VulnerabilityPublished 11 Aug 2026Updated 1 Nov 2026

CVE-2026-15556: Red Hat JBoss Enterprise Application Platform 7.4 ELS on RHEL 7 · Improper Verification of Cryptographic Signature

Affects Red Hat JBoss Enterprise Application Platform 7.4 ELS on RHEL 7Source CVE Database V5

Compare

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 8.1 High.

Data as of 10 Nov 2026, 23:24 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

8.1High

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	8.1

EPSS: 0.3% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 23% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

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

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: Low
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: 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: 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 11 Aug 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 10 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 HatRed Hat JBoss Enterprise Application Platform 7.4.25	Affected–	Fixed in–
Red Hat JBoss Enterprise Application Platform 7.4 ELS on RHEL 7eap7-activemq-artemis	Affected–	Fixed in–
Red Hat JBoss Enterprise Application Platform 7.4 ELS on RHEL 7eap7-glassfish-jsf	Affected–	Fixed in–
Red Hat JBoss Enterprise Application Platform 7.4 ELS on RHEL 7eap7-ironjacamar	Affected–	Fixed in–
Red Hat JBoss Enterprise Application Platform 7.4 ELS on RHEL 7eap7-jackson-annotations	Affected–	Fixed in–
Red Hat JBoss Enterprise Application Platform 7.4 ELS on RHEL 7eap7-jackson-core	Affected–	Fixed in–

AI-suggested

Red Hat JBoss EAP 8.x is not affected and upgrading to this version can mitigate risk. No specific mitigations are currently documented in the advisory. Customers should monitor Red Hat communications for updates on fixes or mitigations.

Description

A flaw was found in Picketlink's SP signature validation; a SAML response containing zero assertion elements matching the signature check can allow an attacker to forge a SAML response and auth as any principal with any roles on the protected application.

Impact

An attacker with low privileges can remotely exploit this vulnerability to bypass authentication by forging SAML responses, thereby gaining unauthorized access as any principal with any roles on the protected application. This leads to a complete compromise of confidentiality and integrity of the application data. Availability is not impacted. No known exploits in the wild have been reported.

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 11 Aug 2026, 09:27 UTC

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats