CVE-2026-19670

mediumpriority · track · 0OT risk · elevatedEPSS 0.002 · 15 %ileUS
grimoire priorityP3 · Track
Exploitable?
—
no known exploitation
Likely / severe?
0.24% (15th) EPSS
CVSS 5.4 · medium
Is it mine?
2 products
Check your exposure
Who says so?
2 sources
osv · cisa_csaf_ot

EPSS · scored 2026-10-28

Malcolm's nginx Lua role-based access control (RBAC) layer decides whether an authenticated user may reach a role-restricted path (e.g. /htadmin, /auth, /admin_login, /arkime/api/esadmin, NetBox, upload endpoints) by pattern-matching the raw, percent-encoded request URI. Nginx itself, however, selects which location block actually serves the request using the percent-decoded, normalized URI. Because the RBAC check never percent-decodes its input, an authenticated low-privilege user can request an admin-only path using percent-encoding (e.g. /%68tadmin.php) and have nginx route it to the restricted location while the Lua RBAC gate evaluating the un-decoded raw string finds no matching restriction and grants access.

01

remediations

Vendor fix, mitigation, or workaround guidance, as published by each source.

A vendor fix is available.

02

cvss

Technical severity, 0–10. One row per scoring source.

5.4
010

base score 0–10 · higher = more severe · hover a vector to decode⚠ sources disagree · low–medium · 1.3–5.4

v3.15.4mediumCVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:Nsecondary · CISA US
v3.15.4mediumCVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:Nsecondary · ics-cert@hq.dhs.gov USexploitability 2.8 · impact 2.5
v4.05.3mediumCVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:X/CR:X/IR:X/AR:X/MAV:X/MAC:X/MAT:X/MPR:X/MUI:X/MVC:X/MVI:X/MVA:X/MSC:X/MSI:X/MSA:X/S:X/AU:X/R:X/V:X/RE:X/U:Xsecondary · ics-cert@hq.dhs.gov US
v4.01.3lowCVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:U/CR:X/IR:X/AR:X/MAV:X/MAC:X/MAT:X/MPR:X/MUI:X/MVC:X/MVI:X/MVA:X/MSC:X/MSI:X/MSA:X/S:X/AU:X/R:X/V:X/RE:X/U:Xsecondary · CVSS-BT (t0sche)
03

ssvc

A stakeholder decision — act, attend, or track — from exploitation and impact.

Exploitation: poc · Automatable: no · Technical Impact: partialcoordinatorcisa_ssvcUS
04

weaknesses

The CWE weakness classes this flaw belongs to.

CWE-863USprimaryCWE-409USCWE-863US
05

affected products (2)

Products and version ranges known to be affected.

06

advisories (2)

Vendor and ecosystem advisories describing this.

  • ICSA-26-230-01CISA Malcolm2026-08-18icsa · cisa_csaf_otUS

    Successful exploitation of these vulnerabilities could allow an attacker to cause a denial-of-service condition or execute arbitrary code.

  • CVE-2026-19671Improper handling of highly compressed data (data amplification) in CISA Malcolm2026-08-18vendor · osvUS

    Malcolm's upload-processing pipeline (scripts/safe-extract.py) enforces entry-count, nesting-depth, and total-uncompressed-byte limits when extracting container archives (zip/tar/rar/7z via libarchive), but those limits are not applied when the uploaded file is a single-stream compressed format (.gz, .bz2, .xz, .lzma, .lz) that isn't a .tar.*-style archive. Any authenticated user permitted to upload PCAP/log files can upload a small, highly compressible file (e.g. a gzip bomb) that decompresses to an effectively unbounded size on disk, exhausting the shared Docker volume used by OpenSearch, Logstash, Arkime, and Zeek, and disrupting the platform for all users.

07

also known as (1)

Other names and identifiers for this entity.

08

sources

Which sources assert this record, and when.

osvcisa_csaf_otNVDCVE.orgMITRE
published 2026-08-18modified 2026-08-18
10

references (2) nvd

External citations — patches, advisories, analysis.

scry

Attackers weaponise vulnerabilities like this against internet-exposed services. See what is exposed on your perimeter with a free passive scan.

Free scan