VulnerabilityPublished 5 Aug 2026

CVE-2026-18531: IBM Maximo Application Suite · Weak Randomness

Affects IBM Maximo Application SuiteSource CVE Database V5

Compare

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 5.3 Medium.

Data as of 3 Nov 2026, 22:58 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

5.3Medium

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

EPSS: 0.3% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 31% 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:N/I:L/A:N

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: None
User Interaction: None
Scope: Unchanged
Confidentiality: None
Integrity: Low
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: None: There is no loss of confidentiality within the impacted component.
Integrity: Low: Modification of data is possible, but the attacker does not have control over the consequence of a modification, or the amount of modification is limited. The data modification does not have a direct, serious impact on 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 5 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 3 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
IBMMaximo Application Suite	Affected =9.2 =9.1 =9.0	Fixed in–

CPE configurations (6)

cpe:2.3:a:ibm:maximo_application_suite:9.2:*:*:*:*:*:*:*
cpe:2.3:a:ibm:maximo_application_suite:9.2.0:*:*:*:*:*:*:*
cpe:2.3:a:ibm:maximo_application_suite:9.1:*:*:*:*:*:*:*
cpe:2.3:a:ibm:maximo_application_suite:9.1.0:*:*:*:*:*:*:*
cpe:2.3:a:ibm:maximo_application_suite:9.0:*:*:*:*:*:*:*
cpe:2.3:a:ibm:maximo_application_suite:9.0.0:*:*:*:*:*:*:*

AI-suggested

Until an official fix is available, monitor IBM's security advisories for updates. No specific mitigation steps are provided at this time.

Description

IBM Maximo Application Suite versions 9.0, 9.1, and 9.2 contain a vulnerability where a weak HMAC session signing secret is used. This weakness could allow a remote attacker to tamper with session data. The vulnerability is identified as CWE-330, indicating the use of insufficiently random values. The CVSS 3.1 base score is 5.3, reflecting a medium severity level. There is no vendor advisory or patch information currently available, and no known exploits in the wild have been reported.

Impact

An attacker could remotely tamper with session data due to the weak HMAC signing secret, potentially affecting the integrity of session information. There is no indication of confidentiality or availability impact. No known exploits have been reported in the wild.

Summary

CVE-2026-18531 affects IBM Maximo Application Suite versions 9.0, 9.1, and 9.2. The vulnerability arises from the use of a weak HMAC session signing secret, which could enable a remote attacker to tamper with session data. This is classified under CWE-330 (Use of Insufficiently Random Values). The CVSS v3.1 score is 5.3 (medium severity), with attack vector network, low attack complexity, no privileges required, no user interaction, and impact limited to integrity.

CWE-330Use of Insufficiently Random Values (opens in a new tab)
Class weaknessLikelihood of exploit: HighOWASP Top 10 A04:2025: Cryptographic Failures (opens in a new tab)
The product uses insufficiently random numbers or values in a security context that depends on unpredictable numbers.
MITRE discourages mapping vulnerabilities to this broad entry; the root cause is usually a more specific weakness.
Architecture and Design
Use a well-vetted algorithm that is currently considered to be strong by experts in the field, and select well-tested implementations with adequate length seeds.
Implementation
Consider a PRNG that re-seeds itself as needed from high quality pseudo-random output sources, such as hardware devices.
Architecture and Design · Requirements · Libraries or Frameworks
Use products or modules that conform to FIPS 140-2 to avoid obvious entropy problems. Consult FIPS 140-2 Annex C ("Approved Random Number Generators").
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Forgot Password (opens in a new tab)
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)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V2.3.1 (opens in a new tab)
V2.6.2 (opens in a new tab)
V2.7.6 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Signature Spoofing by Key Recreation (opens in a new tab)
Session Credential Falsification through Prediction (opens in a new tab)
Brute Force (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).

References

ibm.com/support/pages/node/7282362 (opens in a new tab)

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

CPE configurations (6)

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 13 Aug 2026, 17:28 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-330

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats