VulnerabilityPublished 23 Feb 2026

CVE-2024-58041: WONKO Smolder · PRNG

Affects WONKO SmolderSource CVE Database V5

Compare

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 9.1 Critical.

Data as of 29 Oct 2026, 19:04 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

9.1Critical

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

Contested

Critical score, yet low EPSS after six months

EPSS: 0.4% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 40% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

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

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: None
User Interaction: None
Scope: Unchanged
Confidentiality: High
Integrity: High
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: None: The attacker is unauthorized prior to attack, and therefore does not require any access to settings or files to carry out an attack.
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: High: There is total loss of confidentiality, resulting in all resources within the impacted component being divulged to the attacker. Alternatively, access to only some restricted information is obtained, but the disclosed information presents a direct, serious impact.
Integrity: High: There is a total loss of integrity, or a complete loss of protection. For example, the attacker is able to modify any/all files protected by the impacted component. Alternatively, only some files can be modified, but malicious modification would present a direct, serious consequence to 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 23 Feb 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 29 Oct 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.

What to do

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
WONKOSmolder	Affected <=1.51	Fixed in–

AI-suggested

To mitigate CVE-2024-58041, organizations should immediately audit their use of Smolder versions 1.51 and earlier and identify any cryptographic functions relying on the rand() function or the Data::Random library. Developers should replace the use of rand() with a cryptographically secure PRNG, such as those provided by the Crypt::PRNG or Crypt::Random Perl modules, or system-level secure random sources like /dev/urandom or CryptGenRandom on Windows. If possible, upgrade to a newer version of Smolder that addresses this issue once available. In the absence of an official patch, consider patching the source code to remove dependencies on Data::Random for cryptographic purposes. Additionally, review all cryptographic keys, tokens, and secrets generated by affected systems and rotate them to prevent exploitation of previously generated weak values. Implement monitoring for unusual access patterns or cryptographic failures that may indicate exploitation attempts. Finally, educate development teams about the importance of using secure random number generators in cryptographic contexts to prevent similar issues.

Description

Smolder versions through 1.51 for Perl uses insecure rand() function for cryptographic functions. Smolder 1.51 and earlier for Perl uses the rand() function as the default source of entropy, which is not cryptographically secure, for cryptographic functions. Specifically Smolder::DB::Developer uses the Data::Random library which specifically states that it is "Useful mostly for test programs". Data::Random uses the rand() function.

Impact

The use of a weak PRNG in cryptographic functions severely undermines the security guarantees of the Smolder software. Attackers can potentially predict or reproduce cryptographic keys, tokens, or other sensitive values generated by the software, leading to unauthorized access, data leakage, or data tampering. This compromises the confidentiality and integrity of systems relying on Smolder for secure operations. Since the vulnerability is remotely exploitable without authentication or user interaction, it poses a significant risk to exposed systems. Organizations using Smolder in development, testing, or production environments may face increased risk of compromise, especially if the software is used in security-sensitive contexts such as authentication, secure communications, or data protection. The lack of availability impact means systems remain operational but insecure. The absence of known exploits suggests the threat is currently theoretical but could be weaponized by attackers once understood.

CWE-338Use of Cryptographically Weak Pseudo-Random Number Generator (PRNG) (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessLikelihood of exploit: MediumOWASP Top 10 A04:2025: Cryptographic Failures (opens in a new tab)
The product uses a Pseudo-Random Number Generator (PRNG) in a security context, but the PRNG's algorithm is not cryptographically strong.
Implementation
Use functions or hardware which use a hardware-based random number generation for all crypto. This is the recommended solution. Use CyptGenRandom on Windows, or hw_rand() on Linux.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Transport Layer Protection (opens in a new tab)
User Privacy Protection (opens in a new tab)
Password Storage (opens in a new tab)
Cryptographic Storage (opens in a new tab)
HSTS (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V6.3.3 (opens in a new tab)
V6.3.2 (opens in a new tab)
V6.3.1 (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

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 3 Mar 2026, 01:31 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-338

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats