CVE-2026-23479VulnerabilityPublished 6 May 2026Updated 29 Oct 2026

Red Hat Security Advisory: Red Hat Hardened Images RPMs bug fix and enhancement update

Affects Red HatSource GCVE Database

Compare

Mentioned vulnerabilities

CVE-2026-23631

Not known to be exploited.

Data as of 29 Oct 2026, 16:10 UTC

Severity

High

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

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 6 May 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

AI-suggested

Red Hat advises ensuring that Redis replicas have the 'replica-read-only' setting enabled and protected from unauthorized changes by editing the redis.conf file to include 'replica-read-only yes' and restarting the Redis service. If Lua scripting is not required, it should be disabled to reduce attack surface. Additionally, restrict network access to Redis instances to trusted clients only. These mitigations effectively reduce the risk of exploitation.

Description

A use-after-free vulnerability exists in Redis when Lua scripting is enabled and the instance operates as a replica with the replica-read-only setting disabled or modifiable by an authenticated attacker. Exploitation of this flaw during master-replica synchronization could lead to remote code execution. The vulnerability affects Redis deployments where replicas are writable or lack proper access controls to prevent modification of replica-read-only. Mitigation involves ensuring replica-read-only is enabled and immutable, disabling Lua scripting if not needed, and restricting network access to trusted clients.

Impact

Successful exploitation allows an authenticated attacker to execute remote code on Redis replicas where replica-read-only is disabled or can be disabled. This compromises confidentiality, integrity, and availability of the affected Redis instances. The vulnerability is critical in environments where replicas are writable or insufficiently protected, potentially leading to full system compromise.

Summary

CVE-2026-23631 is a use-after-free vulnerability in Redis's redis-server component related to Lua scripting and master-replica synchronization. It affects Redis instances configured as replicas with replica-read-only disabled or modifiable by an authenticated user. Exploitation can lead to remote code execution. The vulnerability arises during synchronization between master and replica nodes. Red Hat's advisory highlights the importance of maintaining replica-read-only enabled and restricting its modification. Disabling Lua scripting and limiting network access further reduce risk. The vulnerability has a high severity rating and a CVSS base score around 8.8, indicating significant impact on confidentiality, integrity, and availability.

CWE-416Use After Free (opens in a new tab)
Variant weaknessLikelihood of exploit: HighCWE Top 25 (2025): #7
The product reuses or references memory after it has been freed. At some point afterward, the memory may be allocated again and saved in another pointer, while the original pointer references a location somewhere within the new allocation. Any operations using the original pointer are no longer valid because the memory "belongs" to the code that operates on the new pointer.
Architecture and Design · Language Selection
Choose a language that provides automatic memory management.
Implementation · Attack Surface Reduction
When freeing pointers, be sure to set them to NULL once they are freed. However, the utilization of multiple or complex data structures may lower the usefulness of this strategy.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
XML Security (opens in a new tab)
Mass Assignment (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V13.3.1 (opens in a new tab)
V5.1.4 (opens in a new tab)
V5.1.3 (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).
CWE-122Heap-based Buffer Overflow (opens in a new tab)
Variant weaknessLikelihood of exploit: HighCWE Top 25 (2025): #16
The product writes past the end of a buffer that was allocated on the heap.
Pre-design: Use a language or compiler that performs automatic bounds checking.
Architecture and Design
Use an abstraction library to abstract away risky APIs. Not a complete solution.
Operation · Build and Compilation · Environment Hardening
Use automatic buffer overflow detection mechanisms that are offered by certain compilers or compiler extensions. Examples include: the Microsoft Visual Studio /GS flag, Fedora/Red Hat FORTIFY_SOURCE GCC flag, StackGuard, and ProPolice, which provide various mechanisms including canary-based detection and range/index…
OWASP Cheat Sheets
XML Security (opens in a new tab)
Mass Assignment (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V13.3.1 (opens in a new tab)
V5.1.4 (opens in a new tab)
V5.1.3 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Forced Integer Overflow (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

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 29 Oct 2026, 16:10 UTC

Public exploits and detectionGitHub proofs of concept

WeaknessesCWE-416, CWE-122

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats