BlackTreeCVE Intelligence
← Back to the CVE catalogue
Full vulnerability report · 2026
CVE-2026-84837High confidence

Rpm: command injection in `rpmbuild -t*` (`gettarspec`) via unescaped tarball path

Red Hat · Red Hat Enterprise Linux 10

7.8HighCVSS 3.1
Recommended action
Patch only the product branches with a verified fix

High technical severity; prioritise exposed affected systems while verifying vendor guidance. Verified remediation exists for at least one product or source, but 74 structured product or package states remain unresolved. Apply remediation only to the exact product branch confirmed by its source.

Fix availability varies by product
R
Operational reassessment

Published severity in operational context

Open reassessment dashboard →
Published severityHighOperational priority:High, unchanged from published severity.unchanged

Evidence used

  • No CISA KEV confirmation is currently recorded.
  • EPSS is 1.20% for the current model date.

Compensating controls

  • Apply the linked authoritative mitigation while planning the permanent fix.
  • Restrict local access and enforce least privilege on affected hosts.
  • Monitor vendor guidance and exploitation sources for a material change.

Verification

  1. Confirm that the asset runs Red Hat Red Hat Enterprise Linux 10 and falls inside the recorded affected range.
  2. Recheck the vendor advisory before scheduling a change because no verified fixed version is currently retained.
  3. Validate exposure, authentication requirements and compensating controls in the actual environment.
  4. Reopen this reassessment when CVSS, KEV, EPSS, exploit evidence or remediation changes.
Mitigation target: Within 30 daysRemediation target: Within 180 days

This automated reassessment organises public evidence. It does not know asset exposure, business impact or control effectiveness and does not replace CVSS or a human risk decision.

Cross-source reconciliation

Remediation availability differs by product scope

Verified remediation exists for at least one product or source, but 74 structured product or package states remain unresolved. Apply remediation only to the exact product branch confirmed by its source.

Distribution package intelligence

Release-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.

5 package states
Package result overrides the generic status

BlackTree has verified remediation for at least one product or source, but the relevant distribution still reports no fixed package for 4 affected package states shown here. Treat those rows as affected with no fix until that distribution publishes a fixed version.

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 releaseSource packageVendor stateFixed versionEvidence
Debian trixietrixie · sourcerpmAffected, no fix publishedDebian currently tracks this release as open.Not published in this feedDebian Security Tracker ↗Source updated 6 Oct 2026
Debian bookwormbookworm · sourcerpmAffected, no fix publishedDebian currently tracks this release as open.Not published in this feedDebian Security Tracker ↗Source updated 6 Oct 2026
Debian forkyforky · sourcerpmAffected, no fix publishedDebian currently tracks this release as open.Not published in this feedDebian Security Tracker ↗Source updated 6 Oct 2026
Debian sidsid · sourcerpmAffected, no fix publishedDebian currently tracks this release as open.Not published in this feedDebian Security Tracker ↗Source updated 6 Oct 2026
Ubuntu 24.04 LTSnoble · standard archiverpmUnder evaluationCanonical reports that the package might be affected and still needs evaluation or fixing.Not published in this feedCanonical Ubuntu Security ↗Source updated 5 Oct 2026
Direct vendor intelligence

Authoritative 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.

1 current
CVE-2026-84837 · CSAF 2.0 · revision 3 · finalRed Hat Product Securityrpm: Command Injection in `rpmbuild -t*` (`getTarSpec`) via Unescaped Tarball Path
70 known affected

The vendor explicitly identifies these products as affected by this CVE.

  • python3-rpm as a component of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 10
  • rpm-apidocs as a component of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 10
  • rpm-build as a component of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 10
  • rpm-build-libs as a component of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 10
  • rpm-cron as a component of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 10
  • rpm-devel as a component of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 10
  • rpm-libs as a component of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 10
  • rpm-plugin-audit as a component of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 10
  • rpm-plugin-dbus-announce as a component of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 10
  • rpm-plugin-fapolicyd as a component of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 10
  • rpm-plugin-ima as a component of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 10
  • rpm-plugin-selinux as a component of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 10
Summary
A flaw was found in rpm. An attacker can exploit a command injection vulnerability by influencing the path or filename of a tarball processed by `rpmbuild -t*` to include shell metacharacters. This is particularly relevant in automated build or continuous integration (CI) workflows that ingest externally supplied artifact names. Successful exploitation allows for arbitrary command execution with the privileges of the build user, which could lead to information disclosure or disruption of the build environment.
Remediation
To mitigate this issue, avoid using `rpmbuild -t*` with tarballs whose paths or filenames can be influenced by untrusted input. In automated build pipelines, ensure tarballs are staged into a trusted local directory and their names are normalized or validated to reject shell metacharacters before `rpmbuild` is invoked.
Optional official sources

National CERT insights
?CERT means Computer Emergency Response Team; CSIRT is the closely related term Computer Security Incident Response Team.

Choose official national sources for this report. Each advisory shows its original language. Your selection is remembered on this device and included in shared links.

Official European source

ENISA European Vulnerability Database

Official EUVD identifiers, advisory evidence and known-exploited context. Missing fields are not treated as evidence of low risk.

1 current
ENISA EUVD identifier

EUVD-2026-70108

No EUVD known-exploited evidence

A flaw was found in rpm. An attacker can exploit a command injection vulnerability by influencing the path or filename of a tarball processed by `rpmbuild -t*` to include shell metacharacters. This is particularly relevant in automated build or continuous integration (CI) workflows that ingest externally supplied artifact names. Successful exploitation allows for arbitrary command execution with the privileges of the build user, which could lead to information disclosure or disruption of the build environment.

EUVD state
Present in the current official mapping
Known exploitation
Not present in the current ENISA EUVD known-exploited dataset. This is not proof of no exploitation.
ENISA score
7.8 · CVSS 3.1
Advisory evidence
No linked advisory details stored yet
Recommended actionPatch only the product branches with a verified fix

High technical severity; prioritise exposed affected systems while verifying vendor guidance. Verified remediation exists for at least one product or source, but 74 structured product or package states remain unresolved. Apply remediation only to the exact product branch confirmed by its source.

Fix availability varies by product
01

What, why and how

A flaw was found in rpm. An attacker can exploit a command injection vulnerability by influencing the path or filename of a tarball processed by `rpmbuild -t*` to include shell metacharacters. This is particularly relevant in automated build or continuous integration (CI) workflows that ingest externally supplied artifact names. Successful exploitation allows for arbitrary command execution with the privileges of the build user, which could lead to information disclosure or disruption of the build environment.

What

A flaw was found in rpm. An attacker can exploit a command injection vulnerability by influencing the path or filename of a tarball processed by `rpmbuild -t*` to include shell metacharacters. This is particularly relevant in automated build or continuous integration (CI) workflows that ingest externally supplied artifact names. Successful exploitation allows for arbitrary command execution with the privileges of the build user, which could lead to information disclosure or disruption of the build environment.

Why

Untrusted input is incorporated into an operating-system command without safe parameter handling.

How

An attacker operating through local access may attempt exploitation without authentication after a user interaction. If successful, the issue may obtain information outside the intended access boundary.

What

A flaw was found in rpm. An attacker can exploit a command injection vulnerability by influencing the path or filename of a tarball processed by `rpmbuild -t*` to include shell metacharacters. This is particularly relevant in automated build or continuous integration (CI) workflows that ingest externally supplied artifact names. Successful exploitation allows for arbitrary command execution with the privileges of the build user, which could lead to information disclosure or disruption of the build environment.

Why

Untrusted input is incorporated into an operating-system command without safe parameter handling.

How

An attacker operating through local access may attempt exploitation without authentication after a user interaction. If successful, the issue may obtain information outside the intended access boundary.

02

Exploit reality and attack path

CVSS severity, EPSS forecast probability, public exploit material and CISA-confirmed exploitation are separate signals.

Observed exploitation
?Confirmed exploitation and public exploit material are separate signals. Attacks can occur without public proof-of-concept or exploit code.
No confirmed evidence

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
?Confirmed exploitation and public exploit material are separate signals. Attacks can occur without public proof-of-concept or exploit code.
None recorded

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
local access → Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in an OS Command ('OS Command Injection') → obtain information outside the intended access boundary
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-78 ↗

CWE-78: Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in an OS Command ('OS Command Injection'). The product constructs all or part of an OS command using externally-influenced input from an upstream component, but it does not neutralize or incorrectly neutralizes special elements that could modify the intended OS command 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:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H

Common 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.
UnauthenticatedCWE-78
A

Official authority intelligence

Only matched European and national findings are included. Language selectors and unavailable sources are omitted.

ENISA EUVD · EUVD-2026-70108Official EUVD mapping

A flaw was found in rpm. An attacker can exploit a command injection vulnerability by influencing the path or filename of a tarball processed by `rpmbuild -t*` to include shell metacharacters. This is particularly relevant in automated build or continuous integration (CI) workflows that ingest externally supplied artifact names. Successful exploitation allows for arbitrary command execution with the privileges of the build user, which could lead to information disclosure or disruption of the build environment.

Official EUVD record ↗
BSI · German · WID-SEC-2026-3159RPM: Schwachstelle ermöglicht Codeausführung

Ein entfernter, anonymer Angreifer kann eine Schwachstelle in RPM ausnutzen, um beliebigen Programmcode auszuführen.

Official advisory ↗
Cyber Security Agency of Singapore · English · CSA-SB-20260909Security Bulletin 9 Sep 2026

The Cyber Security Agency of Singapore included this CVE in its official Security Bulletin 9 Sep 2026, published on 9 September 2026. Open the linked bulletin for the product, severity and reference information published in that issue.

Official advisory ↗
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 availability varies by product
Affected
Fixed
No fixed version is explicitly recorded in the structured CVE data.
Action
Use the product-specific evidence above. Patch only products with a verified fixed release, and keep every affected or under-investigation state without a matching fix in the remediation queue.
Workaround
To mitigate this issue, avoid using `rpmbuild -t*` with tarballs whose paths or filenames can be influenced by untrusted input. In automated build pipelines, ensure tarballs are staged into a trusted local directory and their names are normalized or validated to reject shell metacharacters before `rpmbuild` is invoked.
04

Evidence and provenance

Published 2 Sept 2026 · Last source change 2 Sept 2026, 16:24 UTC · CWE-78 · Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in an OS Command ('OS Command Injection')

CVE recordCVE.org · 5.2
CVSS sourceCNA
EPSS source
?The date BlackTree first stored a score for this CVE from the daily FIRST EPSS feed.
FIRST · tracked since 2026-09-03
European sourceENISA EUVD · EUVD-2026-70108
Product sourceVendor CSAF · Red Hat Product Security
Remediation sourceVendor CSAF · Red Hat Product Security
CWE sourceCNA
NVD statusNVD awaiting enrichment

Core structured fields are present and their contributing authorities are shown above.

Material change intelligence

What changed after publication

View recent updates ↗
  1. ENISA EUVD mappingEUVD-2026-70108 was added to the official ENISA EUVD mapping for this CVE.
    Before
    not recorded
    After
    {"euvdId":"EUVD-2026-70108"}
    ENISA EUVD ↗
  2. Catalogue recordCVE added to the BlackTree catalogue.
    CNA ↗
Material fields only · duplicate refreshes suppressed · history retained for the configured operational retention period
CVE published
ENISA EUVD · EUVD-2026-70108↗CVE authority or vendor reference↗Official CVE record (CNA and ADP data)↗NVD record↗
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.
Free version - for non-commercial use only.CVE-2026-84837 · cve.blacktree.nl