VulnerabilityPublished 23 Sep 2026Updated 6 Nov 2026

CVE-2026-84724: Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform 2.5 for RHEL 8 · Argument Injection

Affects Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform 2.5 for RHEL 8Source CVE Database V5

Compare

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 6.6 Medium.

Data as of 7 Nov 2026, 11:40 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

6.6Medium

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	6.6

EPSS: 0.2% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 21% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

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

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: High
User Interaction: None
Scope: Changed
Confidentiality: Low
Integrity: Low
Availability: Low

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: High: The attacker is authorized with (i.e., requires) privileges that provide significant (e.g., administrative) control over the vulnerable component that could affect component-wide settings and files.
User Interaction: None: The vulnerable system can be exploited without any interaction from any user.
Scope: Changed: An exploited vulnerability can affect resources beyond the security scope managed by the security authority of the vulnerable component. In this case, the vulnerable component and the impacted component are different and managed by different security authorities.
Confidentiality: Low: There is some loss of confidentiality. Access to some restricted information is obtained, but the attacker does not have control over what information is obtained, or the amount or kind of loss is limited. The information disclosure does not cause a direct, serious loss to the impacted component.
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: 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 23 Sep 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 7 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.

ghsa-q3jc-p8r9-qrvp

What to do

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform 2.5 for RHEL 8automation-controller	Affected–	Fixed in–
Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform 2.5 for RHEL 9automation-controller	Affected–	Fixed in–
Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform 2.6 for RHEL 9automation-controller	Affected–	Fixed in–
Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform 2.6ansible-automation-platform-26/controller-rhel9	Affected–	Fixed in–
Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform 2.7ansible-automation-platform-27/controller-rhel9	Affected–	Fixed in–

AI-suggested

Currently, no mitigation meeting Red Hat Product Security criteria for ease of use, deployment, applicability, or stability is available. The vendor advisory indicates the correct fix involves applying shlex-safe quoting to runner arguments, validating launch-time extra_vars, and coercing numeric options to integers. Users should monitor Red Hat advisories for official patches or updates addressing this issue.

Description

An argument-injection flaw was found in the Ansible Automation Platform automation-controller system-job subsystem. The system-job template launch endpoint stores a user-supplied "days" variable without running the integer validation defined elsewhere for that field, and the dispatcher flattens the management-command argument list into a single string with spaces before the job runner re-splits it, so spaces in the value become additional command-line arguments. Because system jobs are executed in-process on the control node without the container isolation applied to all other job types, an authenticated user with superuser privileges can inject arbitrary arguments — including Python's path option — into the control-plane awx-manage process, controlling its argument vector and the first entry of its module search path. Full remote code execution requires an additional import gadget that is not present in the current management commands, so the demonstrated impact is argument injection with control of the process search path rather than confirmed code execution.

Impact

An authenticated user with superuser privileges can inject arbitrary arguments into the awx-manage process on the control node, potentially manipulating the process's argument vector and module search path. This could lead to privilege escalation or other impacts related to argument injection. However, full remote code execution is not confirmed due to the lack of an import gadget in current management commands. The CVSS score is 6.6 (medium severity), reflecting limited but significant impact.

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 3 Nov 2026, 11:34 UTC

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats