Red Hat Enterprise Linux 10: Improper Access Control
CVE-2026-72693 is a high-severity improper access control vulnerability in Red Hat Enterprise Linux 10 from Red Hat, with a CVSS 3.1 base score of 7.8 out of 10. It can be exploited with local access to the system by an attacker with a low-privileged account, without any action from a user. There is no confirmed exploitation so far. EPSS estimates a 0.15% chance of exploitation within 30 days, which is low compared with other CVEs.
High severity with no evidence of exploitation so far.
What to do
- Check which version of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 10 you run against the affected versions below, and install the vendor's latest release.
Affected products and versions
| Vendor | Product | Affected versions | Fixed in |
|---|---|---|---|
| Red Hat | Red Hat Enterprise Linux 10 | Not specified in the record | Not stated |
| Red Hat | Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8 | Not specified in the record | Not stated |
| Red Hat | Red Hat Enterprise Linux 9 | Not specified in the record | Not stated |
| Red Hat | Red Hat OpenShift Container Platform 4.22 | Not specified in the record | Not stated |
| Red Hat | Red Hat Hardened Images | Not specified in the record | Not stated |
| Red Hat | Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6 | Not specified in the record | Not stated |
| Red Hat | Red Hat Enterprise Linux 7 | Not specified in the record | Not stated |
| Red Hat | Red Hat OpenShift Container Platform 4 | Not specified in the record | Not stated |
| Red Hat | Red Hat OpenShift Container Platform 5 | Not specified in the record | Not stated |
Version data comes from the organisation that assigned the CVE. Confirm against the vendor advisory before deciding you are unaffected.
How the severity score breaks down
- Attack vector
- LocalThe attacker needs local access or must trick a user into running something.
- Attack complexity
- LowNo special conditions are needed; the attack works reliably.
- Privileges required
- LowA basic user account is enough.
- User interaction
- NoneNo action by a victim is required.
- Scope
- UnchangedImpact stays within the vulnerable component.
- Confidentiality
- HighAll data handled by the component can be read.
- Integrity
- HighData or code can be modified at will.
- Availability
- HighThe component can be taken down completely.
Vector: CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H. Scored by CNA (redhat.com).
Official description
`openvt -u` is intended to identify the owner of the current VT and then execute `login` as that user from a privileged context. In the documented `kbrequest`/init usage, the ownership test in `authenticate_user()` relies on `stat("/proc/<pid>/fd/0")`. `stat()` on `/proc/<pid>/fd/0` follows the symlink to the underlying TTY device node. As a result, `buf.st_uid` reflects the owner of the TTY node rather than the owner of the process holding the file descriptor. If the TTY owner returns to `root` or the getty owner after logout while an unprivileged process still has `fd 0` attached to that TTY, the check can incorrectly treat that process as belonging to the privileged console owner. Once that check succeeds, the `-u` path executes a passwordless login as the selected user. In the documented `kbrequest`/init deployment using `openvt -us`, this can result in passwordless `login -f root` on the spawned VT. This report establishes that privilege escalation path for that documented deployment; it does not claim equivalent reachability for deployments that do not use `openvt -u` from a privileged `kbrequest`/init path.
Source: the CVE record as published by its numbering authority, via NVD and CVE.org.
The underlying weakness: Improper Access Control
The product does not restrict or incorrectly restricts access to a resource from an unauthorized actor.
How developers prevent this class of flaw
- Very carefully manage the setting, management, and handling of privileges. Explicitly manage trust zones in the software.
- Compartmentalize the system to have safe areas where trust boundaries can be unambiguously drawn. Do not allow sensitive data to go outside of the trust boundary and always be careful when interfacing with a compartment outside of the safe area. Ensure that appropriate compartmentalization is built into the system design, and the compartmentalization allows for and reinforces privilege separation functionality. Architects and designers should rely on the principle of least privilege to decide the appropriate time to use privileges and the time to drop privileges.
Timeline
- CVE record published.
- CISA published its SSVC assessment (exploitation: none, automatable: no, technical impact: total).
- Record last changed materially (score, affected products, status or references).
References
Other references
- access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2026:41136
- access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2026:57597
- access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2026:57610
- access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2026:60440
- access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2026:66357
- access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2026:78951
- access.redhat.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-72693
- bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2462115
Other vulnerabilities in Red Hat Enterprise Linux 10
- 8.8 High severity
- 7.5 High severity
- 7.5 High severity
- 7.9 High severity
- 7.3 High severity
- 7.5 High severity
Recent Improper Access Control vulnerabilities
- 7.2 High severity
- 7.8 High severity
- 7.4 High severity
- 7.0 High severity
- 7.5 High severity
- 7.5 High severity
Spotted an error? Tell us.