In Enigmail below 2.1, an attacker in possession of PGP encrypted emails can wrap them as sub-parts within a crafted multipart email.
Noroxi assessment
Priority: Monitor (action score 26/100)
- The sources we track (CISA KEV, Exploit-DB, Metasploit, Nuclei, GitHub) show no public exploit code or exploitation in the wild.
- Probability of exploitation in the next 30 days: 1% (FIRST EPSS); higher than 63.1% of all records.
- Anyone who can reach it over the internet can trigger it. No account or password is required. A user must open a link or visit a page. No special conditions are required; it is repeatable.
- Fixed version: enigmail (Debian:11) 2:2.1.3+ds1-1.
Low priority for now. Upgrade to enigmail (Debian:11) 2:2.1.3+ds1-1 or later.
Generated automatically from the record's data: CVSS (NVD and CNA), CISA KEV and SSVC, FIRST EPSS, exploit sources, fixed versions. How we calculate it
Primary sources: NVD · CVE.org · FIRST EPSS
In Enigmail below 2.1, an attacker in possession of PGP encrypted emails can wrap them as sub-parts within a crafted multipart email. The encrypted part(s) can further be hidden using HTML/CSS or ASCII newline characters. This modified multipart email can be re-sent by the attacker to the intended receiver. If the receiver replies to this (benign looking) email, he unknowingly leaks the plaintext of the encrypted message part(s) back to the attacker. This attack variant bypasses protection mechanisms implemented after the "EFAIL" attacks.
- Published
- Aug 5, 2019
- Updated
- Jun 16, 2026
- EPSS
- 1.0% · 63th percentile
- CWE
- CWE-319
Report tools
Action score
26
Monitor
Low priority for now.
- CVSS
- 26 / 40 · 6.5 / 10
- CISA KEV
- 0 / 30 · Not listed
- EPSS
- 0 / 30 · 1.0%
Get told when this record changes
- Not in KEV: no record of exploitation in the wild
- No public exploit code on record
- A fix has been released
If any of these changes, we'll tell you in the daily email digest.
Running WordPress? Scan your site free with WP Lens
Noroxi analysis
What does it mean in your environment?
The assessment above is generated automatically from the record's data; it doesn't know your environment. Our team verifies on your systems whether this vulnerability is actually exploitable and which mitigation is enough.
We use this product, ask for helpAffected systems
Is your version affected?
Pick the product and type the version you run. It's compared with this record's version ranges in your browser; the version isn't sent anywhere.
| Vendor | Product | CPE |
|---|---|---|
| enigmail | enigmail | cpe:2.3:a:enigmail:enigmail |
| fedoraproject | fedora | cpe:2.3:o:fedoraproject:fedora |
Check your site's encryption
This vulnerability is about certificate validation or weak cryptography. The free SSL checker tests your certificate, enabled TLS versions and weak ciphers.
Run the SSL checkAffected versions
NVD version ranges (for catalog products). Add the product to your stack with a version and matching uses these.
- enigmail enigmailbefore 2.1
- fedoraproject fedora30
- fedoraproject fedora31
- fedoraproject fedora32
Package-level exposure
OSV and GitHub Advisory data: ecosystem, package and range. SBOM matching uses this table.
| Ecosystem | Package | Affected range | Fix |
|---|---|---|---|
| Debian:11 | enigmail | before 2:2.1.3+ds1-1 | 2:2.1.3+ds1-1 |
Same product
enigmail: all recordsOther highest-scoring records for the same primary product.
- CVE-2006-5877The enigmail extension before 0.94.2 does not properly handle large, encrypted file e-mail attachments, which allows remote attackers to cau32Monitor
- CVE-2018-12019The signature verification routine in Enigmail before 2.0.7 interprets user ids as status/control messages and does not correctly keep track31Monitor
- CVE-2017-17848An issue was discovered in Enigmail before 1.9.9.31Monitor
Published before and after this one in the same product
- ← EarlierCVE-2017-17847Dec 27, 2017 · An issue was discovered in Enigmail before 1.9.9.30Monitor
- ← EarlierCVE-2018-15586Feb 11, 2019 · Enigmail before 2.0.6 is prone to to OpenPGP signatures being spoofed for arbitrary messages using a PGP/INLINE signature wrapped within a s26Monitor
- ← EarlierCVE-2019-12269May 21, 2019 · Enigmail before 2.0.11 allows PGP signature spoofing: for an inline PGP message, an attacker can cause the product to display a "correctly s30Monitor
Remediation
Which version to upgrade to
Fix versions compiled from the vendor, package registries and Microsoft. Verify the vendor's note before upgrading.
| Product / package | Fixed version | Source |
|---|---|---|
| debian:enigmail | 2:2.1.3+ds1-1 · Debian:11 | Package registry (OSV) |
Exploit status
No known public exploit
No public exploit has been observed yet. That doesn't mean you're safe, only that the bar is a little higher.
Research context
For pentesters and researchers: attack profile, score disagreement, timeline, patch commits, credits, variant and chain candidates, bug bounty scope. All derived from existing data; no exploit code.
Timeline
From publication to today: proof of concept, Metasploit module, CISA KEV and fix record. Dates are as reported by the sources.
No dated events beyond publication.
FIRST EPSS daily score; only changes of 0.01 or more are recorded (step chart).
Patch and commit links
Commit, PR and diff links among the references. A starting point for patch-diffing and variant hunting; fixes, not exploits.
No commit or PR link among the references.
Credits
All researchersFinders, reporters and analysts named in the CNA record. Click a name for that researcher’s other records.
No credits in the CNA record.
Variant candidates
Same product, same weakness class, within 18 months. If the patch missed the root cause, the sibling bug is here.
No nightly-computed relations.
Chain candidates
An authentication bypass and a privilege-requiring bug in the same product, published close together: combined they may become an unauthenticated path.
—
Bug bounty scope
No known public program.
Source: bounty-targets-data (public HackerOne, Bugcrowd, Intigriti, YesWeHack listings).
Technical details
Attack conditions
- Anyone who can reach it over the internet can trigger it.
- No account or password is required.
- A user must open a link or visit a page.
- No special conditions are required; it is repeatable.
If successful
- Confidentiality
- high · data can be read
- Integrity
- none
- Availability
- none
- Attack vector
- Network
- Attack complexity
- Low
- Privileges required
- None
- User interaction
- Required
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality impact
- High
- Integrity impact
- None
- Availability impact
- None
Weakness class (CWE)
CWE-319 · Cleartext Transmission of Sensitive InformationCVSS vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N
nvd-primary
Attack context
MITRE CAPEC attack patterns and ATT&CK techniques for this weakness class (CWE). A starting point for detection rules and threat hunting.
Attack patterns (CAPEC)
ATT&CK techniques
Change log
- Fix✗ → ✓
For records you follow, these changes also arrive as notifications. →
References
Show all references (3 more)Show less
Vendor advisories and official records. Exploit/PoC links are deliberately left out.