How many Glasswing CVEs are actually being exploited?

VulnCheck found that 2 of the 442 CVEs credited to Anthropic's Project Glasswing are exploited in the wild, about 0.45%. Patrick Garrity checked every credited CVE against VulnCheck's Known Exploited Vulnerabilities list. The two are CVE-2026-61500 and CVE-2026-26980. The rest have no known exploitation so far.

Why does VulnCheck doubt Anthropic's 94.2% true-positive rate?

VulnCheck's Patrick Garrity says Anthropic's claimed 94.2% true-positive rate does not match what maintainers report. He questions how the ledger's 1,654 duplicates and 419 withdrawn findings are counted. He also notes that curl, which receives OSS Scanner reports, has marked 19 of 34 reports as not a vulnerability so far.

What does the Glasswing data mean for open-source maintainers?

VulnCheck argues that Project Glasswing has moved the triage burden from Anthropic to open-source maintainers. Anthropic says its self-service OSS Scanner produces reports without human review or triage. Since September the ledger grew by nearly 12,000 findings while fixes rose by only 15, which the post reads as a backlog maintainers must sort through.

Where can I see the list of Anthropic-credited CVEs?

Patrick Garrity keeps the list in a public GitHub repository, patrickmgarrity/Anthropic-Credited-CVEs, which he started on April 17, 2026. It collects CVE records, GitHub advisories and Linux kernel commits that appear to credit Anthropic's research team, and it is the data behind VulnCheck's November Glasswing update.

VulnCheck · 2026-11-09 · major

VulnCheck on Glasswing — 442 CVEs, 2 exploited, maintainers carry the triage

In short

VulnCheck's Patrick Garrity counts 442 CVEs credited to Anthropic's Project Glasswing after seven months. Only 2 are exploited in the wild, and he argues the OSS Scanner shifts triage work onto open-source maintainers.

VulnCheck · 2026-11-09 · 3 sources checked

VulnCheck blog card for the post on Anthropic Project Glasswing findings after seven months

A seven-month audit of Project Glasswing finds many findings, few fixes and almost no exploited bugs.

Key specs

Cves credited	442
Exploited in the wild	2

Quick facts

Author	Patrick Garrity, VulnCheck
Tracking since	April 17, 2026
Share of 2026 CVEs	About 0.5% of 93,450
Ledger findings	37,966 (Nov 2), 217 marked fixed
Claimed true-positive rate	94.2% (Anthropic)
curl reports	34 sent, 19 not a vulnerability

What is it?

VulnCheck's November update on Anthropic's Project Glasswing counts the CVEs that credit Anthropic's research team since April 2026. Patrick Garrity finds 442 of them, about 63 a month and roughly 0.5% of all CVEs published in 2026. He also reviews Anthropic's own disclosure ledger and feedback from curl's maintainers.

How does it work?

The count combines CVE records, GitHub security advisories, Linux kernel commits and Anthropic's disclosure ledger, checked by hand against advisories. Each credited CVE is matched against VulnCheck's KEV list of exploited bugs. The ledger shows 37,966 findings by November 2, but only 7,349 are public and 217 are marked fixed.

Why does it matter?

Anthropic presents Glasswing and its OSS Scanner as proof that AI can find real security bugs at scale. This audit suggests the numbers look bigger than the impact so far, and that unreviewed AI reports cost maintainers time. In September, Claude rated 91.5% of findings critical or high, while maintainers rated 51.3% that way.

Who is it for?

security teams and open-source maintainers

Frequently asked questions

How many Glasswing CVEs are actually being exploited?: VulnCheck found that 2 of the 442 CVEs credited to Anthropic's Project Glasswing are exploited in the wild, about 0.45%. Patrick Garrity checked every credited CVE against VulnCheck's Known Exploited Vulnerabilities list. The two are CVE-2026-61500 and CVE-2026-26980. The rest have no known exploitation so far.
Why does VulnCheck doubt Anthropic's 94.2% true-positive rate?: VulnCheck's Patrick Garrity says Anthropic's claimed 94.2% true-positive rate does not match what maintainers report. He questions how the ledger's 1,654 duplicates and 419 withdrawn findings are counted. He also notes that curl, which receives OSS Scanner reports, has marked 19 of 34 reports as not a vulnerability so far.
What does the Glasswing data mean for open-source maintainers?: VulnCheck argues that Project Glasswing has moved the triage burden from Anthropic to open-source maintainers. Anthropic says its self-service OSS Scanner produces reports without human review or triage. Since September the ledger grew by nearly 12,000 findings while fixes rose by only 15, which the post reads as a backlog maintainers must sort through.
Where can I see the list of Anthropic-credited CVEs?: Patrick Garrity keeps the list in a public GitHub repository, patrickmgarrity/Anthropic-Credited-CVEs, which he started on April 17, 2026. It collects CVE records, GitHub advisories and Linux kernel commits that appear to credit Anthropic's research team, and it is the data behind VulnCheck's November Glasswing update.

Try it

https://github.com/patrickmgarrity/Anthropic-Credited-CVEs