Evidence used
- No CISA KEV confirmation is currently recorded.
- EPSS is 0.80% for the current model date.
BlackTreeCVE IntelligenceFull vulnerability report · 2026
CVE-2026-58222High confidence
Samba: samba ad ldap compare filter injection and trusted-request confusion disclose protected attributes
Red Hat · Red Hat Enterprise Linux 10
8.8HighCVSS 3.1
Within 7 days
Fix not verifiedHigh technical severity; 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 the affected network interface to trusted sources where business-safe.
- Monitor vendor guidance and exploitation sources for a material change.
Verification
- Confirm that the asset runs Red Hat Red Hat Enterprise Linux 10 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.
Distribution package intelligence
5 package statesRelease-specific package status
Debian, ubuntu findings are scoped to the named distribution, release and source package. An absent finding does not mean a package is unaffected.
Repository candidate not checked
A published vendor fix does not prove that a matching update is enabled and installable on a particular asset. Confirm the local package candidate before scheduling remediation.
| Distribution release | Source package | Vendor state | Fixed version | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Debian trixietrixie · source | samba | Vendor fix publishedDebian records a fixed source-package version for this release. | 2:4.22.10+dfsg-0+deb13u2 | Debian Security Tracker ↗Source updated 5 Oct 2026 |
| Debian bookwormbookworm · source | samba | Affected, no fix publishedDebian currently tracks this release as open. | Not published in this feed | Debian Security Tracker ↗Source updated 5 Oct 2026 |
| Debian forkyforky · source | samba | Vendor fix publishedDebian records a fixed source-package version for this release. | 2:4.24.5+dfsg-1 | Debian Security Tracker ↗Source updated 5 Oct 2026 |
| Debian sidsid · source | samba | Vendor fix publishedDebian records a fixed source-package version for this release. | 2:4.24.5+dfsg-1 | Debian Security Tracker ↗Source updated 5 Oct 2026 |
| Ubuntu 24.04 LTSnoble · standard archive | samba | Vendor fix publishedCanonical reports that a fixed source package version has been published. Repository candidate availability is not checked by BlackTree. | 2:4.19.5+dfsg-4ubuntu9.7 | Canonical Ubuntu Security ↗Source updated 5 Oct 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-2026-58222 · CSAF 2.0 · revision 3 · finalRed Hat Product Securitysamba: Samba AD LDAP Compare filter injection and trusted-request confusion disclose protected attributes
The vendor explicitly states that these products are not affected by this CVE.
- ldb-tools as a component of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 10
- libldb as a component of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 10
- libldb-devel as a component of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 10
- libnetapi as a component of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 10
- libnetapi-devel as a component of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 10
- libsmbclient as a component of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 10
- libsmbclient-devel as a component of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 10
- libwbclient as a component of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 10
- libwbclient-devel as a component of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 10
- python3-ldb as a component of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 10
- python3-samba as a component of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 10
- python3-samba-dc as a component of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 10
- Summary
- A security flaw combining LDAP filter injection and improper authorization checks was found in Samba Active Directory Domain Controller (AD DC). When processing LDAP Compare requests, Samba fails to properly validate user-supplied attribute names and executes the resulting internal database search in a trusted context, bypassing normal Access Control List (ACL) enforcement. An authenticated low-privilege domain user can exploit these flaws to disclose confidential Active Directory attributes that would normally be inaccessible. The disclosed information may be leveraged to derive sensitive authentication material, potentially leading to privilege escalation and complete domain compromise. For example: In deployments configured with Group Managed Service Accounts (gMSAs), an attacker can extract the "msKds-RootKeyData" attribute and derive gMSA passwords offline, potentially leading to complete domain compromise if privileged gMSAs are present.
- Remediation
- No remediation text is recorded.
High technical severity; prioritise exposed affected systems while verifying vendor guidance.
Fix not verified01
What, why and how
A security flaw combining LDAP filter injection and improper authorization checks was found in Samba Active Directory Domain Controller (AD DC). When processing LDAP Compare requests, Samba fails to properly validate user-supplied attribute names and executes the resulting internal database search in a trusted context, bypassing normal Access Control List (ACL) enforcement. An authenticated low-privilege domain user can exploit these flaws to disclose confidential Active Directory attributes that would normally be inaccessible. The disclosed information may be leveraged to derive sensitive authentication material, potentially leading to privilege escalation and complete domain compromise. For example: In deployments configured with Group Managed Service Accounts (gMSAs), an attacker can extract the "msKds-RootKeyData" attribute and derive gMSA passwords offline, potentially leading to complete domain compromise if privileged gMSAs are present.
What
A security flaw combining LDAP filter injection and improper authorization checks was found in Samba Active Directory Domain Controller (AD DC). When processing LDAP Compare requests, Samba fails to properly validate user-supplied attribute names and executes the resulting internal database search in a trusted context, bypassing normal Access Control List (ACL) enforcement. An authenticated low-privilege domain user can exploit these flaws to disclose confidential Active Directory attributes that would normally be inaccessible. The disclosed information may be leveraged to derive sensitive authentication material, potentially leading to privilege escalation and complete domain compromise. For example: In deployments configured with Group Managed Service Accounts (gMSAs), an attacker can extract the "msKds-RootKeyData" attribute and derive gMSA passwords offline, potentially leading to complete domain compromise if privileged gMSAs are present.
Why
The product constructs all or part of an LDAP query using externally-influenced input from an upstream component, but it does not neutralize or incorrectly neutralizes special elements that could modify the intended LDAP query when it is sent to a downstream component.
How
An attacker operating through a network path may attempt exploitation with low privileges. If successful, the issue may gain additional privileges.
What
A security flaw combining LDAP filter injection and improper authorization checks was found in Samba Active Directory Domain Controller (AD DC). When processing LDAP Compare requests, Samba fails to properly validate user-supplied attribute names and executes the resulting internal database search in a trusted context, bypassing normal Access Control List (ACL) enforcement. An authenticated low-privilege domain user can exploit these flaws to disclose confidential Active Directory attributes that would normally be inaccessible. The disclosed information may be leveraged to derive sensitive authentication material, potentially leading to privilege escalation and complete domain compromise. For example: In deployments configured with Group Managed Service Accounts (gMSAs), an attacker can extract the "msKds-RootKeyData" attribute and derive gMSA passwords offline, potentially leading to complete domain compromise if privileged gMSAs are present.
Why
The product constructs all or part of an LDAP query using externally-influenced input from an upstream component, but it does not neutralize or incorrectly neutralizes special elements that could modify the intended LDAP query when it is sent to a downstream component.
How
An attacker operating through a network path may attempt exploitation with low privileges. If successful, the issue may gain additional privileges.
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 None recorded
?
Confirmed exploitation and public exploit material are separate signals. Attacks can occur without public proof-of-concept or exploit code.No exploit-tagged reference or CISA SSVC proof-of-concept state is currently recorded. Research may still exist outside the structured feeds.
- Likely attack path
- a network path → Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in an LDAP Query ('LDAP Injection') → gain additional privileges
- Attack surface
- Network
- Privileges required
- Low: a basic authenticated account is required
- User interaction
- None
- 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-90 ↗
CWE-90: Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in an LDAP Query ('LDAP Injection'). The product constructs all or part of an LDAP query using externally-influenced input from an upstream component, but it does not neutralize or incorrectly neutralizes special elements that could modify the intended LDAP query when it is sent to a downstream component.
- CVSS vector
?
CVSS means Common Vulnerability Scoring System. The vector records the metric values used to calculate technical severity. CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:HCommon Vulnerability Scoring System 3.1: the compact vector below is decoded into plain language.
AVNetworkAttack vector: The vulnerable component can be reached over a network.ACLowAttack complexity: No specialised conditions are required beyond attacker-controlled input.PRLowPrivileges required: The attacker needs basic user-level privileges.UINoneUser interaction: No action by another user is required.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
- No specific living-off-the-land technique is confirmed in the structured sources. Monitor normal administration tools for activity inconsistent with the affected service's baseline.
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
- See the vendor and CVE records for the affected range.
- 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. If business-safe, reduce exposure to the affected interface and allow only trusted sources until authoritative guidance is available.
04
Evidence and provenance
Published 30 Jul 2026 · Last source change 30 Jul 2026, 16:12 UTC · CWE-90 · Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in an LDAP Query ('LDAP Injection')
CVE recordCVE.org · 5.2
CVSS sourceCNA
EPSS source FIRST · tracked since 2026-08-14
?
The date BlackTree first stored a score for this CVE from the daily FIRST EPSS feed.European sourceENISA EUVD · EUVD-2026-51158
Product sourceCNA
Remediation sourceCVE/CNA references
CWE sourceCNA
NVD statusNVD awaiting enrichment
Missing structured fields: affected versions. Missing data is not evidence of low risk; review the primary advisory.
Material change intelligence
View recent updates ↗What changed after publication
No material field changes have been recorded since change tracking began. Routine source refreshes and cosmetic edits are intentionally excluded.
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.