CVE-2026-67219: RabbitMQ: Consistent-hash exchange unbounded weight
Noroxi assessment
Priority: Monitor (action score 24/100)
- 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: 0.30% (FIRST EPSS).
- Anyone who can reach it over the internet can trigger it. A low-privileged account is enough. No user action is required. No special conditions are required; it is repeatable.
- Fixed version: azl3 rabbitmq-server 3.13.7-9 on Azure Linux 3.0 3.13.7-10.
Low priority for now. Upgrade to azl3 rabbitmq-server 3.13.7-9 on Azure Linux 3.0 3.13.7-10 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
RabbitMQ is a messaging and streaming broker. Prior to versions 3.13.15, 4.0.20, 4.1.11, 4.2.6, and 4.3.0, add_binding/3 parses the routing key as an integer weight N and computes ring positions with lists:seq(NextN0, NextN0 + N - 1). validate_binding/2 only checks N >= 1 , no upper bound. The resulting list is stored in the exchange's Khepri record, replicated cluster-wide, and reloaded on restart. A user with write permission on a consistent-hash exchange and read on a queue can create a binding whose routing key (the hash-ring weight) is an arbitrarily large integer. The broker allocates a list of that many integers via lists:seq/2 and persists it to Khepri across all cluster nodes , a single binding with weight 100000000 allocates ~800 MB on every node and survives restarts. Preconditions include rabbitmq_consistent_hash_exchange plugin enabled write permission on a consistent-hash exchange + read on a queue (standard binding perms). This issue is fixed in versions 3.13.15, 4.0.20, 4.1.11, 4.2.6, and 4.3.0.
- Published
- Sep 23, 2026
- Updated
- Oct 19, 2026
- EPSS
- 0.3% · 23th percentile
- CWE
- CWE-770
Report tools
Action score
24
Monitor
Low priority for now.
- CVSS
- 24 / 40 · 6.0 / 10
- CISA KEV
- 0 / 30 · Not listed
- EPSS
- 0 / 30 · 0.3%
CISA SSVC decision
- Exploitation
- none
- Automatable
- no
- Technical impact
- partial
Vulnrichment: CISA's decision-tree inputs.
CNA vs NVD score
- NVD
- —
- CNA · GitHub_M
- 6.0
- NVD has not scored this yet; the score shown is the CNA’s.
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:L/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:H/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N
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.
| Vendor | Product | CPE |
|---|---|---|
| broadcom | rabbitmq server | cpe:2.3:a:broadcom:rabbitmq_server |
Affected versions
NVD version ranges (for catalog products). Add the product to your stack with a version and matching uses these.
- broadcom rabbitmq server3.13.0 and later · before 3.13.15
- broadcom rabbitmq server4.0.0 and later · before 4.0.20
- broadcom rabbitmq server4.1.0 and later · before 4.1.11
- broadcom rabbitmq server4.2.0 and later · before 4.2.6
Versions reported by the vendor
Affected version ranges reported by the assigning authority (GitHub_M). Independent of NVD's CPE analysis and usually ahead of it.
rabbitmq rabbitmq-server
- >= 3.13.0, < 3.13.15, >= 4.0.0, < 4.0.20, >= 4.1.0, < 4.1.11, >= 4.2.0, < 4.2.6affected
Package-level exposure
OSV and GitHub Advisory data: ecosystem, package and range. SBOM matching uses this table.
| Ecosystem | Package | Affected range | Fix |
|---|---|---|---|
| Debian:12 | rabbitmq-server | from 0 | — |
| Debian:14 | rabbitmq-server | before 4.3.0-2 | 4.3.0-2 |
| Red Hat:hummingbird:1 | rabbitmq-server4.3 | before 0:4.3.6-1.hum1 | 0:4.3.6-1.hum1 |
Same product
broadcom: all recordsOther highest-scoring records for the same primary product.
- CVE-2026-57216RabbitMQ: AMQP 1.0, AMQP 0-9-1, Stream Protocol loopback enforcement can lead to remote guest sessions due to listener-address loopback checks40Plan
- CVE-2026-57211RabbitMQ: UNC SSRF affecting the management UI on Windows40Plan
- CVE-2016-9877An issue was discovered in Pivotal RabbitMQ 3.x before 3.5.8 and 3.6.x before 3.6.6 and RabbitMQ for PCF 1.5.x before 1.5.20, 1.6.x before 139Monitor
Published before and after this one in the same product
- ← EarlierCVE-2026-66080Sep 23, 2026 · RabbitMQ: Super-stream partitions unbounded allocation23Monitor
- ← EarlierCVE-2026-67218Sep 23, 2026 · RabbitMQ: Super-stream HTTP creation skips configure-permission check8Monitor
- Later →CVE-2026-67220Sep 23, 2026 · RabbitMQ: JMS topic exchange erl_scan atom exhaustion24Monitor
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 |
|---|---|---|
| azl3 rabbitmq-server 3.13.7-9 on Azure Linux 3.0 | 3.13.7-10 · Release Notes | Microsoft (MSRC) |
| debian:rabbitmq-server | 4.3.0-2 · Debian:14 | Package registry (OSV) |
| red hat:rabbitmq-server4.3 | 0:4.3.6-1.hum1 · Red Hat:hummingbird:1 | 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.
- CVE-2026-660790 days apartRabbitMQ: Pre-auth AMQP 1.0 array32 zero-width element DoS32Monitor
- CVE-2026-5722075 days apartRabbitMQ: Stream listener does not enforce configured frame-size limit during authentication, permitting unauth'd mem-exhaust DoS30Monitor
- CVE-2026-672350 days apartRabbitMQ: AMQP 0-9-1 body assembly never validates accumulated size28Monitor
- CVE-2026-5721275 days apartRabbitMQ management HTTP API accepts request bodies larger than configured max_http_body_size28Monitor
- CVE-2026-672252 days apartRabbitMQ: Stream-protocol frame length never validated against frame_max25Monitor
- CVE-2026-672302 days apartRabbitMQ: Web-STOMP unbounded pre-auth accumulation25Monitor
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.
- No special conditions are required; it is repeatable.
If successful
- Confidentiality
- Integrity
- Availability
- Attack vector
- Network
- Attack complexity
- Low
- Privileges required
- Low
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- X
Weakness class (CWE)
CWE-770 · Allocation of Resources Without Limits or ThrottlingCVSS vector
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:L/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:H/SC:N/SI:N/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
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.
Attack patterns (CAPEC)
- FloodingCAPEC-125likelihood: High · Medium
- Excessive AllocationCAPEC-130likelihood: Medium · Medium
- XML Ping of the DeathCAPEC-147likelihood: Low · Medium
- Exponential Data ExpansionCAPEC-197likelihood: High · Medium
- Serialized Data Parameter BlowupCAPEC-229likelihood: High · High
- Serialized Data with Nested PayloadsCAPEC-230likelihood: Medium · High
- Oversized Serialized Data PayloadsCAPEC-231likelihood: Medium · High
- HTTP DoSCAPEC-469Low
ATT&CK techniques
- Network Denial of Service:Direct Network FloodT1498.001
- Network Denial of Service:Reflection AmplificationT1498.002
- Endpoint Denial of ServiceT1499
- Endpoint Denial of Service: OS Exhaustion FloodT1499.001
- Endpoint Denial of Service:Service Exhaustion FloodT1499.002
- Endpoint Denial of Service:Application Exhaustion FloodT1499.003
Change log
- Fix✗ → ✓
For records you follow, these changes also arrive as notifications. →
References
Show all references (2 more)Show less
Vendor advisories and official records. Exploit/PoC links are deliberately left out.