VulnerabilityPublished 27 Feb 2026

CVE-2026-1442: Unitree UPK · Use of Hard-coded Cryptographic Key

Affects Unitree UPKSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 7.8 High.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 14:05 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

7.8High

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

EPSS: 0.1% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 5% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

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

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

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

Attack Vector: Local: The vulnerable component is not bound to the network stack and the attacker’s path is via read/write/execute capabilities. Either: the attacker exploits the vulnerability by accessing the target system locally (e.g., keyboard, console), or remotely (e.g., SSH); or the attacker relies on User Interaction by another person to perform actions required to exploit the vulnerability (e.g., tricking a legitimate user into opening a malicious document).
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: Required: Successful exploitation of this vulnerability requires a user to take some action before the vulnerability can be exploited.
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: High: There is total loss of availability, resulting in the attacker being able to fully deny access to resources in the impacted component; this loss is either sustained (while the attacker continues to deliver the attack) or persistent (the condition persists even after the attack has completed). Alternatively, the attacker has the ability to deny some availability, but the loss of availability presents a direct, serious consequence to the impacted component (e.g., the attacker cannot disrupt existing connections, but can prevent new connections; the attacker can repeatedly exploit a vulnerability that, in each instance of a successful attack, leaks a only small amount of memory, but after repeated exploitation causes a service to become completely unavailable).

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v3.1 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 27 Feb 2026
Detectable: no evidence on record.
No public nuclei template indexed
Weaponised: 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 26 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.
Weaponised: Public exploit code exists in Metasploit or Exploit-DB, 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
UnitreeUPK	Affected <=20260226v1	Fixed in–
GitHubbin4ry/UniTEABag`pkg:github/bin4ry/UniTEABag`Other threats	Affected =0	Fixed in–

Check your own hosts for these packages with threat-finder (opens in a new tab), our free open-source scanner.

AI-suggested

Organizations should immediately enforce strict physical security controls to prevent unauthorized local access to Unitree devices and their update mechanisms. Monitoring and logging of firmware update activities should be enhanced to detect anomalies or unauthorized modifications. Until official patches or updated cryptographic implementations are released by Unitree, users should avoid applying firmware updates from untrusted sources and verify update integrity through out-of-band methods if possible. Network segmentation can limit exposure of affected devices. Engaging with Unitree to obtain security advisories and timelines for remediation is critical. Additionally, organizations should consider deploying endpoint detection and response (EDR) solutions capable of identifying unusual device behavior post-update. For high-risk environments, temporarily disabling automatic firmware updates or restricting update capabilities to trusted administrators may reduce risk. Finally, educating users about the risks of interacting with update prompts can help mitigate social engineering vectors.

Description

Since the encryption algorithm used to protect firmware updates is itself encrypted using key material available to an attacker (or anyone paying attention), the firmware updates may be altered by an unauthorized user, and then trusted by a Unitree product, such as the Unitree Go2 and other models. This issue appears to affect all of Unitree’s current offerings as of February 26, 2026, and so should be considered a vulnerability in both the firmware generation and extraction processes. At the time of this release, there is no publicly-documented mechanism to subvert the update process and insert poisoned firmware packages without the equipment owner’s knowledge.

Impact

The vulnerability allows attackers to compromise the firmware update process by injecting malicious or altered firmware that the device will trust and install. This can lead to complete device compromise, including unauthorized control, data theft, sabotage, or denial of service. For organizations relying on Unitree robotic platforms, this undermines operational security and safety, especially in sensitive environments such as research labs, manufacturing, logistics, or security applications. The ability to alter firmware without detection can facilitate persistent backdoors or espionage. Given the growing deployment of robotic systems in critical infrastructure and commercial sectors, the impact extends beyond individual devices to potentially affect entire operational workflows. The requirement for local access and user interaction somewhat limits remote exploitation but does not eliminate risk, especially in environments where physical security is lax or insider threats exist. The absence of patches increases exposure duration, raising the likelihood of exploitation once attackers develop tools.

Summary

CVE-2026-1442 is a vulnerability categorized under CWE-321, indicating the use of hard-coded cryptographic keys within Unitree's UPK firmware update system. The encryption protecting firmware updates is itself encrypted using key material embedded in the product, which attackers can obtain or deduce. This design flaw allows attackers to modify firmware updates and have the compromised firmware accepted as legitimate by Unitree devices such as the Unitree Go2 and other models. The vulnerability affects all current Unitree offerings as of February 26, 2026, impacting both the firmware generation and extraction processes. The cryptographic weakness undermines the fundamental trust model of firmware updates, potentially enabling attackers to inject malicious code, disrupt device operation, or exfiltrate sensitive data. Exploitation requires local access to the device or update process and user interaction, but no elevated privileges are necessary. Although no known exploits are publicly documented, the vulnerability's presence in widely deployed robotic platforms poses a significant security risk. The CVSS v3.1 score of 7.8 reflects high impact on confidentiality, integrity, and availability, with low attack complexity but limited attack vector (local). The lack of available patches at the time of disclosure necessitates immediate risk management and mitigation efforts by users and the vendor.

CWE-321Use of Hard-coded Cryptographic Key (opens in a new tab)
Variant weaknessLikelihood of exploit: HighOWASP Top 10 A04:2025: Cryptographic Failures (opens in a new tab)
The product uses a hard-coded, unchangeable cryptographic key.
Architecture and Design
Prevention schemes mirror that of hard-coded password storage.
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
V2.3.1 (opens in a new tab)
V2.6.2 (opens in a new tab)
V2.8.5 (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 27 Feb 2026, 16:25 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-321

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats