Red Hat Enterprise Linux up to 10 gvfs server-side request forgery

Summaryinfo

A vulnerability was found in Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6/7/8/9/10. It has been rated as critical. This impacts an unknown function of the component gvfs. The manipulation leads to server-side request forgery. This vulnerability is referenced as CVE-2026-28295. Remote exploitation of the attack is possible. No exploit is available.

Detailsinfo

A vulnerability, which was classified as critical, has been found in Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6/7/8/9/10. This issue affects an unknown function of the component gvfs. The manipulation with an unknown input leads to a server-side request forgery vulnerability. Using CWE to declare the problem leads to CWE-918. The web server receives a URL or similar request from an upstream component and retrieves the contents of this URL, but it does not sufficiently ensure that the request is being sent to the expected destination. Impacted is confidentiality, integrity, and availability. The summary by CVE is:

A flaw was found in the FTP GVfs backend. A malicious FTP server can exploit this vulnerability by providing an arbitrary IP address and port in its passive mode (PASV) response. The client unconditionally trusts this information and attempts to connect to the specified endpoint, allowing the malicious server to probe for open ports accessible from the client's network.

The advisory is shared at access.redhat.com. The identification of this vulnerability is CVE-2026-28295 since 02/26/2026. The exploitation is known to be easy. The attack may be initiated remotely. No form of authentication is needed for a successful exploitation. It demands that the victim is doing some kind of user interaction. Neither technical details nor an exploit are publicly available. The price for an exploit might be around USD $5k-$25k at the moment (estimation calculated on 03/02/2026).

The vulnerability scanner Nessus provides a plugin with the ID 300158 (Linux Distros Unpatched Vulnerability : CVE-2026-28295), which helps to determine the existence of the flaw in a target environment.

There is no information about possible countermeasures known. It may be suggested to replace the affected object with an alternative product.

The vulnerability is also documented in the vulnerability database at Tenable (300158). If you want to get the best quality for vulnerability data then you always have to consider VulDB.

Productinfo

Type

• Operating System

Vendor

• Red Hat

Name

• Enterprise Linux

Version

• 6
• 7
• 8
• 9
• 10

License

• commercial

Website

• Vendor: https://www.redhat.com/

CPE 2.3info

• 🔒
• 🔒
• 🔒

CPE 2.2info

• 🔒
• 🔒
• 🔒

CVSSv4info

CVSSv3info

CVSSv2info

Exploitinginfo

Threat Intelligenceinfo

Countermeasuresinfo

Timelineinfo

Sourcesinfo

Entryinfo

If you want to get the best quality for vulnerability data then you always have to consider VulDB.

Discussion