VulnerabilityPublished 5 Mar 2026Updated 6 Mar 2026

CVE-2026-30791: RustDesk Client · Weak Cryptography

Affects RustDesk ClientSource CVE Database V5

Compare

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 8.7 High.

Data as of 29 Oct 2026, 19:04 UTC

CVSS 4.0 base score

8.7High

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

EPSS: 0.2% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 16% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/VI:N/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Attack Requirements: None
Privileges Required: None
User Interaction: None
Vulnerable system confidentiality: High
Vulnerable system integrity: None
Vulnerable system availability: None
Subsequent system confidentiality: None
Subsequent system integrity: None
Subsequent system availability: None

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

Attack Vector: Network: The vulnerable system is bound to the network stack and the set of possible attackers extends beyond the other options listed below, 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: The attacker must take no measurable action to exploit the vulnerability. The attack requires no target-specific circumvention to exploit the vulnerability. An attacker can expect repeatable success against the vulnerable system.
Attack Requirements: None: The successful attack does not depend on the deployment and execution conditions of the vulnerable system. The attacker can expect to be able to reach the vulnerability and execute the exploit under all or most instances of the vulnerability.
Privileges Required: None: The attacker is unauthorized prior to attack, and therefore does not require any access to settings or files of the vulnerable system to carry out an attack.
User Interaction: None: The vulnerable system can be exploited without interaction from any human user, other than the attacker.
Vulnerable system confidentiality: High: There is a total loss of confidentiality, resulting in all information within the Vulnerable System being divulged to the attacker. Alternatively, access to only some restricted information is obtained, but the disclosed information presents a direct, serious impact. For example, an attacker steals the administrator's password, or private encryption keys of a web server.
Vulnerable system integrity: None: There is no loss of integrity within the Vulnerable System.
Vulnerable system availability: None: There is no impact to availability within the Vulnerable System.
Subsequent system confidentiality: None: There is no loss of confidentiality within the Subsequent System or all confidentiality impact is constrained to the Vulnerable System.
Subsequent system integrity: None: There is no loss of integrity within the Subsequent System or all integrity impact is constrained to the Vulnerable System.
Subsequent system availability: None: There is no impact to availability within the Subsequent System or all availability impact is constrained to the Vulnerable System.

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v4.0 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 5 Mar 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 29 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.
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
rustdesk-clientRustDesk Client	Affected <=1.4.5	Fixed in–
GitHubrustdesk-client`pkg:github/rustdesk-client`Other threats	Affected <=1.4.5	Fixed in–

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

AI-suggested

Immediate mitigation involves disabling or restricting the use of the vulnerable configuration import and URI scheme features until patches are released.
Monitor RustDesk official channels for security updates and apply patches promptly once available.
Implement network-level controls such as firewall rules or intrusion detection systems to limit exposure of RustDesk client services to untrusted networks.
Conduct thorough audits of existing RustDesk configurations to identify and remove embedded sensitive data where feasible.
Employ application-layer encryption or VPN tunnels to add an additional layer of protection around remote desktop communications.
Educate users on the risks of importing untrusted configuration files or clicking on suspicious URI schemes related to RustDesk.
Consider alternative remote desktop solutions with stronger cryptographic assurances if immediate patching is not possible.
Use endpoint detection and response (EDR) tools to detect anomalous activities that may indicate exploitation attempts.
Review and tighten access controls and authentication mechanisms around remote desktop infrastructure to limit potential damage from data exposure.
Engage in threat hunting and log analysis to detect any signs of exploitation attempts targeting this vulnerability.

Description

Use of a Broken or Risky Cryptographic Algorithm vulnerability in rustdesk-client RustDesk Client rustdesk-client on Windows, MacOS, Linux, iOS, Android, WebClient (Config import, URI scheme handler, CLI --config modules) allows Retrieve Embedded Sensitive Data. This vulnerability is associated with program files flutter/lib/common.Dart, hbb_common/src/config.Rs and program routines parseRustdeskUri(), importConfig(). This issue affects RustDesk Client: through 1.4.5.

Impact

The primary impact of CVE-2026-30791 is the unauthorized disclosure of embedded sensitive data within the RustDesk Client application. This can lead to compromise of user credentials, configuration secrets, or other confidential information that attackers can leverage to gain unauthorized access to remote desktop sessions or escalate privileges. Since the vulnerability is exploitable remotely without authentication or user interaction, it significantly increases the attack surface for threat actors. Organizations relying on RustDesk for remote access may face data breaches, unauthorized system access, and potential lateral movement within their networks. The exposure of sensitive configuration data could also facilitate further attacks such as man-in-the-middle, session hijacking, or persistent access. Given RustDesk’s cross-platform presence, the impact spans diverse environments including enterprise desktops, mobile devices, and web clients, amplifying the risk. The vulnerability undermines trust in the cryptographic protections of the client, potentially affecting compliance with data protection regulations and increasing liability. Although no active exploitation is reported, the high CVSS score reflects the critical nature of the threat if weaponized.

CWE-327Use of a Broken or Risky Cryptographic Algorithm (opens in a new tab)
Class weaknessLikelihood of exploit: HighOWASP Top 10 A04:2025: Cryptographic Failures (opens in a new tab)
The product uses a broken or risky cryptographic algorithm or protocol.
Architecture and Design · Libraries or Frameworks
When there is a need to store or transmit sensitive data, use strong, up-to-date cryptographic algorithms to encrypt that data. Select a well-vetted algorithm that is currently considered to be strong by experts in the field, and use well-tested implementations.
Architecture and Design
Ensure that the design allows one cryptographic algorithm to be replaced with another in the next generation or version. Where possible, use wrappers to make the interfaces uniform. This will make it easier to upgrade to stronger algorithms.
Architecture and Design
Carefully manage and protect cryptographic keys (see CWE-320). If the keys can be guessed or stolen, then the strength of the cryptography itself is irrelevant.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Cryptographic Storage (opens in a new tab)
Key Management (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)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V8.3.7 (opens in a new tab)
V2.9.3 (opens in a new tab)
V6.2.2 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Encryption Brute Forcing (opens in a new tab)
Creating a Rogue Certification Authority Certificate (opens in a new tab)
Signature Spoof (opens in a new tab)
Signature Spoofing by Improper Validation (opens in a new tab)
Cryptanalysis of Cellular Encryption (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).
CWE-684Incorrect Provision of Specified Functionality (opens in a new tab)
Class weakness
The code does not function according to its published specifications, potentially leading to incorrect usage.
Implementation
Ensure that your code strictly conforms to specifications.
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 12 Mar 2026, 20:24 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-327, CWE-684

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats