CVE-2026-42784VulnerabilityPublished 6 Oct 2026Updated 3 Nov 2026

Red Hat Security Advisory: rust-rpm-sequoia security update

Affects Red Hat rust-rpm-sequoiaSource GCVE Database

Compare

Authoritative record:CVE-2026-42784· High 7.4

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 7.4 High.

Data as of 3 Nov 2026, 18:59 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

7.4High

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	7.4

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

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: None
User Interaction: Required
Scope: Changed
Confidentiality: None
Integrity: High
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: 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: Required: Successful exploitation of this vulnerability requires a user to take some action before the vulnerability can be exploited.
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: None: There is no loss of confidentiality within the impacted component.
Integrity: High: There is a total loss of integrity, or a complete loss of protection. For example, the attacker is able to modify any/all files protected by the impacted component. Alternatively, only some files can be modified, but malicious modification would present a direct, serious consequence to 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 3 Nov 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 Ansible Automation Platform 2.6 for RHEL 9python3.12-pysequoia	Affected–	Fixed in–
Red Hat Enterprise Linux 10rust-rpm-sequoia	Affected–	Fixed in–
Red Hat Enterprise Linux 10rust-sequoia-sqv	Affected–	Fixed in–
Red Hat Enterprise Linux 10rust-sequoia-sq	Affected–	Fixed in–
Red Hat Enterprise Linux 9rust-rpm-sequoia	Affected–	Fixed in–
Red Hat Cost Management On-Premise 1costmanagement/costmanagement-ui-rhel10	Affected–	Fixed in–

AI-suggested

Red Hat has released an official security update for rust-rpm-sequoia that addresses this vulnerability. Users of affected Red Hat Enterprise Linux 9 versions should apply the provided update as detailed in the Red Hat advisory (https://access.redhat.com/articles/11258). No additional mitigation steps are indicated or required beyond applying the official patch.

Description

A cryptographic integrity vulnerability exists in the sequoia-openpgp component of rust-rpm-sequoia, caused by key flag confusion. This flaw could compromise the integrity of cryptographic operations. Red Hat has issued a security update for rust-rpm-sequoia in Red Hat Enterprise Linux 9 to address this issue. The update is rated as Important severity by Red Hat Product Security. No CVSS score is provided in the advisory. The vulnerability is identified as CVE-2026-42784.

Impact

The impact is a compromise of cryptographic integrity in the affected component, which could undermine trust in cryptographic signatures or operations relying on sequoia-openpgp. This may affect package verification or other security mechanisms that depend on the RPM PGP interface. Red Hat rates the security impact as Important, indicating a significant but not critical risk.

Summary

The vulnerability CVE-2026-42784 affects the sequoia-openpgp implementation used in rust-rpm-sequoia, which is part of the RPM PGP interface. The flaw involves cryptographic integrity compromise due to key flag confusion, potentially allowing an attacker to undermine the integrity guarantees of cryptographic operations. Red Hat has released updated packages for multiple architectures and variants of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 9 to fix this issue. The advisory references a detailed Red Hat security update and provides instructions for applying the patch. No evidence of exploitation in the wild is reported.

CWE-347Improper Verification of Cryptographic Signature (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessOWASP Top 10 A04:2025: Cryptographic Failures (opens in a new tab)
The product does not verify, or incorrectly verifies, the cryptographic signature for data.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
XML Security (opens in a new tab)
REST Security (opens in a new tab)
JSON Web Token for Java (opens in a new tab)
REST Assessment (opens in a new tab)
Cross-Site Request Forgery Prevention (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V13.3.2 (opens in a new tab)
V3.5.3 (opens in a new tab)
V13.2.6 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Padding Oracle Crypto Attack (opens in a new tab)
Signature Spoofing by Improper Validation (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 3 Nov 2026, 18:59 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-347

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats