CVE-2026-23846VulnerabilityPublished 19 Jan 2026

CVE-2026-23846: Quenary tugtainer · Use of GET Request Method With Sensitive Query Strings

Affects Quenary tugtainerSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 8.1 High : upgrade to 1.16.1 soon.

Data as of 25 Oct 2026, 19:02 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

8.1High

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

EPSS: 0.4% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 39% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.
Patch: Available – fixed in 1.16.1

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

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: None
User Interaction: Required
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: 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: None: There is no impact to availability within the impacted component.

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v3.1 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 19 Jan 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 2026-10-25.

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 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

Upgrade tugtainer and quenary/tugtainer to 1.16.1.

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
Quenarytugtainer	Affected <1.16.1	Fixed in 1.16.1
GitHubquenary/tugtainer`pkg:github/quenary/tugtainer`Other threats	Affected <1.16.1	Fixed in 1.16.1

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

AI-suggested

1. Immediately upgrade tugtainer installations to version 1.16.1 or later, where the vulnerability is patched by moving password transmission to the HTTP request body. 2. Conduct a thorough audit of server access logs, proxy logs, and browser histories to identify any exposed passwords and rotate affected credentials promptly. 3. Restrict access to logs and ensure that logging configurations do not capture sensitive query parameters. 4. Implement network segmentation and access controls to limit exposure of management interfaces and logs to trusted personnel only. 5. Educate users and administrators about the risks of transmitting sensitive data in URLs and encourage secure authentication practices. 6. Monitor network traffic for suspicious activity that could indicate exploitation attempts. 7. Where possible, enforce use of HTTPS to protect query strings in transit, although this does not prevent logging exposure. 8. Integrate security scanning tools to detect insecure use of GET requests with sensitive data in custom or third-party applications.

Description

CVE-2026-23846 is a high-severity vulnerability in Quenary's tugtainer versions prior to 1.16.1, where password authentication uses HTTP GET requests with sensitive query strings. This insecure design causes passwords to be exposed in server logs, browser history, Referer headers, and proxy logs, risking credential leakage. The vulnerability does not require authentication but does require user interaction, and it affects the confidentiality and integrity of credentials without impacting availability. The issue is patched in version 1.16.1. European organizations using tugtainer for Docker container automation should urgently update to mitigate exposure risks. Countries with significant container adoption and cloud infrastructure usage, such as Germany, France, and the Netherlands, are most likely to be affected.

Impact

For European organizations, this vulnerability poses a substantial risk to the confidentiality and integrity of authentication credentials used in container management workflows. Organizations relying on tugtainer for Docker container automation may have passwords exposed in server access logs, browser histories, and proxy logs, increasing the likelihood of credential theft and unauthorized access. Such breaches can lead to lateral movement within networks, compromise of containerized applications, and potential data breaches. Given the critical role of container orchestration in modern IT infrastructure, exploitation could disrupt development pipelines and production environments indirectly by enabling attackers to manipulate container updates or configurations. The exposure of passwords in logs also complicates incident response and forensic investigations, as sensitive data may be widely distributed across systems. European organizations with strict data protection regulations (e.g., GDPR) may face compliance risks if credential leakage leads to unauthorized access or data breaches. The vulnerability’s impact is amplified in sectors with high container adoption such as finance, telecommunications, and cloud service providers.

Summary

CVE-2026-23846 identifies a security vulnerability in the tugtainer application by Quenary, a self-hosted tool designed to automate Docker container updates. In versions prior to 1.16.1, the application’s password authentication mechanism transmits user credentials via HTTP GET request query parameters rather than the safer HTTP POST request body. This practice violates secure design principles because URLs, including query strings, are commonly logged by web servers, proxies, and can be stored in browser histories or transmitted in Referer headers when navigating between sites. Consequently, passwords can be inadvertently exposed to unauthorized parties through access to these logs or network intermediaries. The vulnerability is classified under CWE-598, which concerns the use of GET requests with sensitive query strings. The CVSS v3.1 score is 8.1 (high severity), reflecting the vulnerability’s network attack vector, low attack complexity, no privileges required, and user interaction needed. The impact primarily affects confidentiality and integrity of authentication credentials, as attackers who obtain these passwords can impersonate users or escalate privileges. The vulnerability does not affect system availability. The issue was publicly disclosed on January 19, 2026, and fixed in tugtainer version 1.16.1. No known exploits are currently reported in the wild, but the risk remains significant due to the sensitive nature of exposed credentials and the widespread use of container orchestration tools in enterprise environments.

CWE-598Use of HTTP Request With Sensitive Query String (opens in a new tab)
Variant weaknessOWASP Top 10 A06:2025: Insecure Design (opens in a new tab)
The web application uses an HTTP method to process a request, but the request includes sensitive information in the query string.
Implementation
When sending sensitive information, only include it in the request body or request headers instead of the query string. This may require avoiding use of GET requests.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Server Side Request Forgery Prevention (opens in a new tab)
Web Service Security (opens in a new tab)
Secure Design Principles (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V3.1.1 (opens in a new tab)
V13.1.3 (opens in a new tab)
V8.3.4 (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 26 Jan 2026, 20:11 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-598

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats