CVE-2026-44073: seteuid failure ignored in auth modules
Noroxi assessment
Priority: Monitor (action score 20/100)
- 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: 0.27% (FIRST EPSS).
- Anyone who can reach it over the internet can trigger it. A low-privileged account is enough. No user action is required. Special conditions such as timing or configuration are required.
- Fixed version: netatalk (Debian:14) 4.5.0~ds-1.
Low priority for now. Upgrade to netatalk (Debian:14) 4.5.0~ds-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
Authentication modules in Netatalk 1.5.0 through 4.4.2 fail to check the return value of seteuid(), which may allow a remote authenticated attacker to retain elevated privileges under error conditions.
- Published
- May 21, 2026
- Updated
- Jul 23, 2026
- EPSS
- 0.2% · 20th percentile
- CWE
- CWE-273
Report tools
Action score
20
Monitor
Low priority for now.
- CVSS
- 20 / 40 · 5.0 / 10
- CISA KEV
- 0 / 30 · Not listed
- EPSS
- 0 / 30 · 0.2%
CISA SSVC decision
- Exploitation
- none
- Automatable
- no
- Technical impact
- partial
Vulnrichment: CISA's decision-tree inputs.
CNA vs NVD score
- NVD
- —
- CNA · securin
- 4.0
- NVD has not scored this yet; the score shown is the CNA’s.
The score given by the assigning authority versus NVD’s independent score. A gap means the severity is contested.
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.
—
Versions reported by the vendor
Affected version ranges reported by the assigning authority (securin). Independent of NVD's CPE analysis and usually ahead of it.
Netatalk Netatalk
- 4.5.0not affected
- 1.5.0 and later · up to and including 4.4.2affected · semver
Package-level exposure
OSV and GitHub Advisory data: ecosystem, package and range. SBOM matching uses this table.
| Ecosystem | Package | Affected range | Fix |
|---|---|---|---|
| Debian:13 | netatalk | from 0 | — |
| Debian:14 | netatalk | before 4.5.0~ds-1 | 4.5.0~ds-1 |
Same product
netatalk: all recordsOther highest-scoring records for the same primary product.
- CVE-2018-1160Netatalk before 3.1.12 is vulnerable to an out of bounds write in dsi_opensess.c.65This week
- CVE-2022-43634This vulnerability allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code on affected installations of Netatalk.45Plan
- CVE-2022-23121This vulnerability allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code on affected installations of Netatalk.42Plan
Published before and after this one in the same product
- ← EarlierCVE-2026-44070May 21, 2026 · Unbounded realloc in charset conversion12Monitor
- ← EarlierCVE-2026-44072May 21, 2026 · system() after failed chdir()12Monitor
- Later →CVE-2026-44076May 21, 2026 · Shell injection via volume path26Monitor
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:netatalk | 4.5.0~ds-1 · Debian:14 | 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.
No history yet (it accumulates with the daily EPSS job).
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.
- Arjun BasnetSecurinfinder
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.
- A low-privileged account is enough.
- No user action is required.
- Special conditions such as timing or configuration are required.
If successful
- Confidentiality
- low · data can be read
- Integrity
- low · data or configuration can be modified
- Availability
- low · the service can be disrupted
- Attack vector
- Network
- Attack complexity
- High
- Privileges required
- Low
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality impact
- Low
- Integrity impact
- Low
- Availability impact
- Low
Weakness class (CWE)
CWE-273 · Improper Check for Dropped PrivilegesCVSS vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L
nvd-secondary
Attack context
MITRE CAPEC attack patterns and ATT&CK techniques for this weakness class (CWE). A starting point for detection rules and threat hunting.
MITRE has no CAPEC/ATT&CK mapping for this CWE.
Change log
- Fix✗ → ✓
For records you follow, these changes also arrive as notifications. →
References
Vendor advisories and official records. Exploit/PoC links are deliberately left out.