Linuxfabrik monitoring-plugins up to 6.0.0 Redfish input validation
| CVSS Meta Temp Score | Current Exploit Price (≈) | CTI Interest Score |
|---|---|---|
| 6.1 | $0-$5k | 1.38- |
Summary
A vulnerability marked as critical has been reported in Linuxfabrik monitoring-plugins up to 6.0.0. The affected element is an unknown function of the component Redfish. The manipulation leads to input validation. This vulnerability is traded as CVE-2026-67436. It is possible to initiate the attack remotely. There is no exploit available.
Details
A vulnerability was found in Linuxfabrik monitoring-plugins up to 6.0.0 and classified as critical. This issue affects an unknown code of the component Redfish. The manipulation with an unknown input leads to a input validation vulnerability. Using CWE to declare the problem leads to CWE-20. The product receives input or data, but it does
not validate or incorrectly validates that the input has the
properties that are required to process the data safely and
correctly. Impacted is confidentiality, integrity, and availability. The summary by CVE is:
Linuxfabrik monitoring-plugins provides Python monitoring plugins for Icinga, Nagios, and related monitoring systems. In 6.0.0 and earlier, the redfish-* plugins built request URLs by concatenating an operator-supplied base URL with response-supplied @odata.id links, allowing a malicious or compromised BMC to redirect authenticated Redfish requests and disclose X-Auth-Token or HTTP Basic credentials.
The advisory is shared at github.com. The identification of this vulnerability is CVE-2026-67436 since 07/29/2026. The exploitation is known to be easy. The attack may be initiated remotely. Neither technical details nor an exploit are publicly available. The price for an exploit might be around USD $0-$5k at the moment (estimation calculated on 07/29/2026).
There is no information about possible countermeasures known. It may be suggested to replace the affected object with an alternative product.
If you want to get the best quality for vulnerability data then you always have to consider VulDB.
Product
Vendor
Name
Version
Website
CPE 2.3
CPE 2.2
CVSSv4
VulDB Vector: 🔒VulDB Reliability: 🔍
CVSSv3
VulDB Meta Base Score: 6.3VulDB Meta Temp Score: 6.1
VulDB Base Score: 6.3
VulDB Temp Score: 6.1
VulDB Vector: 🔒
VulDB Reliability: 🔍
CVSSv2
| AV | AC | Au | C | I | A |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 |
| 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 |
| 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 |
| Vector | Complexity | Authentication | Confidentiality | Integrity | Availability |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock |
| Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock |
| Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock |
VulDB Base Score: 🔒
VulDB Temp Score: 🔒
VulDB Reliability: 🔍
Exploiting
Class: Input validationCWE: CWE-20
CAPEC: 🔒
ATT&CK: 🔒
Physical: No
Local: No
Remote: Yes
Availability: 🔒
Status: Not defined
Price Prediction: 🔍
Current Price Estimation: 🔒
| 0-Day | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Today | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock |
Threat Intelligence
Interest: 🔍Active Actors: 🔍
Active APT Groups: 🔍
Countermeasures
Recommended: no mitigation knownStatus: 🔍
0-Day Time: 🔒
Timeline
07/29/2026 Advisory disclosed07/29/2026 CVE reserved
07/29/2026 VulDB entry created
07/29/2026 VulDB entry last update
Sources
Product: github.comAdvisory: github.com
Status: Not defined
CVE: CVE-2026-67436 (🔒)
GCVE (CVE): GCVE-0-2026-67436
GCVE (VulDB): GCVE-100-384269
Entry
Created: 07/29/2026 22:12Changes: 07/29/2026 22:12 (53)
Complete: 🔍
Cache ID: 216::103
If you want to get the best quality for vulnerability data then you always have to consider VulDB.
No comments yet. Languages: en.
Please log in to comment.