Evidence used
- No CISA KEV confirmation is currently recorded.
- A structured source references public exploit or proof-of-concept material.
- EPSS is 0.27% for the current model date.
BlackTreeCVE IntelligenceFull vulnerability report · 2026
CVE-2026-46439High confidence
compliance-trestle Vulnerable to Remote Code Execution via Recursive Server-Side Template Injection (SSTI)
oscal-compass · compliance-trestle
Official source article: GitHub GHSA-GG2G-P7XC-QQMM ↗. Check the applicable product and release in the original source.
7.8HighCVSS 3.1
Within 7 days
Fix not verifiedHigh technical severity with public exploit material referenced by a structured source; prioritise exposed affected systems while verifying vendor guidance.
R
Open reassessment dashboard →Operational reassessment
Published severity in operational context
Published severityHigh→Operational priority:High, unchanged from published severity.unchanged
Compensating controls
- Restrict local access and enforce least privilege on affected hosts.
- Increase monitoring for the attack path and post-exploitation behaviour described in the report.
Verification
- Confirm that the asset runs oscal-compass compliance-trestle and falls inside the recorded affected range.
- Recheck the vendor advisory before scheduling a change because no verified fixed version is currently retained.
- Validate exposure, authentication requirements and compensating controls in the actual environment.
- Reopen this reassessment when CVSS, KEV, EPSS, exploit evidence or remediation changes.
Open-source package ranges2 source-attributed ranges
These OSV and GitHub advisory ranges apply only to the named package and ecosystem. A listed fixed version is not a universal product patch or proof that an update is installed.
| Ecosystem and package | Affected range | First fixed version | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| pipcompliance-trestle | <= 3.12.1 | 3.12.2 | GitHub advisory ↗upstream repository advisory · 28 May 2026 |
| pipcompliance-trestle | >= 4.0.0, < 4.0.3 | 4.0.3 | GitHub advisory ↗upstream repository advisory · 28 May 2026 |
Direct vendor intelligence
1 currentAuthoritative vendor CSAF and VEX advisories
Structured product status and remediation from the issuing vendor. Product-state explanations are always visible; large lists can be searched or downloaded.
CVE-2026-46439 · CSAF 2.0 · revision 3 · finalRed Hat Product Securitycompliance-trestle: compliance-trestle: Remote Code Execution via Recursive Server-Side Template Injection
The vendor explicitly identifies these products as affected by this CVE.
- compliance/openshift-compliance-content-rhel8 as a component of File Integrity Operator
- Summary
- A flaw was found in compliance-trestle. This Server-Side Template Injection (SSTI) vulnerability exists in the `trestle author jinja` command, which recursively evaluates rendered templates. An attacker can inject malicious payloads into data fields, such as SSP documents or Lookup Tables, to achieve arbitrary command execution with the privileges of the running process.
- Remediation
- Affected
High technical severity with public exploit material referenced by a structured source; prioritise exposed affected systems while verifying vendor guidance.
Fix not verified01
What, why and how
compliance-trestle is a tooling platform for managing compliance as code. Versions prior to 3.12.2 and 4.0.3 have a Server-Side Template Injection (SSTI) vulnerability exists in the `trestle author jinja` command. The command recursively evaluates rendered templates, allowing an attacker to achieve arbitrary command execution with privileges of the running process by injecting malicious payloads into data fields (such as SSP documents or Lookup Tables). The vulnerability does not require attacker control of the template itself. Only attacker-controlled input data rendered into a trusted template is required. This distinction is critical: the template author may only intend to render plain text (e.g., `Title: {{ ssp.metadata.title }}`), but because of the recursive parsing, the data field itself becomes executable. The vulnerability is caused by recursive re-compilation and re-rendering of already-rendered output. Versions 3.12.3 and 4.0.3 patch the issue.
What
compliance-trestle is a tooling platform for managing compliance as code. Versions prior to 3.12.2 and 4.0.3 have a Server-Side Template Injection (SSTI) vulnerability exists in the `trestle author jinja` command. The command recursively evaluates rendered templates, allowing an attacker to achieve arbitrary command execution with privileges of the running process by injecting malicious payloads into data fields (such as SSP documents or Lookup Tables). The vulnerability does not require attacker control of the template itself. Only attacker-controlled input data rendered into a trusted template is required. This distinction is critical: the template author may only intend to render plain text (e.g., `Title: {{ ssp.metadata.title }}`), but because of the recursive parsing, the data field itself becomes executable. The vulnerability is caused by recursive re-compilation and re-rendering of already-rendered output. Versions 3.12.3 and 4.0.3 patch the issue.
Why
Untrusted data can cross into a code-evaluation path and be interpreted as executable instructions.
How
An attacker operating through local access may attempt exploitation without authentication after a user interaction. If successful, the issue may cause the confidentiality, integrity or availability impact described by the vendor.
What
compliance-trestle is a tooling platform for managing compliance as code. Versions prior to 3.12.2 and 4.0.3 have a Server-Side Template Injection (SSTI) vulnerability exists in the `trestle author jinja` command. The command recursively evaluates rendered templates, allowing an attacker to achieve arbitrary command execution with privileges of the running process by injecting malicious payloads into data fields (such as SSP documents or Lookup Tables). The vulnerability does not require attacker control of the template itself. Only attacker-controlled input data rendered into a trusted template is required. This distinction is critical: the template author may only intend to render plain text (e.g., `Title: {{ ssp.metadata.title }}`), but because of the recursive parsing, the data field itself becomes executable. The vulnerability is caused by recursive re-compilation and re-rendering of already-rendered output. Versions 3.12.3 and 4.0.3 patch the issue.
Why
Untrusted data can cross into a code-evaluation path and be interpreted as executable instructions.
How
An attacker operating through local access may attempt exploitation without authentication after a user interaction. If successful, the issue may cause the confidentiality, integrity or availability impact described by the vendor.
02
Exploit reality and attack path
CVSS severity, EPSS forecast probability, public exploit material and CISA-confirmed exploitation are separate signals.
Observed exploitation No confirmed evidence
?
Confirmed exploitation and public exploit material are separate signals. Attacks can occur without public proof-of-concept or exploit code.No CISA KEV match was present at the last successful refresh. This means no confirmation from that source, not proof of no exploitation.
Public PoC / exploit material Reference recorded
?
Confirmed exploitation and public exploit material are separate signals. Attacks can occur without public proof-of-concept or exploit code.CISA Vulnrichment records proof-of-concept exploitation in its SSVC data. BlackTree has not independently executed or validated exploit material.
- Likely attack path
- local access → Improper Control of Generation of Code ('Code Injection') → cause the confidentiality, integrity or availability impact described by the vendor
- Attack surface
- Local
- Privileges required
- None: unauthenticated exploitation is possible
- User interaction
- Required interaction required
- Attack complexity
- Low: no specialised conditions are recorded
- Security boundary
- Unchanged: impact remains within the vulnerable component's security authority
- Weakness
?
CWE means Common Weakness Enumeration: a standard category for the underlying weakness. - CWE-94 ↗
CWE-94: Improper Control of Generation of Code ('Code Injection'). The product constructs all or part of a code segment using externally-influenced input from an upstream component, but it does not neutralize or incorrectly neutralizes special elements that could modify the syntax or behavior of the intended code segment.
- CVSS vector
?
CVSS means Common Vulnerability Scoring System. The vector records the metric values used to calculate technical severity. CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:HCommon Vulnerability Scoring System 3.1: the compact vector below is decoded into plain language.
AVLocalAttack vector: The attacker needs local access to the vulnerable system.ACLowAttack complexity: No specialised conditions are required beyond attacker-controlled input.PRNonePrivileges required: The attacker does not need an account or existing privileges.UIRequiredUser interaction: Another user must perform an action for exploitation to succeed.SUnchangedScope: The security impact remains within the vulnerable component's authority.CHighConfidentiality impact: A successful attack can cause a major loss.IHighIntegrity impact: A successful attack can cause a major loss.AHighAvailability impact: A successful attack can cause a major loss.- Post-exploitation / living off the land
- The issue can support a local privilege or sandbox boundary transition; normal system utilities may then be available in the gained context.
03
Patch and workaround
Operational remediation based on structured source evidence.
- Status
?
Patch availability is based on structured fixed-version fields and authoritative update references. If no fix is verified, check the vendor advisory before making a change. - Fix not verified
- Affected
- compliance/openshift-compliance-content-rhel8 as a component of File Integrity Operator
- Fixed
- No fixed version is explicitly recorded in the structured CVE data.
- Action
- No verified patch reference is present in the current structured sources. Check the vendor advisory before making a change.
- Workaround
- No verified workaround is recorded. Limit untrusted access and use least privilege until authoritative guidance is available.
04
Evidence and provenance
Published 14 Aug 2026 · Last source change 14 Aug 2026, 16:34 UTC · CWE-94 · Improper Control of Generation of Code ('Code Injection')
CVE recordCVE.org · 5.2
CVSS sourceCNA
EPSS source FIRST · tracked since 2026-08-23
?
The date BlackTree first stored a score for this CVE from the daily FIRST EPSS feed.European sourceENISA EUVD · EUVD-2026-58711
Product sourceVendor CSAF · Red Hat Product Security
Remediation sourceVendor CSAF · Red Hat Product Security
CWE sourceCNA
NVD statusNVD not scheduled
Core structured fields are present and their contributing authorities are shown above.
Material change intelligence
View recent updates ↗What changed after publication
- Affected versionsThe structured affected or fixed version information changed.CNA ↗
- Before
- < 3.12.2; >= 4.0.0, < 4.0.3 · Fixed: No fixed version is explicitly recorded in the structured CVE data.
- After
- compliance-trestle: < 3.12.2, >= 4.0.0, < 4.0.3 · Fixed: No fixed version is explicitly recorded in the structured CVE data.
- Public exploit evidencePublic exploit evidence changed from Public exploit reference to Public exploit reference.CVE.org ↗
- Before
- Public exploit reference
- After
- Public exploit reference
- Catalogue recordCVE added to the BlackTree catalogue.CNA ↗
Technical terms and abbreviations used in this report
- CVE
- Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures: the public identifier for one disclosed vulnerability.
- CVSS
- Common Vulnerability Scoring System: a technical severity framework; it is not patching priority by itself.
- EPSS
- Exploit Prediction Scoring System: FIRST's estimate of the probability that exploitation activity will be observed in the next 30 days; it is a forecast, not confirmation.
- CWE
- Common Weakness Enumeration: the standard category describing the underlying software or hardware weakness.
- CNA
- CVE Numbering Authority: an organisation authorised to assign and publish CVE records.
- CISA ADP
- Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency Authorized Data Publisher: structured enrichment added to a CVE record.
- NVD
- National Vulnerability Database: NIST's enrichment service for CVE records.
- CERT / CSIRT
- A computer security incident response team that publishes warnings or coordinates incident response.
- PoC
- Proof of concept: public material that demonstrates or helps reproduce exploitation.
- CSAF
- Common Security Advisory Framework: a machine-readable format for security advisories.
- LoTL
- Living off the land: abuse of legitimate tools or system functions during an attack.