VulnerabilityPublished 18 Mar 2026

CVE-2026-4396: Devolutions Hub Reporting Service · Improper Certificate Validation

Affects Devolutions Hub Reporting ServiceSource CVE Database V5

Compare

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 8.3 High.

Data as of 29 Oct 2026, 19:04 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

8.3High

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

EPSS: 0.1% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 4% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

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

Attack Vector: Adjacent
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: None
User Interaction: None
Scope: Unchanged
Confidentiality: High
Integrity: High
Availability: Low

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

Attack Vector: Adjacent: The vulnerable component is bound to the network stack, but the attack is limited at the protocol level to a logically adjacent topology. This can mean an attack must be launched from the same shared physical (e.g., Bluetooth or IEEE 802.11) or logical (e.g., local IP subnet) network, or from within a secure or otherwise limited administrative domain (e.g., MPLS, secure VPN to an administrative network zone).
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: 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: Low: Performance is reduced or there are interruptions in resource availability. Even if repeated exploitation of the vulnerability is possible, the attacker does not have the ability to completely deny service to legitimate users. The resources in the impacted component are either partially available all of the time, or fully available only some of the time, but overall there is no direct, serious consequence to the impacted component.

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v3.1 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 18 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
DevolutionsHub Reporting Service	Affected <=2025.3.1.1	Fixed in–

AI-suggested

Until an official patch is released, organizations should implement strict network segmentation and restrict access to the Devolutions Hub Reporting Service to trusted networks only. Employ network-level TLS interception detection tools to identify potential MitM attempts. Enforce strict certificate validation policies on client systems interacting with the service, potentially through custom configuration or additional security layers such as TLS proxy validation. Monitor network traffic for anomalies indicative of MitM attacks. Once available, apply vendor patches immediately to restore proper certificate validation. Additionally, consider using VPNs or other secure tunnels to protect communications with the reporting service. Regularly audit and update TLS configurations to ensure compliance with best practices. Educate IT staff about the risks of disabled certificate validation and the importance of verifying TLS settings in all internal services.

Description

Improper certificate validation in Devolutions Hub Reporting Service 2025.3.1.1 and earlier allows a network attacker to perform a man-in-the-middle attack via disabled TLS certificate verification.

Impact

The primary impact of CVE-2026-4396 is the compromise of confidentiality and integrity of data transmitted by the Devolutions Hub Reporting Service. Successful exploitation allows attackers to intercept sensitive reporting information, manipulate data in transit, or inject malicious content. This can lead to unauthorized disclosure of operational metrics, internal system states, or other sensitive information critical to organizational security and decision-making. Additionally, attackers could leverage the MitM position to pivot into other internal systems or disrupt reporting accuracy, affecting business continuity and trust in IT management processes. Organizations relying heavily on Devolutions Hub for centralized reporting, especially in sectors like finance, government, healthcare, and critical infrastructure, face elevated risks. The vulnerability's ease of exploitation without authentication and no user interaction requirement broadens the attack surface and increases the likelihood of successful attacks in hostile network environments.

CWE-295Improper Certificate Validation (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessOWASP Top 10 A07:2025: Authentication Failures (opens in a new tab)
The product does not validate, or incorrectly validates, a certificate.
Architecture and Design · Implementation
Certificates should be carefully managed and checked to assure that data are encrypted with the intended owner's public key.
Implementation
If certificate pinning is being used, ensure that all relevant properties of the certificate are fully validated before the certificate is pinned, including the hostname.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Transport Layer Protection (opens in a new tab)
TLS Cipher String (opens in a new tab)
OWASP Authentication (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V9.2.1 (opens in a new tab)
V1.9.2 (opens in a new tab)
V2.8.5 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Creating a Rogue Certification Authority Certificate (opens in a new tab)
Signature Spoofing by Improper Validation (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).

References

devolutions.net/security/advisories/DEVO-2026-0009/ (opens in a new tab)

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 18 Mar 2026, 20:13 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-295

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats