VulnerabilityPublished 12 Nov 2026

CVE-2026-126643: Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform 2 · Cleartext Storage of Sensitive Information

Affects Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform 2Source CVE Database V5

Compare

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 6.5 Medium.

Data as of 12 Nov 2026, 11:06 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

6.5Medium

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	6.5

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

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: Low
User Interaction: None
Scope: Unchanged
Confidentiality: High
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: 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: 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 12 Nov 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 11 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.

What to do

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform 2ansible-automation-platform-25/gateway-rhel8-operator	Affected–	Fixed in–
Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform 2ansible-automation-platform-25/gateway-rhel9-operator	Affected–	Fixed in–
Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform 2ansible-automation-platform-26/gateway-rhel9-operator	Affected–	Fixed in–
Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform 2ansible-automation-platform-27/gateway-rhel9-operator	Affected–	Fixed in–

AI-suggested

Red Hat advises restricting OpenShift RBAC permissions so that only principals already trusted to read the corresponding Kubernetes Secrets have permission to read the AutomationController custom resources. If untrusted principals may have accessed the AutomationController resource, rotate the resource-server secret to prevent misuse. These mitigations directly address the vulnerability by limiting exposure and invalidating potentially compromised secrets.

Description

CVE-2026-126643 is a cleartext storage vulnerability in the Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform 2's AAP Gateway Operator. The operator copies a sensitive resource-server secret from a Kubernetes Secret into the AutomationController custom resource in plaintext. This exposure breaks the intended RBAC separation, allowing any user with read access to the AutomationController resource but not the Secret to obtain the secret. The secret may also be exposed in Kubernetes API storage, GitOps histories, manifests, support bundles, and audit data. Disclosure of this secret could allow impersonation of a trusted Controller service and access to privileged APIs.

Impact

The vulnerability leads to disclosure of a sensitive resource-server secret used for trusted service authentication within the Ansible Automation Platform. This breaks RBAC separation by exposing the secret to users who can read the AutomationController custom resource but not the underlying Kubernetes Secret. Disclosure may allow an attacker to impersonate the Controller service and access privileged APIs. The impact is limited to confidentiality loss; integrity and availability are not affected. Exploitation requires authenticated access with specific RBAC permissions. No known exploitation in the wild has been reported.

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 12 Nov 2026, 11:06 UTC

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats