CVE-2026-34078VulnerabilityPublished 4 Jun 2026Updated 8 Oct 2026

SUSE · security update for flatpak

Affects SUSESource GCVE Database

Compare

Mentioned vulnerabilities

CVE-2026-34079

Not known to be exploited : upgrade SUSE to 8.11 soon.

Data as of 29 Oct 2026, 19:04 UTC

Severity

High

Rated by Threat Radar · No CVSS score from NVD or the CNA

EPSS: 1.6% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 76% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.
Patch: Available – fixed in 8.11

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 4 Jun 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

Upgrade SUSE to 8.11.

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
SUSE Product Security Team SUSE	Affected >=8 <8.11 SUSE i686 flatpak-0:1.12.9-4.el9_6.1.i686 flatpak-devel-0:1.12.9-4.el9_6.1.i686 flatpak-libs-0:1.12.9-4.el9_6.1.i686	Fixed in 8.11

AI-suggested

Red Hat has released an official security update for Flatpak (version 1.12.9-4.el8_10) that addresses these vulnerabilities. Users of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8 and related distributions should apply this update promptly following Red Hat's guidance at https://access.redhat.com/articles/11258. No additional mitigation steps are indicated beyond applying the official patch.

Description

Flatpak is a Linux application sandboxing and distribution framework. Prior to 1.16.4, the Flatpak portal accepts paths in the sandbox-expose options which can be app-controlled symlinks pointing at arbitrary paths. Flatpak run mounts the resolved host path in the sandbox. This gives apps access to all host files and can be used as a primitive to gain code execution in the host context. This vulnerability is fixed in 1.16.4.

Impact

Successful exploitation of CVE-2026-34078 could allow an attacker to execute arbitrary code within the Flatpak sandbox environment, potentially leading to elevated privileges or system compromise. CVE-2026-34079 could enable an attacker to delete arbitrary files on the host system, potentially disrupting system operations or causing data loss. Both vulnerabilities pose significant risks to affected systems running Flatpak on Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8.

Summary

Flatpak versions included in Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8 and related distributions contain two vulnerabilities: CVE-2026-34078 enables arbitrary code execution through crafted symlinks in sandbox-expose options, and CVE-2026-34079 allows arbitrary file deletion on the host system due to improper validation of cache file paths. Red Hat Product Security has released an update (flatpak-1.12.9-4.el8_10) that fixes these issues. The advisory RHSA-2026:21756 details the update and affected packages across multiple architectures. No CVSS score is provided in the advisory, but the severity is rated as Important by Red Hat.

CWE-59Improper Link Resolution Before File Access (Link Following) (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessLikelihood of exploit: MediumOWASP Top 10 A01:2025: Broken Access Control (opens in a new tab)
The product attempts to access a file based on the filename, but it does not properly prevent that filename from identifying a link or shortcut that resolves to an unintended resource.
Architecture and Design · Separation of Privilege
Follow the principle of least privilege when assigning access rights to entities in a software system.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Authorization (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Symlink Attack (opens in a new tab)
Using Malicious Files (opens in a new tab)
Leverage Executable Code in Non-Executable Files (opens in a new tab)
Manipulating Web Input to File System Calls (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).
CWE-22Improper Limitation of a Pathname to a Restricted Directory (Path Traversal) (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessLikelihood of exploit: HighCWE Top 25 (2025): #6OWASP Top 10 A01:2025: Broken Access Control (opens in a new tab)
The product uses external input to construct a pathname that is intended to identify a file or directory that is located underneath a restricted parent directory, but the product does not properly neutralize special elements within the pathname that can cause the pathname to resolve to a location that is outside of the restricted directory.
Implementation · Input Validation
Assume all input is malicious. Use an "accept known good" input validation strategy, i.e., use a list of acceptable inputs that strictly conform to specifications. Reject any input that does not strictly conform to specifications, or transform it into something that does.
Architecture and Design
For any security checks that are performed on the client side, ensure that these checks are duplicated on the server side, in order to avoid CWE-602. Attackers can bypass the client-side checks by modifying values after the checks have been performed, or by changing the client to remove the client-side checks…
Implementation · Input Validation
Inputs should be decoded and canonicalized to the application's current internal representation before being validated (CWE-180). Make sure that the application does not decode the same input twice (CWE-174).
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Authorization (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V12.3.1 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Path Traversal (opens in a new tab)
Using Slashes and URL Encoding Combined to Bypass Validation Logic (opens in a new tab)
Manipulating Web Input to File System Calls (opens in a new tab)
Using Escaped Slashes in Alternate Encoding (opens in a new tab)
Using Slashes in Alternate Encoding (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 7 Jul 2026, 00:51 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-59, CWE-22

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats