Evidence used
- No CISA KEV confirmation is currently recorded.
- EPSS is 0.44% for the current model date.
BlackTreeCVE IntelligenceFull vulnerability report · 2026
CVE-2026-71192High confidence
An attacker can inject these headers into a signed PUT request targeting their own bucket, causing Swift to perform a server-side copy from another tenant's private object
OpenStack · Swift
6.0MediumCVSS 4.0
Scheduled
Fix not verifiedMedium technical severity with no CISA KEV confirmation; remediate through the normal risk-based patch cycle unless local exposure raises the priority.
R
Open reassessment dashboard →Operational reassessment
Published severity in operational context
Published severityMedium→Operational priority:Medium, 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 OpenStack Swift 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 | swift | Vendor fix publishedDebian records a fixed source-package version for this release. | 2.35.1-0+deb13u3 | Debian Security Tracker ↗Source updated 5 Oct 2026 |
| Debian bookwormbookworm · source | swift | Vendor fix publishedDebian records a fixed source-package version for this release. | 2.30.1-0+deb12u3 | Debian Security Tracker ↗Source updated 5 Oct 2026 |
| Debian forkyforky · source | swift | Vendor fix publishedDebian records a fixed source-package version for this release. | 2.37.1-6 | Debian Security Tracker ↗Source updated 5 Oct 2026 |
| Debian sidsid · source | swift | Vendor fix publishedDebian records a fixed source-package version for this release. | 2.37.1-6 | Debian Security Tracker ↗Source updated 5 Oct 2026 |
| Ubuntu 24.04 LTSnoble · standard archive | swift | Under evaluationCanonical reports that the package might be affected and still needs evaluation or fixing. | Not published in this feed | Canonical Ubuntu Security ↗Source updated 5 Oct 2026 |
Medium technical severity with no CISA KEV confirmation; remediate through the normal risk-based patch cycle unless local exposure raises the priority.
Fix not verified01
What, why and how
In OpenStack Swift through 2.38.0, the S3API middleware does not sanitize Swift-native control headers (X-Copy-From, X-Copy-From-Account) from S3 API requests when s3_acl=true. An attacker can inject these headers into a signed PUT request targeting their own bucket, causing Swift to perform a server-side copy from another tenant's private object. The source object authorization is bypassed because the S3API middleware has already authorized the request against the destination. The attacker can read any object whose project_id, container name, and object name are known, regardless of the source object's ACLs or ownership. This requires the non-default s3_acl=true configuration.
What
In OpenStack Swift through 2.38.0, the S3API middleware does not sanitize Swift-native control headers (X-Copy-From, X-Copy-From-Account) from S3 API requests when s3_acl=true. An attacker can inject these headers into a signed PUT request targeting their own bucket, causing Swift to perform a server-side copy from another tenant's private object. The source object authorization is bypassed because the S3API middleware has already authorized the request against the destination. The attacker can read any object whose project_id, container name, and object name are known, regardless of the source object's ACLs or ownership. This requires the non-default s3_acl=true configuration.
Why
The application performs an authorisation check, but it does not correctly enforce the required permission boundary.
How
An attacker operating through a network path may attempt exploitation with low privileges. If successful, the issue may cause the confidentiality, integrity or availability impact described by the vendor.
What
In OpenStack Swift through 2.38.0, the S3API middleware does not sanitize Swift-native control headers (X-Copy-From, X-Copy-From-Account) from S3 API requests when s3_acl=true. An attacker can inject these headers into a signed PUT request targeting their own bucket, causing Swift to perform a server-side copy from another tenant's private object. The source object authorization is bypassed because the S3API middleware has already authorized the request against the destination. The attacker can read any object whose project_id, container name, and object name are known, regardless of the source object's ACLs or ownership. This requires the non-default s3_acl=true configuration.
Why
The application performs an authorisation check, but it does not correctly enforce the required permission boundary.
How
An attacker operating through a network path may attempt exploitation with low privileges. 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 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 → Incorrect Authorization → cause the confidentiality, integrity or availability impact described by the vendor
- 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
- Not a CVSS 4.0 base metric
- Weakness
?
CWE means Common Weakness Enumeration: a standard category for the underlying weakness. - CWE-863 ↗
CWE-863: Incorrect Authorization. The product performs an authorization check when an actor attempts to access a resource or perform an action, but it does not correctly perform the check.
- CVSS vector
?
CVSS means Common Vulnerability Scoring System. The vector records the metric values used to calculate technical severity. CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:L/UI:N/VC:H/VI:N/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:NCommon Vulnerability Scoring System 4.0: 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.ATPresentAttack requirements: A particular deployment or execution condition must be present.PRLowPrivileges required: The attacker needs basic user-level privileges.UINoneUser interaction: No action by another user is required.VCHighVulnerable-system confidentiality: A successful attack can cause a major loss.VINoneVulnerable-system integrity: No direct loss is represented by this metric.VANoneVulnerable-system availability: No direct loss is represented by this metric.SCNoneSubsequent-system confidentiality: No direct loss is represented by this metric.SINoneSubsequent-system integrity: No direct loss is represented by this metric.SANoneSubsequent-system availability: No direct loss is represented by this metric.- 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
- Swift: 2.18.0 < 2.35.4, 2.36.0 < 2.36.3, 2.37.0 < 2.37.3, 2.38.0
- 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 5 Aug 2026 · Last source change 5 Aug 2026, 13:31 UTC · CWE-863 · Incorrect Authorization
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-2026-53050
Product sourceCNA
Remediation sourceCVE/CNA references
CWE sourceCNA
NVD statusNVD awaiting enrichment
Core structured fields are present and their contributing authorities are shown above.
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.