Количество 3
Количество 3
CVE-2026-11386
An input validation and injection vulnerability exists in Canonical ubuntu-pro-client (formerly ubuntu-advantage-tools). The client constructs APT source files (such as /etc/apt/sources.list.d/ubuntu-.list or their DEB822 equivalents) using data received directly from the contract server response via the directives.suites[] and directives.aptURL fields. Because the client utilizes Python's str.format() to write these files without performing escaping, validation, or newline character filtering, a malicious or tampered contract response containing embedded newline (\n) characters can successfully inject arbitrary, attacker-controlled deb configuration lines into root-owned APT sources. When combined with the unvalidated additionalPackages[] field—which is passed positionally into a root-executed apt-get install command—an attacker capable of spoofing or manipulating the contract response (e.g., via a compromised internal infrastructure, an intercepted connection utilizing a trust...
CVE-2026-11386
An input validation and injection vulnerability exists in Canonical ubuntu-pro-client (formerly ubuntu-advantage-tools). The client constructs APT source files (such as /etc/apt/sources.list.d/ubuntu-.list or their DEB822 equivalents) using data received directly from the contract server response via the directives.suites[] and directives.aptURL fields. Because the client utilizes Python's str.format() to write these files without performing escaping, validation, or newline character filtering, a malicious or tampered contract response containing embedded newline (\n) characters can successfully inject arbitrary, attacker-controlled deb configuration lines into root-owned APT sources. When combined with the unvalidated additionalPackages[] field—which is passed positionally into a root-executed apt-get install command—an attacker capable of spoofing or manipulating the contract response (e.g., via a compromised internal infrastructure, an intercepted connection utilizing a trusted
GHSA-9836-vm3x-qwmj
An input validation and injection vulnerability exists in Canonical ubuntu-pro-client (formerly ubuntu-advantage-tools). The client constructs APT source files (such as /etc/apt/sources.list.d/ubuntu-.list or their DEB822 equivalents) using data received directly from the contract server response via the directives.suites[] and directives.aptURL fields. Because the client utilizes Python's str.format() to write these files without performing escaping, validation, or newline character filtering, a malicious or tampered contract response containing embedded newline (\n) characters can successfully inject arbitrary, attacker-controlled deb configuration lines into root-owned APT sources. When combined with the unvalidated additionalPackages[] field—which is passed positionally into a root-executed apt-get install command—an attacker capable of spoofing or manipulating the contract response (e.g., via a compromised internal infrastructure, an intercepted connection utilizing a trust...
Уязвимостей на страницу
Уязвимость | CVSS | EPSS | Опубликовано | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
CVE-2026-11386 An input validation and injection vulnerability exists in Canonical ubuntu-pro-client (formerly ubuntu-advantage-tools). The client constructs APT source files (such as /etc/apt/sources.list.d/ubuntu-.list or their DEB822 equivalents) using data received directly from the contract server response via the directives.suites[] and directives.aptURL fields. Because the client utilizes Python's str.format() to write these files without performing escaping, validation, or newline character filtering, a malicious or tampered contract response containing embedded newline (\n) characters can successfully inject arbitrary, attacker-controlled deb configuration lines into root-owned APT sources. When combined with the unvalidated additionalPackages[] field—which is passed positionally into a root-executed apt-get install command—an attacker capable of spoofing or manipulating the contract response (e.g., via a compromised internal infrastructure, an intercepted connection utilizing a trust... | CVSS3: 9 | 1% Низкий | 2 месяца назад | |
CVE-2026-11386 An input validation and injection vulnerability exists in Canonical ubuntu-pro-client (formerly ubuntu-advantage-tools). The client constructs APT source files (such as /etc/apt/sources.list.d/ubuntu-.list or their DEB822 equivalents) using data received directly from the contract server response via the directives.suites[] and directives.aptURL fields. Because the client utilizes Python's str.format() to write these files without performing escaping, validation, or newline character filtering, a malicious or tampered contract response containing embedded newline (\n) characters can successfully inject arbitrary, attacker-controlled deb configuration lines into root-owned APT sources. When combined with the unvalidated additionalPackages[] field—which is passed positionally into a root-executed apt-get install command—an attacker capable of spoofing or manipulating the contract response (e.g., via a compromised internal infrastructure, an intercepted connection utilizing a trusted | CVSS3: 9 | 1% Низкий | 2 месяца назад | |
GHSA-9836-vm3x-qwmj An input validation and injection vulnerability exists in Canonical ubuntu-pro-client (formerly ubuntu-advantage-tools). The client constructs APT source files (such as /etc/apt/sources.list.d/ubuntu-.list or their DEB822 equivalents) using data received directly from the contract server response via the directives.suites[] and directives.aptURL fields. Because the client utilizes Python's str.format() to write these files without performing escaping, validation, or newline character filtering, a malicious or tampered contract response containing embedded newline (\n) characters can successfully inject arbitrary, attacker-controlled deb configuration lines into root-owned APT sources. When combined with the unvalidated additionalPackages[] field—which is passed positionally into a root-executed apt-get install command—an attacker capable of spoofing or manipulating the contract response (e.g., via a compromised internal infrastructure, an intercepted connection utilizing a trust... | CVSS3: 9 | 1% Низкий | 2 месяца назад |
Уязвимостей на страницу