Evidence used
- No CISA KEV confirmation is currently recorded.
- The selected CVSS metric records a network-reachable, unauthenticated path with no user interaction.
- EPSS is 0.72% for the current model date.
BlackTreeCVE IntelligenceFull vulnerability report · 2026
CVE-2026-87874High confidence
Community.general: community.general: memcached cache plugin deserializes untrusted pickle data from memcached, enabling cache-poisoning remote code execution on the ansible controller
Red Hat · Red Hat Ceph Storage 5
8.1HighCVSS 3.1
Patch only the product branches with a verified fix
Fix availability varies by productHigh technical severity; prioritise exposed affected systems while verifying vendor guidance. Verified remediation exists for at least one product or source, but 9 structured product or package states remain unresolved. Apply remediation only to the exact product branch confirmed by its source.
R
Open reassessment dashboard →Operational reassessment
Published severity in operational context
Published severityHigh→Operational priority:High, unchanged from published severity.unchanged
Compensating controls
- Apply the linked authoritative mitigation while planning the permanent fix.
- 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 Ceph Storage 5 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.
Remediation availability differs by product scope
Verified remediation exists for at least one product or source, but 9 structured product or package states remain unresolved. Apply remediation only to the exact product branch confirmed by its source.
- Red Hat Product Security: 5 affected or under-investigation product states without a fixed product state in the same current advisory
- Debian Security Tracker: 4 affected package states with no published fix
Distribution package intelligence
6 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.
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 release | Source package | Vendor state | Fixed version | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Debian trixietrixie · source | ansible | Affected, no fix publishedDebian currently tracks this release as open. | Not published in this feed | Debian Security Tracker ↗Source updated 5 Oct 2026 |
| Debian bookwormbookworm · source | ansible | 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 | ansible | Affected, no fix publishedDebian currently tracks this release as open. | Not published in this feed | Debian Security Tracker ↗Source updated 5 Oct 2026 |
| Debian sidsid · source | ansible | Affected, no fix publishedDebian currently tracks this release as open. | Not published in this feed | Debian Security Tracker ↗Source updated 5 Oct 2026 |
| Ubuntu 24.04 LTSnoble · standard archive | ansible | 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 |
| Ubuntu 24.04 LTSnoble · standard archive | ansible-core | 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 |
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-2026-87874 · CSAF 2.0 · revision 3 · finalRed Hat Product Securitycommunity.general: community.general: memcached cache plugin deserializes untrusted pickle data from memcached, enabling cache-poisoning remote code execution on the Ansible controller
The vendor explicitly identifies these products as affected by this CVE.
- ansible-collection-community-general.src as a component of Red Hat Ceph Storage 5
- ansible-collection-community-general as a component of Red Hat Ceph Storage 9
- ansible-collection-community-general.src as a component of Red Hat Ceph Storage 9
- ansible-collection-community-general.src as a component of Red Hat OpenStack Platform 17.1
- ansible-collection-community-general.src as a component of Red Hat OpenStack Platform 18.0
- Summary
- A flaw was found in the memcached cache plugin of the community.general Ansible collection. Although its documentation states that records are stored in JSON format, the plugin performs no explicit serialization and relies on python-memcached, which pickles values on write and unpickles them on read. Because memcached is unauthenticated and cache keys are predictable, an attacker able to reach a network-exposed or shared memcached instance can write a crafted pickle payload that is deserialized and executed on the Ansible controller when the poisoned fact cache is next read, leading to remote code execution.
- Remediation
- Bind memcached to localhost only (the plugin default, 127.0.0.1:11211) and never expose an unauthenticated memcached across a trust boundary; isolate the cache to the controller. Prefer the redis cache plugin (explicit JSON) or the jsonfile/yaml cache plugins where a shared/remote fact cache is required. Treat any host with write access to the fact-cache memcached as trusted to run code on the controller.
High technical severity; prioritise exposed affected systems while verifying vendor guidance. Verified remediation exists for at least one product or source, but 9 structured product or package states remain unresolved. Apply remediation only to the exact product branch confirmed by its source.
Fix availability varies by product01
What, why and how
A flaw was found in the memcached cache plugin of the community.general Ansible collection. Although its documentation states that records are stored in JSON format, the plugin performs no explicit serialization and relies on python-memcached, which pickles values on write and unpickles them on read. Because memcached is unauthenticated and cache keys are predictable, an attacker able to reach a network-exposed or shared memcached instance can write a crafted pickle payload that is deserialized and executed on the Ansible controller when the poisoned fact cache is next read, leading to remote code execution.
What
A flaw was found in the memcached cache plugin of the community.general Ansible collection. Although its documentation states that records are stored in JSON format, the plugin performs no explicit serialization and relies on python-memcached, which pickles values on write and unpickles them on read. Because memcached is unauthenticated and cache keys are predictable, an attacker able to reach a network-exposed or shared memcached instance can write a crafted pickle payload that is deserialized and executed on the Ansible controller when the poisoned fact cache is next read, leading to remote code execution.
Why
Attacker-influenced serialised data is reconstructed as trusted objects, which can invoke dangerous application behaviour.
How
An attacker operating through a network path may attempt exploitation without authentication or user interaction. If successful, the issue may execute code or commands in the affected security context.
What
A flaw was found in the memcached cache plugin of the community.general Ansible collection. Although its documentation states that records are stored in JSON format, the plugin performs no explicit serialization and relies on python-memcached, which pickles values on write and unpickles them on read. Because memcached is unauthenticated and cache keys are predictable, an attacker able to reach a network-exposed or shared memcached instance can write a crafted pickle payload that is deserialized and executed on the Ansible controller when the poisoned fact cache is next read, leading to remote code execution.
Why
Attacker-influenced serialised data is reconstructed as trusted objects, which can invoke dangerous application behaviour.
How
An attacker operating through a network path may attempt exploitation without authentication or user interaction. If successful, the issue may execute code or commands in the affected security context.
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 → Deserialization of Untrusted Data → execute code or commands in the affected security context
- Attack surface
- Network
- Privileges required
- None: unauthenticated exploitation is possible
- User interaction
- None
- Attack complexity
- High: exploitation depends on specific conditions
- 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-502 ↗
CWE-502: Deserialization of Untrusted Data. The product deserializes untrusted data without sufficiently ensuring that the resulting data will be valid.
- 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:H/PR:N/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.ACHighAttack complexity: Successful exploitation depends on specific conditions outside the attacker's direct control.PRNonePrivileges required: The attacker does not need an account or existing 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
- After compromise, an attacker may use built-in shells, scripting engines, scheduled tasks and native network utilities for discovery, persistence or movement. This is a plausible LoTL path, not evidence that it has occurred for every attack.
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
- ansible-collection-community-general.src as a component of Red Hat Ceph Storage 5
- ansible-collection-community-general as a component of Red Hat Ceph Storage 9
- ansible-collection-community-general.src as a component of Red Hat Ceph Storage 9
- ansible-collection-community-general.src as a component of Red Hat OpenStack Platform 17.1
- ansible-collection-community-general.src as a component of Red Hat OpenStack Platform 18.0
- 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
- Bind memcached to localhost only (the plugin default, 127.0.0.1:11211) and never expose an unauthenticated memcached across a trust boundary; isolate the cache to the controller. Prefer the redis cache plugin (explicit JSON) or the jsonfile/yaml cache plugins where a shared/remote fact cache is required. Treat any host with write access to the fact-cache memcached as trusted to run code on the controller.
04
Evidence and provenance
Published 9 Sept 2026 · Last source change 10 Sept 2026, 12:50 UTC · CWE-502 · Deserialization of Untrusted Data
CVE recordCVE.org · 5.2
CVSS sourceCNA
EPSS source FIRST · tracked since 2026-09-10
?
The date BlackTree first stored a score for this CVE from the daily FIRST EPSS feed.European sourceENISA EUVD · EUVD-2026-75115
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
View recent updates ↗What changed after publication
- ENISA EUVD mappingEUVD-2026-75115 was added to the official ENISA EUVD mapping for this CVE.ENISA EUVD ↗
- Before
- not recorded
- After
- {"euvdId":"EUVD-2026-75115"}
- 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.