CVE-2026-67241 (GCVE-0-2026-67241)
Vulnerability from cvelistv5 – Published: 2026-09-25 16:12 – Updated: 2026-09-25 16:12
VLAI
EPSS
VEX
Title
RabbitMQ: AMQP 1.0 management exchange.declare skips alternate-exchange permission check
Summary
RabbitMQ is a messaging and streaming broker. From 4.2.0 until 4.2.9 and 4.3.3, AMQP 1.0 management exchange.declare skips alternate-exchange permission check. pUT /exchanges/:name (lines 192-240) checks only configure on the declared exchange and passes XArgs straight to rabbitexchange:declare/7. It omits the checkreadpermitted(X) + checkwritepermitted(AE) that rabbitchannel.erl:2540-2548 enforces for the alternate-exchange argument on the AMQP 0-9-1 path. The same file already implements the analogous DLX check for queues (lines 708-719), confirming this is a missing-check bug rather than intentional A user with only configure on exchange X can route X's unroutable messages into an alternate exchange they have no write permission AMQP 1.0 enabled (default in RabbitMQ 4.x) Attacker has configure on at least one exchange but lacks write on the target. This issue is fixed in versions 4.2.9 and 4.3.3.
Severity
CWE
- CWE-862 - Missing Authorization
Assigner
References
5 references
| URL | Tags |
|---|---|
| https://github.com/rabbitmq/rabbitmq-server/secur… | x_refsource_CONFIRM |
| https://github.com/rabbitmq/rabbitmq-server/commi… | x_refsource_MISC |
| https://github.com/rabbitmq/rabbitmq-server/commi… | x_refsource_MISC |
| https://github.com/rabbitmq/rabbitmq-server/relea… | x_refsource_MISC |
| https://github.com/rabbitmq/rabbitmq-server/relea… | x_refsource_MISC |
Impacted products
1 product
| Vendor | Product | Version | CPE status | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| rabbitmq | rabbitmq-server |
Affected:
>= 4.2.0, < 4.2.9
Affected: >= 4.3.0, < 4.3.3 |
guessed |
{
"containers": {
"cna": {
"affected": [
{
"product": "rabbitmq-server",
"vendor": "rabbitmq",
"versions": [
{
"status": "affected",
"version": "\u003e= 4.2.0, \u003c 4.2.9"
},
{
"status": "affected",
"version": "\u003e= 4.3.0, \u003c 4.3.3"
}
]
}
],
"descriptions": [
{
"lang": "en",
"value": "RabbitMQ is a messaging and streaming broker. From 4.2.0 until 4.2.9 and 4.3.3, AMQP 1.0 management exchange.declare skips alternate-exchange permission check. pUT /exchanges/:name (lines 192-240) checks only configure on the declared exchange and passes XArgs straight to rabbitexchange:declare/7. It omits the checkreadpermitted(X) + checkwritepermitted(AE) that rabbitchannel.erl:2540-2548 enforces for the alternate-exchange argument on the AMQP 0-9-1 path. The same file already implements the analogous DLX check for queues (lines 708-719), confirming this is a missing-check bug rather than intentional A user with only configure on exchange X can route X\u0027s unroutable messages into an alternate exchange they have no write permission AMQP 1.0 enabled (default in RabbitMQ 4.x) Attacker has configure on at least one exchange but lacks write on the target. This issue is fixed in versions 4.2.9 and 4.3.3."
}
],
"metrics": [
{
"cvssV4_0": {
"attackComplexity": "LOW",
"attackRequirements": "PRESENT",
"attackVector": "NETWORK",
"baseScore": 4.8,
"baseSeverity": "MEDIUM",
"privilegesRequired": "HIGH",
"subAvailabilityImpact": "NONE",
"subConfidentialityImpact": "LOW",
"subIntegrityImpact": "HIGH",
"userInteraction": "NONE",
"vectorString": "CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:H/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:N/SC:L/SI:H/SA:N",
"version": "4.0",
"vulnAvailabilityImpact": "NONE",
"vulnConfidentialityImpact": "NONE",
"vulnIntegrityImpact": "NONE"
}
}
],
"problemTypes": [
{
"descriptions": [
{
"cweId": "CWE-862",
"description": "CWE-862: Missing Authorization",
"lang": "en",
"type": "CWE"
}
]
}
],
"providerMetadata": {
"dateUpdated": "2026-09-25T16:12:14.689Z",
"orgId": "a0819718-46f1-4df5-94e2-005712e83aaa",
"shortName": "GitHub_M"
},
"references": [
{
"name": "https://github.com/rabbitmq/rabbitmq-server/security/advisories/GHSA-rg2g-289m-xhhw",
"tags": [
"x_refsource_CONFIRM"
],
"url": "https://github.com/rabbitmq/rabbitmq-server/security/advisories/GHSA-rg2g-289m-xhhw"
},
{
"name": "https://github.com/rabbitmq/rabbitmq-server/commit/18eac8d547b4382bf830c621b20a35932dd1cfa5",
"tags": [
"x_refsource_MISC"
],
"url": "https://github.com/rabbitmq/rabbitmq-server/commit/18eac8d547b4382bf830c621b20a35932dd1cfa5"
},
{
"name": "https://github.com/rabbitmq/rabbitmq-server/commit/56005e7cebffc478ef397573de24aff1167e7cda",
"tags": [
"x_refsource_MISC"
],
"url": "https://github.com/rabbitmq/rabbitmq-server/commit/56005e7cebffc478ef397573de24aff1167e7cda"
},
{
"name": "https://github.com/rabbitmq/rabbitmq-server/releases/tag/v4.2.9",
"tags": [
"x_refsource_MISC"
],
"url": "https://github.com/rabbitmq/rabbitmq-server/releases/tag/v4.2.9"
},
{
"name": "https://github.com/rabbitmq/rabbitmq-server/releases/tag/v4.3.3",
"tags": [
"x_refsource_MISC"
],
"url": "https://github.com/rabbitmq/rabbitmq-server/releases/tag/v4.3.3"
}
],
"source": {
"advisory": "GHSA-rg2g-289m-xhhw",
"discovery": "UNKNOWN"
},
"title": "RabbitMQ: AMQP 1.0 management exchange.declare skips alternate-exchange permission check"
}
},
"cveMetadata": {
"assignerOrgId": "a0819718-46f1-4df5-94e2-005712e83aaa",
"assignerShortName": "GitHub_M",
"cveId": "CVE-2026-67241",
"datePublished": "2026-09-25T16:12:14.689Z",
"dateReserved": "2026-07-28T19:50:39.438Z",
"dateUpdated": "2026-09-25T16:12:14.689Z",
"state": "PUBLISHED"
},
"dataType": "CVE_RECORD",
"dataVersion": "5.2",
"vulnerability-lookup:meta": {
"epss": {
"cve": "CVE-2026-67241",
"date": "2026-09-28",
"epss": "0.00347",
"percentile": "0.25721"
},
"nvd": {
"cve": {
"affected": [
{
"affectedData": [
{
"product": "rabbitmq-server",
"vendor": "rabbitmq",
"versions": [
{
"status": "affected",
"version": "\u003e= 4.2.0, \u003c 4.2.9"
},
{
"status": "affected",
"version": "\u003e= 4.3.0, \u003c 4.3.3"
}
]
}
],
"source": "security-advisories@github.com"
}
],
"cveTags": [],
"descriptions": [
{
"lang": "en",
"value": "RabbitMQ is a messaging and streaming broker. From 4.2.0 until 4.2.9 and 4.3.3, AMQP 1.0 management exchange.declare skips alternate-exchange permission check. pUT /exchanges/:name (lines 192-240) checks only configure on the declared exchange and passes XArgs straight to rabbitexchange:declare/7. It omits the checkreadpermitted(X) + checkwritepermitted(AE) that rabbitchannel.erl:2540-2548 enforces for the alternate-exchange argument on the AMQP 0-9-1 path. The same file already implements the analogous DLX check for queues (lines 708-719), confirming this is a missing-check bug rather than intentional A user with only configure on exchange X can route X\u0027s unroutable messages into an alternate exchange they have no write permission AMQP 1.0 enabled (default in RabbitMQ 4.x) Attacker has configure on at least one exchange but lacks write on the target. This issue is fixed in versions 4.2.9 and 4.3.3."
}
],
"id": "CVE-2026-67241",
"lastModified": "2026-09-28T14:38:38.163",
"metrics": {
"cvssMetricV40": [
{
"cvssData": {
"Automatable": "NOT_DEFINED",
"Recovery": "NOT_DEFINED",
"Safety": "NOT_DEFINED",
"attackComplexity": "LOW",
"attackRequirements": "PRESENT",
"attackVector": "NETWORK",
"availabilityRequirement": "NOT_DEFINED",
"baseScore": 4.8,
"baseSeverity": "MEDIUM",
"confidentialityRequirement": "NOT_DEFINED",
"exploitMaturity": "NOT_DEFINED",
"integrityRequirement": "NOT_DEFINED",
"modifiedAttackComplexity": "NOT_DEFINED",
"modifiedAttackRequirements": "NOT_DEFINED",
"modifiedAttackVector": "NOT_DEFINED",
"modifiedPrivilegesRequired": "NOT_DEFINED",
"modifiedSubAvailabilityImpact": "NOT_DEFINED",
"modifiedSubConfidentialityImpact": "NOT_DEFINED",
"modifiedSubIntegrityImpact": "NOT_DEFINED",
"modifiedUserInteraction": "NOT_DEFINED",
"modifiedVulnAvailabilityImpact": "NOT_DEFINED",
"modifiedVulnConfidentialityImpact": "NOT_DEFINED",
"modifiedVulnIntegrityImpact": "NOT_DEFINED",
"privilegesRequired": "HIGH",
"providerUrgency": "NOT_DEFINED",
"subAvailabilityImpact": "NONE",
"subConfidentialityImpact": "LOW",
"subIntegrityImpact": "HIGH",
"userInteraction": "NONE",
"valueDensity": "NOT_DEFINED",
"vectorString": "CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:H/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:N/SC:L/SI:H/SA:N/E:X/CR:X/IR:X/AR:X/MAV:X/MAC:X/MAT:X/MPR:X/MUI:X/MVC:X/MVI:X/MVA:X/MSC:X/MSI:X/MSA:X/S:X/AU:X/R:X/V:X/RE:X/U:X",
"version": "4.0",
"vulnAvailabilityImpact": "NONE",
"vulnConfidentialityImpact": "NONE",
"vulnIntegrityImpact": "NONE",
"vulnerabilityResponseEffort": "NOT_DEFINED"
},
"source": "security-advisories@github.com",
"type": "Secondary"
}
]
},
"published": "2026-09-25T17:17:12.180",
"references": [
{
"source": "security-advisories@github.com",
"url": "https://github.com/rabbitmq/rabbitmq-server/commit/18eac8d547b4382bf830c621b20a35932dd1cfa5"
},
{
"source": "security-advisories@github.com",
"url": "https://github.com/rabbitmq/rabbitmq-server/commit/56005e7cebffc478ef397573de24aff1167e7cda"
},
{
"source": "security-advisories@github.com",
"url": "https://github.com/rabbitmq/rabbitmq-server/releases/tag/v4.2.9"
},
{
"source": "security-advisories@github.com",
"url": "https://github.com/rabbitmq/rabbitmq-server/releases/tag/v4.3.3"
},
{
"source": "security-advisories@github.com",
"url": "https://github.com/rabbitmq/rabbitmq-server/security/advisories/GHSA-rg2g-289m-xhhw"
}
],
"sourceIdentifier": "security-advisories@github.com",
"vulnStatus": "Undergoing Analysis",
"weaknesses": [
{
"description": [
{
"lang": "en",
"value": "CWE-862"
}
],
"source": "security-advisories@github.com",
"type": "Primary"
}
]
}
},
"redhat_vex": {
"aggregate_severity": "Moderate",
"current_release_date": "2026-09-26T17:55:41+00:00",
"cve": "CVE-2026-67241",
"id": "CVE-2026-67241",
"initial_release_date": "2026-09-25T16:12:14.689000+00:00",
"product_status:fixed": "3",
"product_status:known_affected": "8",
"source": "Red Hat CSAF VEX",
"status": "final",
"title": "rabbitmq-server: rabbitmq-server: Unauthorized message routing via missing alternate-exchange permission check",
"url": "https://security.access.redhat.com/data/csaf/v2/vex/2026/cve-2026-67241.json",
"version": "3"
}
}
}
Loading…
Loading…
Experimental. This forecast is provided for visualization only and may change without notice. Do not use it for operational decisions.
Forecast uses a logistic model when the trend is rising, or an exponential decay model when the trend is falling. Fitted via linearized least squares.
Sightings
| Author | Source | Type | Date | Other |
|---|
Nomenclature
- Seen: The vulnerability was mentioned, discussed, or observed by the user.
- Confirmed: The vulnerability has been validated from an analyst's perspective.
- Published Proof of Concept: A public proof of concept is available for this vulnerability.
- Exploited: The vulnerability was observed as exploited by the user who reported the sighting.
- Patched: The vulnerability was observed as successfully patched by the user who reported the sighting.
- Not exploited: The vulnerability was not observed as exploited by the user who reported the sighting.
- Not confirmed: The user expressed doubt about the validity of the vulnerability.
- Not patched: The vulnerability was not observed as successfully patched by the user who reported the sighting.
Loading…
Loading…
The MITRE ATT&CK techniques below are AI-generated suggestions, inferred from the description of the
vulnerability by the CIRCL/vulnerability-attack-technique-classification-roberta-base
model, served locally by ML-Gateway.
They have not been verified by an analyst and are provided for guidance only.
The approach is described in our paper Mapping CVEs to MITRE ATT&CK Techniques: A Curated Gold-Set Classifier and the Limits of LLM-Assisted Label Expansion.
Browse all ATT&CK techniques and the vulnerabilities related to each.
The approach is described in our paper Mapping CVEs to MITRE ATT&CK Techniques: A Curated Gold-Set Classifier and the Limits of LLM-Assisted Label Expansion.
Browse all ATT&CK techniques and the vulnerabilities related to each.
Loading…
Related by attack behaviour
Vulnerabilities whose description is nearest to this one in the vector space of the CIRCL/vulnerability-attack-technique-biencoder model. This is a similarity search over the bi-encoder space (plain cosine), not a classification, and it has no measured accuracy.
Loading…