains any static or shipped credentials, and make per-installation secret generation a requirement in security-relevant purchases.

🎯 Why is this Critical?

It is being exploited right now. Cisco found out via in-the-wild attacks, not a coordinated report timeline. CISA agreed with a three-day federal deadline.
The CVSS score is actively misleading. A base score of 5.3 will lose the prioritization argument to a dozen “critical” CVEs that nobody is exploiting. Cisco’s own High Security Impact Rating, and Horizon3’s 8.9, tell the real story.
There is no exploit to develop. Once the credential is known, exploitation is a login. That is the lowest barrier to mass exploitation that exists.
Customers cannot fix it themselves. No configuration change, no password policy, no WAF rule removes a credential embedded in the vendor’s software. Only the hotfix does.
It is a chaining primitive in a product with a chaining history. The same product had a CVSS 10.0 unauthenticated-to-root authentication bypass (CVE-2026-20079) disclosed in March 2026. An account on this web stack is a meaningful step, not an endpoint.
The target is the control plane of the network boundary. Compromising the FMC is not compromising one host — it is compromising the authority that defines and enforces where every managed firewall draws its lines.
Patching does not close the incident. Cisco’s instruction to rotate all credentials, keys, and certificates is an acknowledgement that anything the appliance held may already be gone.

🚀 Timeline and Disclosure

2026-03-04 — Cisco discloses CVE-2026-20079 (CVSS 10.0, unauthenticated authentication bypass to root) and CVE-2026-20131 in Secure FMC. CISA adds CVE-2026-20079 to the KEV catalog with a remediation deadline of 2026-03-22, establishing the escalation context for what follows.
July 2026 — Cisco PSIRT becomes aware of active exploitation of the static credential flaw in the wild. Exploitation predates any advisory: this is a zero-day.
2026-07-29 — Cisco publishes advisory cisco-sa-fmc-static-cred-BET3Cjh for CVE-2026-20316, crediting Jimi Sebree of Horizon3.ai. The CVE is published in NVD the same day, and CISA adds it to the KEV catalog with a federal remediation deadline of 2026-08-01.
2026-07-30 — Hotfixes become available through the Cisco Software Center for branches 7.0, 7.2, 7.4, 7.6, 7.7 and 10.0. Horizon3.ai publishes its analysis; coverage follows across BleepingComputer, The Hacker News, Help Net Security, SecurityWeek and others.
2026-08-01 — CISA KEV remediation deadline for U.S. federal civilian executive branch agencies. The NVD record is last modified the same day.
CW31 (July 27 - August 2, 2026) — the entire disclosure, patch, and KEV cycle plays out inside a single calendar week.

🔗 Resources and References

CVE: CVE-2026-20316
NVD: NVD — CVE-2026-20316
Vendor advisory: Cisco Secure Firewall Management Center Software Static Credential Vulnerability (cisco-sa-fmc-static-cred-BET3Cjh)
CWE: CWE-259: Use of Hard-coded Password
CISA KEV Catalog: Known Exploited Vulnerabilities (added 2026-07-29, due 2026-08-01)
CISA alert: CISA Adds One Known Exploited Vulnerability to Catalog (2026-07-29)
Related: CVE-2026-20079 — CVSS 10.0 FMC authentication bypass to root, disclosed March 2026

💼 SEKurity Supports You

CVE-2026-20316 is a small vulnerability in the technical sense and a large one in every sense that matters operationally. A 5.3 base score attached to a firewall management console that was already being attacked before anyone published an advisory is exactly the kind of finding that slips through a severity-sorted patch queue — and exactly the kind that an attacker builds a chain around. The broader lesson generalizes well beyond Cisco: the systems that manage your security controls are frequently less scrutinized, less segmented, and less monitored than the controls themselves, while being strictly more valuable to compromise. We help organizations find that gap before someone else does — mapping which management planes are actually reachable and from where, testing whether an authenticated foothold on an appliance can be escalated in practice, and validating that a successful login by an account nobody recognizes would actually generate an alert. Our perimeter and infrastructure penetration testing deliberately targets the consoles, portals, and management interfaces that quietly hold authority over everything else.

Our Services

Penetration Testing: Web applications, mobile apps (Android & iOS), SAP systems, Active Directory
Large-Scale Attacks: Perimeter testing, IT infrastructure testing, Red Team engagements
Security Awareness: Phishing campaigns, hacking demonstrations

Act now — before attackers do.

Contact:

🌐 Website: www.sekurity.de

📧 Inquiries: www.sekurity.de/kontakt

📱 LinkedIn: SEKurity GmbH

Your SEKurity Team — Your Trusted Adversaries

The security of your network management infrastructure is our drive.

InSEKurity of the Week (CW31/2026): Cisco Secure Firewall Management Center Static Credentials (CVE-2026-20316)