CVE-2025-9648VulnerabilityPublished 26 Nov 2025Updated 10 Sep 2026

Red Hat Security Advisory: RHSA 4.8.6 security and bug fix update

Affects Red Hat RHSA 4.8.6Source GCVE Database

Not known to be exploited : upgrade Red Hat RHSA 4.8.6 to 4.9.0 or 4.8.6 when convenient.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 08:30 UTC

Severity

Medium

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

EPSS: 0.7% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 54% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.
Patch: Available – fixed in 4.9.0, 4.8.6

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 26 Nov 2025
Detectable: no evidence on record.
No public nuclei template indexed
Weaponised: 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 26 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.
Weaponised: Public exploit code exists in Metasploit or Exploit-DB, or CISA SSVC 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 Red Hat RHSA 4.8.6 to 4.9.0 or 4.8.6.

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
Red Hat Product Security Red Hat	Affected >=4.8.0 <4.8.6 >=4.9.0 <4.9.0 Red Hat Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security 4.8 amd64 registry.redhat.io/advanced-cluster-security/rhacs-central-db-rhel8@sha256:1e8f7b5c46266c48635f7edc0457a9eb31b65f6af385337c2f21e7d73c1317cc_amd64 Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security 4.9 registry.redhat.io/advanced-cluster-security/rhacs-central-db-rhel8@sha256:048ac5be7cca995f1b204d40770c136d901b9e1af396ff69ed70dc2e466065be_amd64	Fixed in 4.8.6 4.9.0

AI-suggested

Red Hat has released updated images as part of RHSA 4.8.6 that include fixes for this vulnerability. Users of Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes are advised to upgrade to the fixed versions mentioned in the advisory to benefit from the security patches. No additional mitigations are specified or required beyond applying the official update.

Description

See the release notes (link in the references section) for a description of the fixes and enhancements in this particular release.

Impact

The vulnerability can cause applications that cancel queries during concurrent database operations to receive inconsistent or unexpected data. While it may lead to data inconsistency, the scope of exploitation is limited and unlikely to result in direct system compromise in typical deployments. There are no known exploits in the wild. The impact is primarily on data integrity and application stability rather than confidentiality or availability.

Summary

This vulnerability (CVE-2025-9648) is a race condition in the database/sql package used by Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes. When a query is cancelled during a Scan method call on returned Rows, concurrent queries can produce unexpected results, causing inconsistent data to be returned. The issue is classified under CWE-362 (Concurrent Execution using Shared Resource with Improper Synchronization) and CWE-158. Red Hat has released a security advisory (RHSA-2025:22179) with updated images for RHACS 4.8.6 that include fixes for this and other issues. The vulnerability is rated moderate severity by Red Hat, with no known exploits in the wild. The advisory recommends upgrading to the fixed versions to mitigate the issue.

CWE-158Improper Neutralization of Null Byte or NUL Character (opens in a new tab)
Variant weakness
The product receives input from an upstream component, but it does not neutralize or incorrectly neutralizes NUL characters or null bytes when they are sent to a downstream component.
Developers should anticipate that null characters or null bytes will be injected/removed/manipulated in the input vectors of their product. Use an appropriate combination of denylists and allowlists to ensure only valid, expected and appropriate input is processed by the system.
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.
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
Abuse Case (opens in a new tab)
Deserialization (opens in a new tab)
Server Side Request Forgery Prevention (opens in a new tab)
Unvalidated Redirects and Forwards (opens in a new tab)
Cross Site Scripting Prevention (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V1.5.1 (opens in a new tab)
V5.2.2 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Embedding NULL Bytes (opens in a new tab)
Postfix, Null Terminate, and Backslash (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).
CWE-362Concurrent Execution using Shared Resource with Improper Synchronization ('Race Condition') (opens in a new tab)
Class weaknessLikelihood of exploit: MediumOWASP Top 10 A06:2025: Insecure Design (opens in a new tab)
The product contains a concurrent code sequence that requires temporary, exclusive access to a shared resource, but a timing window exists in which the shared resource can be modified by another code sequence operating concurrently.
Architecture and Design
In languages that support it, use synchronization primitives. Only wrap these around critical code to minimize the impact on performance.
Architecture and Design
Use thread-safe capabilities such as the data access abstraction in Spring.
Architecture and Design
Minimize the usage of shared resources in order to remove as much complexity as possible from the control flow and to reduce the likelihood of unexpected conditions occurring.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Abuse Case (opens in a new tab)
Secure Design Principles (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V1.11.2 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Leveraging Time-of-Check and Time-of-Use (TOCTOU) Race Conditions (opens in a new tab)
Leveraging Race Conditions (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 10 Aug 2026, 19:57 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-158, CWE-362

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats