VulnerabilityPublished 29 Oct 2026

CVE-2026-93007: Red Hat Ceph Storage 9 · Uncontrolled Resource Consumption

Affects Red Hat Ceph Storage 9Source CVE Database V5

Compare

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 5.3 Medium.

Data as of 29 Oct 2026, 14:52 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

5.3Medium

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	5.3

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

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: None
User Interaction: None
Scope: Unchanged
Confidentiality: None
Integrity: None
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: 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: None: There is no loss of confidentiality within the impacted component.
Integrity: None: There is no loss of integrity within 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 29 Oct 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
Red Hat Ceph Storage 9rhceph/alloy-rhel10	Affected–	Fixed in–
Red Hat Enterprise Linux 10dnsmasq	Affected–	Fixed in–
Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6dnsmasq	Affected–	Fixed in–
Red Hat Enterprise Linux 7dnsmasq	Affected–	Fixed in–
Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8dnsmasq	Affected–	Fixed in–
Red Hat Enterprise Linux 9dnsmasq	Affected–	Fixed in–

AI-suggested

Red Hat advises increasing the TCP connection limit using the --max-tcp-connections option to raise the number of connections an attacker must hold. Additionally, administrators should implement firewall rules to limit per-source TCP connections to port 53, for example using iptables connlimit. Restricting access to TCP port 53 from untrusted networks is also recommended if TCP DNS is not required. These mitigations reduce the risk without requiring immediate patching.

Description

CVE-2026-93007 is a moderate severity vulnerability in dnsmasq used by Red Hat Ceph Storage 9. The TCP DNS service uses a small fixed pool of child processes without a receive timeout on client connections. A remote attacker can exhaust this pool by opening idle TCP connections to port 53, disrupting TCP DNS operations such as DNSSEC validation that require TCP fallback. UDP DNS resolution remains functional, and the affected slots recover automatically after about 150 seconds unless the attacker reconnects. The impact is limited to TCP-dependent DNS functions, with availability impact rated as low.

Impact

The vulnerability causes a denial of service condition for TCP DNS operations by exhausting the fixed pool of child processes handling TCP DNS queries. This prevents new TCP DNS connections and disrupts DNSSEC validation that relies on TCP fallback, as well as zone transfers and TCP-only clients. However, UDP DNS resolution continues unaffected, and the exhaustion condition self-recovers after about 150 seconds if the attacker does not reconnect. Overall, the availability impact is low and confidentiality and integrity are not affected.

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 29 Oct 2026, 13:05 UTC

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats