VulnerabilityPublished 17 Sep 2026Updated 13 Nov 2026

CVE-2026-92893: Incorrect Authorization

Source GCVE Database

Compare

Authoritative record:CVE-2026-92893· Medium 4.3

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 4.3 Medium : update Red Hat Satellite 6 when convenient.

Data as of 13 Nov 2026, 20:18 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

4.3Medium

How severe the flaw is on the 0–10 CVSS scale.

Thin evidence

One scorer or none

CVSS scores by source
CNA (redhat)	CVSS 3.1	4.3

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: Low
User Interaction: None
Scope: Unchanged
Confidentiality: Low
Integrity: None
Availability: None

Bold values are the worst case: easiest to exploit or largest impact.

Attack Vector: Network: The vulnerable component is bound to the network stack and the set of possible attackers extends beyond the other options listed, up to and including the entire Internet. Such a vulnerability is often termed 'remotely exploitable' and can be thought of as an attack being exploitable at the protocol level one or more network hops away (e.g., across one or more routers).
Attack Complexity: Low: Specialized access conditions or extenuating circumstances do not exist. An attacker can expect repeatable success against the vulnerable component.
Privileges Required: Low: The attacker is authorized with (i.e., requires) privileges that provide basic user capabilities that could normally affect only settings and files owned by a user. Alternatively, an attacker with Low privileges may have the ability to cause an impact only to non-sensitive resources.
User Interaction: None: The vulnerable system can be exploited without any interaction from any user.
Scope: Unchanged: An exploited vulnerability can only affect resources managed by the same security authority. In this case, the vulnerable component and the impacted component are either the same, or both are managed by the same security authority.
Confidentiality: Low: There is some loss of confidentiality. Access to some restricted information is obtained, but the attacker does not have control over what information is obtained, or the amount or kind of loss is limited. The information disclosure does not cause a direct, serious loss to the impacted component.
Integrity: None: There is no loss of integrity within the impacted component.
Availability: None: There is no impact to availability within the impacted component.

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v3.1 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 17 Sep 2026
Detectable: no evidence on record.
No public nuclei template indexed
Weaponized: no evidence on record.
No public exploit code indexed in Metasploit or Exploit-DB
Exploited in the wildExploited: no evidence on record.
Not in CISA KEV and no source reports exploitation
Observed by OffSeq MirageSeen by Mirage: no evidence on record.
No attack traffic recorded by OffSeq Mirage sensors

A missing step is not evidence of safety. Sources: cve.org (opens in a new tab), the Metasploit, Exploit-DB and nuclei-templates index as of 13 Nov 2026.

Disclosed: The CVE record is public on cve.org. Its publication is t = 0.
Detectable: A public nuclei template can find exposed instances, for defenders and attackers alike.
Weaponized: A Metasploit exploit module or Exploit-DB entry exists (Metasploit scanner modules do not count), or CISA SSVC or the CVSS exploit maturity reports a public proof of concept.
Exploited in the wild: CISA KEV lists it, CISA SSVC rates exploitation active, or a source reports attacks.
Observed by OffSeq Mirage: OffSeq Mirage honeypot sensors recorded attack traffic for this CVE, or found exposed hosts without attack traffic.

Moments are spaced evenly, not to scale; a dashed line marks a gap of six months or more. Deltas count from t = 0. Sources that give only a date (CISA KEV, Exploit-DB, or a time of exactly 00:00Z) read “same day” rather than hours. Metasploit modules carry the flaw’s disclosure date, not their release date, and nuclei templates carry no date, so both appear above but not on the timeline.

ghsa-pvvq-573r-296r

What to do

Patches and advisories

access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2026:100120 (opens in a new tab)

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
Red Hat Satellite 6rubygem-foreman_ansible	Affected–	Fixed in–

AI-suggested

Red Hat has released an official security update for Red Hat Satellite 6.19 on RHEL 9 that fixes this authorization flaw by enforcing proper access controls in the foreman_ansible plugin. Users should apply the Red Hat Satellite 6.19 update as per the advisory RHSA-2026:100120 to remediate this vulnerability. No additional mitigation steps are required beyond applying the official patch.

Description

CVE-2026-92893 is a vulnerability in the foreman_ansible plugin's Ansible inventory API where an authenticated user can bypass host visibility restrictions. The flaw arises because the host query does not enforce the caller's view_hosts permission filter, allowing unauthorized access to full Ansible inventory data, including hidden parameter values. This issue affects Red Hat Satellite 6.19 on RHEL 9. A security update has been released by Red Hat to enforce proper authorization when accessing Ansible inventory data.

Impact

An authenticated user with limited host visibility permissions can access full Ansible inventory data for arbitrary hosts within their organization, including sensitive parameter values that are normally hidden. This unauthorized data exposure could lead to information disclosure within the organization. The CVSS score is 4.3 (medium severity), indicating a low complexity attack with limited impact confined to confidentiality.

Summary

The foreman_ansible plugin's Ansible inventory API contains an authorization flaw due to an unscoped Host.where query that fails to enforce the search filter tied to the caller's view_hosts permission. As a result, an authenticated user with restricted host visibility can supply arbitrary host IDs within their organization and retrieve the complete Ansible inventory for those hosts, including parameters marked as hidden. Red Hat has addressed this issue in an update to the rubygem-foreman_ansible package as part of Red Hat Satellite 6.19 for RHEL 9.

CWE-863Incorrect Authorization (opens in a new tab)
Class weaknessLikelihood of exploit: HighCWE Top 25 (2025): #17OWASP Top 10 A01:2025: Broken Access Control (opens in a new tab)
The product performs an authorization check when an actor attempts to access a resource or perform an action, but it does not correctly perform the check.
Architecture and Design
Divide the product into anonymous, normal, privileged, and administrative areas. Reduce the attack surface by carefully mapping roles with data and functionality. Use role-based access control (RBAC) to enforce the roles at the appropriate boundaries.
Architecture and Design
Ensure that access control checks are performed related to the business logic. These checks may be different than the access control checks that are applied to more generic resources such as files, connections, processes, memory, and database records.
Architecture and Design · Libraries or Frameworks
Use a vetted library or framework that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Authorization (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V8.3.8 (opens in a new tab)
V13.4.2 (opens in a new tab)
V7.2.2 (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Patches and advisories

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 13 Nov 2026, 20:18 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-863

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats