CVE-2026-126607:詳細資料

CVE-2026-126607

7.8
/
高危
2026-11-11
09h17 +00:00
Local
2026-11-11
09h17 +00:00
指定 CVE 通知
掌握特定 CVE 的任何變更。
管理通知

CVE 描述

Progressive Robot hMailServer 6.2.3 through 6.3.7 on Windows, with a MySQL or MariaDB database, hands the bundled MariaDB Connector/C the folder of its authentication plugins (the plugin folder in the installation's Bin folder) as Latin-1 bytes, which the client reads in the system's ANSI code page when it builds a plugin's path and loads the plugin with LoadLibraryExA, which allows a local authenticated user to execute code as the hMailServer service's account (LocalSystem, or the service's virtual account for a new installation from 6.3.4) by creating the folder those bytes name in the code page and placing in it a DLL with a plugin's name, when the installation folder's path holds a character between U+0080 and U+00FF whose byte the code page reads as another character, and none above U+00FF, and the user can create that other folder (by default any authenticated user may create a folder directly under the root of the system drive). The server converted the path with the C runtime's wcstombs_s in the C locale, which writes each character up to U+00FF as the byte of the same value: on code page 1252 those bytes are the same letters, while on another code page, such as 1251, or on a UTF-8 code page, they name another folder. The client loads the plugin the database server names in its greeting, unless it is built in, and any plugin the server names in an authentication switch, and tries again at each connection while a load fails, so with a MySQL 8.0 or later server, whose greeting names caching_sha2_password by default, the DLL is loaded at the next connection the service makes, whatever plugin the database account uses; a DLL's entry point runs when it is loaded. A path holding any character above U+00FF was handed over as an empty string, whatever the code page, from which the client makes a plugin's name at the root of the current drive: for the service, whose current folder is System32, that is the root of the system drive, where by default only administrators can create a file, but the server's own database commands (hMailServer.exe --check-database, --upgrade-database and the others from 6.3.4, and the /Debug and /Test console modes from 6.2.3) run in the folder they are started from - the product tells administrators to run them from an elevated prompt in the Bin folder, and the setup of 6.3.4 and 6.3.5 ran two or three of them itself with the Bin folder as their working folder for a new installation with an external database - so a DLL that a local authenticated user placed under a plugin's name at the root of a drive other users may write, such as a FAT or exFAT volume, was loaded into the administrator's process at the command's first connection to a MySQL 8.0 or later server. 6.3.8 fixes both cases: it hands the folder in the code page's bytes or by its short (8.3) name, and where neither can be written, a folder under the Windows system folder that holds no plugin and that only administrators can create, or else refuses the connection before attempting it; it never hands the empty value or a folder the current drive completes. The configuration is not the default: the default installation folder, under Program Files, is ASCII. Linux builds set no plugin folder and are not affected.

CVE 資訊

相關弱點

CWE-ID 弱點名稱 來源
CWE-427 Uncontrolled Search Path Element
The product uses a fixed or controlled search path to find resources, but one or more locations in that path can be under the control of unintended actors.

指標

指標 評分 嚴重程度 CVSS 向量 來源
V3.1 7.8 HIGH CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H

Base: Exploitabilty Metrics

The Exploitability metrics reflect the characteristics of the thing that is vulnerable, which we refer to formally as the vulnerable component.

Attack Vector

This metric reflects the context by which vulnerability exploitation is possible.

Local

The vulnerable component is not bound to the network stack and the attacker’s path is via read/write/execute capabilities.

Attack Complexity

This metric describes the conditions beyond the attacker’s control that must exist in order to exploit the vulnerability.

Low

Specialized access conditions or extenuating circumstances do not exist. An attacker can expect repeatable success when attacking the vulnerable component.

Privileges Required

This metric describes the level of privileges an attacker must possess before successfully exploiting the vulnerability.

Low

The attacker requires privileges that provide basic user capabilities that could normally affect only settings and files owned by a user. Alternatively, an attacker with Low privileges has the ability to access only non-sensitive resources.

User Interaction

This metric captures the requirement for a human user, other than the attacker, to participate in the successful compromise of the vulnerable component.

None

The vulnerable system can be exploited without interaction from any user.

Base: Scope Metrics

The Scope metric captures whether a vulnerability in one vulnerable component impacts resources in components beyond its security scope.

Scope

Formally, a security authority is a mechanism (e.g., an application, an operating system, firmware, a sandbox environment) that defines and enforces access control in terms of how certain subjects/actors (e.g., human users, processes) can access certain restricted objects/resources (e.g., files, CPU, memory) in a controlled manner. All the subjects and objects under the jurisdiction of a single security authority are considered to be under one security scope. If a vulnerability in a vulnerable component can affect a component which is in a different security scope than the vulnerable component, a Scope change occurs. Intuitively, whenever the impact of a vulnerability breaches a security/trust boundary and impacts components outside the security scope in which vulnerable component resides, a Scope change occurs.

Unchanged

An exploited vulnerability can only affect resources managed by the same security authority. In this case, the vulnerable component and the impacted component are either the same, or both are managed by the same security authority.

Base: Impact Metrics

The Impact metrics capture the effects of a successfully exploited vulnerability on the component that suffers the worst outcome that is most directly and predictably associated with the attack. Analysts should constrain impacts to a reasonable, final outcome which they are confident an attacker is able to achieve.

Confidentiality Impact

This metric measures the impact to the confidentiality of the information resources managed by a software component due to a successfully exploited vulnerability.

High

There is a total loss of confidentiality, resulting in all resources within the impacted component being divulged to the attacker. Alternatively, access to only some restricted information is obtained, but the disclosed information presents a direct, serious impact. For example, an attacker steals the administrator's password, or private encryption keys of a web server.

Integrity Impact

This metric measures the impact to integrity of a successfully exploited vulnerability. Integrity refers to the trustworthiness and veracity of information.

High

There is a total loss of integrity, or a complete loss of protection. For example, the attacker is able to modify any/all files protected by the impacted component. Alternatively, only some files can be modified, but malicious modification would present a direct, serious consequence to the impacted component.

Availability Impact

This metric measures the impact to the availability of the impacted component resulting from a successfully exploited vulnerability.

High

There is a total loss of availability, resulting in the attacker being able to fully deny access to resources in the impacted component; this loss is either sustained (while the attacker continues to deliver the attack) or persistent (the condition persists even after the attack has completed). Alternatively, the attacker has the ability to deny some availability, but the loss of availability presents a direct, serious consequence to the impacted component (e.g., the attacker cannot disrupt existing connections, but can prevent new connections; the attacker can repeatedly exploit a vulnerability that, in each instance of a successful attack, leaks a only small amount of memory, but after repeated exploitation causes a service to become completely unavailable).

Temporal Metrics

The Temporal metrics measure the current state of exploit techniques or code availability, the existence of any patches or workarounds, or the confidence in the description of a vulnerability.

Environmental Metrics

These metrics enable the analyst to customize the CVSS score depending on the importance of the affected IT asset to a user’s organization, measured in terms of Confidentiality, Integrity, and Availability.

cve@gitlab.com

參考資料