VulnerabilityPublished 23 Apr 2026

CVE-2026-41564: MIK CryptX · PRNG

Affects MIK CryptXSource CVE Database V5

Compare

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 7.5 High : upgrade to 0.088 soon.

Data as of 29 Oct 2026, 19:04 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

7.5High

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

EPSS: 0.4% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 37% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.
Patch: Available – fixed in 0.088

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

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: None
User Interaction: None
Scope: Unchanged
Confidentiality: High
Integrity: None
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: 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: None: There is no loss of integrity within 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 23 Apr 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

Upgrade MIK CryptX to 0.088.

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
MIKCryptX	Affected <0.088	Fixed in 0.088
GitHubCryptX`pkg:github/CryptX`Other threats	Affected <0.088	Fixed in 0.088

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

AI-suggested

If you cannot patch yet, avoid creating Crypt::PK::* objects before forking in preforking services. Alternatively, ensure that PRNG states are properly reseeded in child processes after fork to prevent nonce reuse.

Description

CryptX versions before 0.088 for Perl contain a vulnerability where the Crypt::PK pseudo-random number generator (PRNG) state is not reseeded after a process fork. This causes child processes to share identical PRNG states, leading to identical outputs in cryptographic operations such as key generation and signing. Specifically, ECDSA or DSA signatures generated by different processes can leak the private key due to nonce reuse. This affects preforking services like the Starman web server that load Crypt::PK::* objects before forking. The vulnerability has a high severity with a CVSS score of 7.5.

Impact

The vulnerability allows an attacker to recover private signing keys by analyzing multiple signatures generated by different child processes sharing the same PRNG state. This compromises the confidentiality of private keys used in ECDSA or DSA signatures, potentially enabling signature forgery or impersonation. The impact is limited to environments where Crypt::PK objects are created before forking, such as preforking web servers.

Summary

The vulnerability in CryptX (before version 0.088) arises because the Crypt::PK modules (including RSA, DSA, DH, ECC, Ed25519, and X25519) initialize a per-object PRNG state at construction and reuse it without detecting process forks. When a process forks, the child inherits the parent's PRNG state without reseeding, causing identical pseudo-random outputs across processes. This flaw enables attackers to recover private keys from multiple signatures generated by different child processes due to nonce reuse, compromising cryptographic security in preforking environments such as the Starman web server.

CWE-335Incorrect Usage of Seeds in Pseudo-Random Number Generator (PRNG) (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessOWASP Top 10 A04:2025: Cryptographic Failures (opens in a new tab)
The product uses a Pseudo-Random Number Generator (PRNG) but does not correctly manage seeds.
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)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).
CWE-338Use of Cryptographically Weak Pseudo-Random Number Generator (PRNG) (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessLikelihood of exploit: MediumOWASP Top 10 A04:2025: Cryptographic Failures (opens in a new tab)
The product uses a Pseudo-Random Number Generator (PRNG) in a security context, but the PRNG's algorithm is not cryptographically strong.
Implementation
Use functions or hardware which use a hardware-based random number generation for all crypto. This is the recommended solution. Use CyptGenRandom on Windows, or hw_rand() on Linux.
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
V6.3.3 (opens in a new tab)
V6.3.2 (opens in a new tab)
V6.3.1 (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 30 Apr 2026, 08:14 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-335, CWE-338

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats