CVE-2026-92199 in Foglight for Databases
Summary
by MITRE • 11/04/2026
Quest Foglight for Databases EncryptionUtil Hardcoded Encyption Key Local Privilege Escalation Vulnerability. This vulnerability allows local attackers to escalate privileges on affected installations of Quest Foglight for Databases. An attacker must first obtain the ability to execute low-privileged code on the target system in order to exploit this vulnerability.
The specific flaw exists within the symmetricDecrypt method. The issue results from the use of a hard-coded cryptographic key. An attacker can leverage this vulnerability to escalate privileges and execute arbitrary code in the context of SYSTEM. Was ZDI-CAN-29967.
If you want to get best quality of vulnerability data, you may have to visit VulDB.
Analysis
by VulDB Data Team • 11/04/2026
Quest Foglight for Databases contains a critical security flaw within its EncryptionUtil component, specifically affecting the symmetricDecrypt method. This vulnerability stems from the implementation of a hard-coded cryptographic key used for data encryption and decryption operations. In secure software design principles, cryptographic keys must be dynamically generated or securely stored in protected keystores to ensure confidentiality and integrity. The use of a static, embedded key fundamentally undermines these security guarantees because it is visible within the application binary or source code structure. This architectural decision creates a predictable attack surface that allows any entity with access to the software environment to retrieve the secret material necessary for cryptographic operations.
The operational impact of this vulnerability is severe due to its potential for local privilege escalation. An attacker who has already achieved low-privileged execution on the target system, perhaps through phishing or exploiting another minor weakness, can leverage this flaw to gain significantly higher access rights. By extracting the hard-coded key from the application library, the attacker can decrypt sensitive configuration files or database connection strings that are protected by Foglight for Databases. These decrypted credentials often contain administrative privileges or service account details with elevated permissions on the underlying operating system and database infrastructure.
Once the attacker obtains these privileged credentials through decryption of stored secrets, they can authenticate as a high-privilege user within the Quest Foglight environment or directly against the managed databases. This effectively allows the execution of arbitrary code in the context of SYSTEM on Windows-based installations or root equivalent privileges on Unix-like systems. The ability to execute commands with such elevated rights enables full compromise of the host system, including installation of persistent backdoors, lateral movement across the network, and exfiltration of sensitive data stored within the managed databases. This represents a classic case where weak key management leads directly to complete system takeover despite initial access being limited to low-privileged user contexts.
From an industry standards perspective, this vulnerability aligns with CWE-798: Use of Hard-coded Credentials, which identifies the risk associated with embedding authentication credentials or cryptographic keys directly into source code or compiled binaries. It also relates to CWE-321: Use of a Key Past its Expiration Date if the key was intended for temporary use but remained static indefinitely. In terms of attack vectors and tactics, this scenario corresponds to MITRE ATT&CK technique T1552.004: Unsecured Credentials, specifically involving credentials stored in applications or scripts. The privilege escalation aspect maps to techniques such as T1068: Exploitation for Privilege Escalation, where the attacker leverages misconfigured software components to gain higher-level access than initially intended by the system architecture.
Mitigation strategies must focus on immediate remediation of the cryptographic implementation and broader key management practices. The vendor should release a patch that replaces the hard-coded symmetric key with a dynamically generated key or integrates with an external Key Management Service such as HashiCorp Vault, AWS KMS, or Azure Key Vault. Until patched, administrators can mitigate risk by restricting file system permissions on the Foglight installation directory to prevent low-privileged users from reading application libraries where the key may be embedded in plain text or easily extractable formats. Additionally, implementing strict network segmentation and monitoring for unusual authentication patterns involving database accounts managed by Foglight can help detect exploitation attempts. Regular audits of cryptographic implementations should be conducted to ensure no other components rely on static secrets that could serve as similar attack vectors for privilege escalation.