VulnerabilityPublished 5 Aug 2026Updated 2 Nov 2026

CVE-2026-71225: Stephan Muelle libkcapi · Weak Randomness

Affects Stephan Muelle libkcapiSource CVE Database V5

Compare

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 6.5 Medium : upgrade to 1.5.1 when convenient.

Data as of 3 Nov 2026, 22:58 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

6.5Medium

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

Thin evidence

One scorer or none

CVSS scores by source
CNA (redhat)	CVSS 3.1	6.5

EPSS: 0.3% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 28% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.
Patch: Available – fixed in 1.5.1

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

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: High
Privileges Required: None
User Interaction: None
Scope: Unchanged
Confidentiality: High
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: High: A successful attack depends on conditions beyond the attacker's control. That is, a successful attack cannot be accomplished at will, but requires the attacker to invest in some measurable amount of effort in preparation or execution against the vulnerable component before a successful attack can be expected. For example, a successful attack may require an attacker to: gather knowledge about the environment in which the vulnerable target/component exists; prepare the target environment to improve exploit reliability; or inject themselves into the logical network path between the target and the resource requested by the victim in order to read and/or modify network communications (e.g., a man in the middle attack).
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: 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

Upgrade Stephan Muelle libkcapi to 1.5.1.

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
Stephan Muellelibkcapi	Affected >=0.10.1 <1.5.1	Fixed in 1.5.1
GitHublibkcapi`pkg:github/libkcapi`Other threats	Affected >=0.10.1 <1.5.1	Fixed in 1.5.1

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

AI-suggested

To mitigate this issue, applications using libkcapi should avoid using the one-shot symmetric cipher APIs for inputs exceeding 64 KiB when continuous-message semantics are critical. Instead, they should use the streaming interface for processing large messages or ensure that one-shot inputs remain below the internal chunking threshold to guarantee consistent IV application throughout the operation.

Description

A flaw was found in libkcapi. When performing one-shot symmetric cipher operations on large inputs (over 64 KiB) in stateful modes such as Counter (CTR) or Cipher Block Chaining (CBC), the library improperly reuses the Initialization Vector (IV) for each internal data chunk. A remote attacker could potentially exploit this by making an application that uses libkcapi process specially crafted large inputs. This can lead to a significant weakening of data confidentiality, as the repeated IV use can expose relationships in encrypted plaintext, and may also affect data integrity by causing incorrect cryptographic processing.

Impact

The vulnerability allows an attacker to weaken the confidentiality of encrypted data by exploiting repeated IV reuse in large one-shot symmetric cipher operations, potentially exposing relationships between plaintext blocks. Data integrity may also be affected due to incorrect cryptographic processing. There is no impact on availability. The attack requires network access but has high complexity and no privileges or user interaction are needed.

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 12 Aug 2026, 14:38 UTC

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats