VulnerabilityPublished 16 Sep 2026Updated 17 Sep 2026

CVE-2026-92615: Red Hat Advanced Cluster Management for Kubernetes 2 · Improper Resource Locking

Affects Red Hat Advanced Cluster Management for Kubernetes 2Source CVE Database V5

Compare

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 6.6 Medium.

Data as of 31 Oct 2026, 20:20 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

6.6Medium

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

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: High
Privileges Required: High
User Interaction: None
Scope: Changed
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: 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: 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 16 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 31 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
Red HatRed Hat Advanced Cluster Management for Kubernetes 2	Affected–	Fixed in–
Red HatRed Hat Edge Manager 1	Affected–	Fixed in–

AI-suggested

There is no application-level workaround that fully eliminates this race condition without a code fix. Deployment-level mitigations include avoiding the use of mTLS client certificates in git repositories and not setting skipServerVerification to true in Repository resources. These measures reduce the risk of sensitive TLS data leaking between tenants. Monitor Red Hat's advisory for patch availability and apply official fixes when released.

Description

CVE-2026-92615 is a medium severity vulnerability in Red Hat Advanced Cluster Management for Kubernetes 2 related to improper resource locking in the flightctl component. The flaw arises from a race condition in the configureRepoHTTPSClient() function, which installs per-repository TLS configurations into a process-global map shared across concurrent git clone operations. This can cause TLS settings, including InsecureSkipVerify and mTLS client credentials, from one tenant to leak into another tenant's git operations in multi-tenant deployments.

Impact

The vulnerability can cause leakage of sensitive TLS configuration data, including client private keys and InsecureSkipVerify settings, across tenants in a multi-tenant deployment. This may allow an attacker to intercept or manipulate git operations of other tenants by misusing leaked TLS credentials or disabling server verification. The integrity impact is low, confidentiality impact is high, and availability is not affected. Exploitation requires high privileges and specific conditions, limiting the attack surface.

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 24 Sep 2026, 05:25 UTC

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats