CVE-2026-94140

CRITICALPre-NVD 9.19.1
EchelonGraph scoreHIGH confidence

“—” beside the score: it is equal to the CVSS score beside it.

Score 9.1 from GitHub Security Advisory (severity: CRITICAL) published 2026-10-22. CISA-ADP (Vulnrichment) CVSS v3.1 baseline 9.1; sources differ by 0.0.

Triggered by: GitHub Security Advisory CVSS
Sources: CISA-ADP (Vulnrichment) CVSS v3.1, EPSS, GitHub Security Advisory
Trending — 5 sources updated this week

Also known asEUVD-2026-107576 (ENISA EUVD) · GHSA-xx8j-qhmg-cj8f (GitHub Security Advisories)Source: ENISA EUVD

9.1EG
EchelonGraph verdictPlan mitigationRemediate within your standard update timelines at low or medium mission impact and sooner than that at high (the SSVC decision on this page).
  • High severity, but no confirmed exploitation yet
CISA-KEV: Not listedEPSS PROB: 0.4%CVSS: 9.1Exploit: None knownExposed services: Not assessed

No fix is confirmed yet — apply a workaround or compensating control (WAF / firewall / segmentation) and watch for the fix.

The CVE record's CNA (CPAN Security Group) lists Rex versions up to and including 1.16.1 as affected. No release containing a fix is confirmed on record.

Rex versions through 1.16.1 for Perl accept an unknown SSH host key for remote rsync transfers because sync hardcodes StrictHostKeyChecking=no.

Every remote branch of sync builds its ssh command with that option, for password authentication, for private-key authentication and for the fallback. The ssh options a caller sets through set_openssh_opt reach the OpenSSH transport but not this command, so there is no configuration that restores host key checking for the transfer.

An attacker who can redirect the connection before the real host key is known presents their own and the transfer proceeds: under password authentication sync sends the connection password to that server, an upload writes the selected local files to it, and a download writes what it returns to the local destination.

CVSS v3
9.1
EG Score
9.1CRITICALhigh confidence
EG Risk
56
EG Risk 56/100

EG Risk is EchelonGraph's 0–100 priority score. It fuses impact severity (EG Severity, the CVSS base score, never the KEV-floored or EPSS-lifted EG Score) with real-world exploitation and automatability, under weights EchelonGraph set by hand, so you can rank equal-severity CVEs and fix the most dangerous first. Higher = act sooner.

How it’s computed (value × EchelonGraph’s weight)
Severity91% × 45%
Impact severity (EG Severity): CVSS 9.1 of 10. Never the KEV-floored or EPSS-lifted EG Score.
Exploitation0.4% × 40%
FIRST EPSS: the 30-day exploitation probability when EchelonGraph scored this CVE.
Automatability100% × 15%
CISA's SSVC Automatable value: yes (Vulnrichment).
SSVC (CISA's decision table, applied by EchelonGraph): Track at low or medium mission impact; Attend at high (mission-essential systems).
Exploitation none (CISA Vulnrichment) · Automatable yes (CISA Vulnrichment) · Technical impact total (CISA Vulnrichment). All three are CISA's SSVC values (Vulnrichment). EchelonGraph applied CISA's decision table to them; CISA publishes SSVC inputs and the table, not a decision for each CVE.
Action: No fix is confirmed yet. Restrict network exposure of the affected system or apply the vendor's mitigation within your standard update timelines at low or medium mission impact and sooner than that at high, and watch the vendor's advisory for the fix.
EPSS PROB
0.4%
EPSS %ILE
37th
KEV
Not listed

What the EG score is made of (scorer v4.0: the three questions the 0–10 score mixes, published apart · methodology)

The EG score (9.1): severity, escalated by confirmed exploitation. This CVE's 9.1 is its impact severity (EG Severity), not escalated.

EG Severity
9.1 CRITICALCVSS-B, impact only: no KEV listing, EPSS or EG-KEV tier raises it.GitHub Security Advisory CVSS
EG Likelihood
0.4% within 30 daysSource: FIRST EPSS (model v2026.06.15, score date 2026-10-31). FIRST's exploitation probability, not an EchelonGraph model.
Confirmed exploitation
None on record (CISA KEV, EG-KEV Tier 1)Reported apart from the likelihood: an observed fact, not a probability.
EG Priority
SSVC Track at medium mission impactTrack at low or medium mission impact; Attend at high (mission-essential systems).CISA BOD 26-04: 3 days if the affected system is publicly exposed; 60 days if it is not.Each input and its source: the SSVC and BOD 26-04 blocks below.

SSVC (CISA's decision table, applied by EchelonGraph)Track at low or medium mission impact; Attend at high (mission-essential systems).

No fix is confirmed yet. Restrict network exposure of the affected system or apply the vendor's mitigation within your standard update timelines at low or medium mission impact and sooner than that at high, and watch the vendor's advisory for the fix.

Exploitation none (CISA Vulnrichment) · Automatable yes (CISA Vulnrichment) · Technical impact total (CISA Vulnrichment). All three are CISA's SSVC values (Vulnrichment). EchelonGraph applied CISA's decision table to them; CISA publishes SSVC inputs and the table, not a decision for each CVE. Mission impact is CISA's Mission & Well-being decision point, and only you can judge it. CISA's table makes it high when Mission Prevalence is Essential — the vulnerable component "directly provides capabilities that constitute at least one MEF for at least one entity" (MEF: mission essential function) — or when Public Well-Being Impact is Irreversible: "multiple fatalities are likely", the cyber-physical system "is likely lost or destroyed", "extreme or serious externalities" are imposed on other parties, or social systems such as elections or the financial grid "are destabilized and potentially collapse". CISA's decision table

BOD 26-04 (CISA's remediation timeline, Table 1)3 days if the affected system is publicly exposed; 60 days if it is not.

In CISA KEV no (CISA's KEV catalog) · Automatable yes (CISA Vulnrichment) · Technical impact total (CISA Vulnrichment). Whether your system is publicly exposed is yours to answer. BOD 26-04 binds US Federal Civilian Executive Branch agencies; for anyone else it is CISA's published timeline, a reference rather than an obligation. The directive · how EchelonGraph applies it

Published

October 21, 2026

Last Modified

October 30, 2026

Advisory Details (2)

Auto-updated Oct 30, 2026
No fix on record yet.
Web page

oss-security - CVE-2026-94140: Rex versions through 1.16.1 for Perl accept an unknown SSH host key for remote rsync transfers because sync hardcodes StrictHostKeyChecking=no

http://www.openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2026/10/21/28

Vendor Advisories for CVE-2026-94140(1)

These vendors published their own advisory mentioning this CVE — often with vendor-specific remediation steps + affected product lists not in NVD.

Weakness Classification(1)

MITRE Common Weakness Enumeration — the root-cause categories this CVE belongs to.

Data Freshness Timeline

(refreshed 15× in last 7d / 27× in last 30d)

Each row is a time one of our pipelines fetched, updated or re-scored this CVE. For example, "NVD update" means NVD published or revised its analysis for this CVE; "MITRE cvelistV5" means we ingested or refreshed it from the CNA feed. An arrow marks a change the record states ("CVSS v3 → 9.1"); EPSS and GHSA rows show the values recorded at that time, not what changed (EPSS values are rounded; hover one for the exact figures). Most recent first.

  1. 2026-10-31 16:54 UTCEG score recompute
  2. 2026-10-31 16:54 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-xx8j-qhmg-cj8f · GitHub severity CRITICAL · GitHub CVSS 9.1
  3. 2026-10-31 16:33 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 37th percentile
  4. 2026-10-30 16:35 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.3% · 16th percentile
  5. 2026-10-30 16:27 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-xx8j-qhmg-cj8f
  6. 2026-10-30 16:00 UTCEG score recomputeFirst assessed: 9.1 CRITICAL
  7. 2026-10-30 16:00 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-xx8j-qhmg-cj8f
  8. 2026-10-30 16:00 UTCMITRE cvelistV5CVSS v3 → 9.1 · severity → CRITICAL
  9. 2026-10-30 03:55 UTCOSV refresh
  10. 2026-10-29 16:34 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.3% · 16th percentile
  11. 2026-10-28 16:33 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.3% · 16th percentile
  12. 2026-10-27 16:33 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.3% · 16th percentile
  13. 2026-10-26 16:33 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.3% · 16th percentile
  14. 2026-10-25 16:34 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.3% · 16th percentile
  15. 2026-10-25 13:49 UTCEG score recompute
  16. 2026-10-24 16:34 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.3% · 15th percentile
  17. 2026-10-23 16:33 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.3% · 15th percentile
  18. 2026-10-22 17:33 UTCEG score recompute
  19. 2026-10-22 17:33 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-xx8j-qhmg-cj8f
  20. 2026-10-22 16:35 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.3% · 15th percentile
  21. 2026-10-22 01:27 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-xx8j-qhmg-cj8f
  22. 2026-10-22 01:25 UTCNVD update
  23. 2026-10-22 00:52 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-xx8j-qhmg-cj8f
  24. 2026-10-22 00:50 UTCMITRE cvelistV5
  25. 2026-10-21 22:25 UTCNVD update
Show 2 more
  1. 2026-10-21 21:32 UTCEG score recompute
  2. 2026-10-21 21:30 UTCMITRE cvelistV5first tracked

Frequently asked(5)

What is CVE-2026-94140?
CVE-2026-94140 is a critical-severity vulnerability; its CVE record was published on October 21, 2026. Rex versions through 1.16.1 for Perl accept an unknown SSH host key for remote rsync transfers because sync hardcodes StrictHostKeyChecking=no. Every remote branch of sync builds its ssh command with that option, for password authentication, for private-key authentication and for the fallback. The…
When was the CVE record for CVE-2026-94140 published?
The CVE record for CVE-2026-94140 was published on October 21, 2026. That is the record's publication date; the vulnerability itself may have been made public earlier. EchelonGraph's copy of the record carries a last-modified date of October 30, 2026; the record at its source may have been updated since.
Is CVE-2026-94140 actively exploited?
CVE-2026-94140 is not currently on CISA's Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog. FIRST EPSS estimates a 0.4% probability of exploitation in the next 30 days (37th percentile of EPSS-scored CVEs).
What is the CVSS score of CVE-2026-94140?
CVE-2026-94140 has a CVSS v3.1 base score of 9.1 (CISA-ADP / Vulnrichment enrichment; NVD's own analysis pending).
How do I remediate CVE-2026-94140?
No fix for CVE-2026-94140 is confirmed yet. Until one is published, restrict network exposure of the affected system or apply the vendor's mitigation — for example, keep it off the internet or limit it to trusted networks — and watch the vendor's advisory for the fix. The CVE record's CNA (CPAN Security Group) lists Rex versions up to and including 1.16.1 as affected. No release containing a fix is confirmed on record. The vendor advisories EchelonGraph has for CVE-2026-94140 are linked in the Vendor Advisories panel on this page.

Dependency Blast Radius

Explore the affected products and dependency analysis for CVE-2026-94140

Explore →

Is Your Infrastructure Affected by CVE-2026-94140?

EchelonGraph automatically scans your cloud infrastructure and maps CVE exposure using blast radius analysis.