CVE-2026-10037
Official description Straight from the sourceThe vendor's or NVD's own wording, published unedited. Authoritative, but often terse — it says what broke, rarely what to do.
NVD · uneditedA sandbox escape vulnerability exists in the OpenJDK packages provided in Ubuntu. The .jar MIME handlers installed by these packages execute files marked as executable when the mailcap package is installed. A compromised or malicious sandboxed application with access to the OpenURI portal via xdg-desktop-portal-gtk can write a malicious .jar file to the host file system, set its executable bit, and trigger the handler to execute arbitrary code outside of the sandbox environment.
Technical summary Written by usOur analysis, written from the advisory, the CVSS vector and the affected-version data. It adds context the advisory leaves out, and never invents facts that are not in the source.
dbcve analysis · moderate confidenceA sandbox escape vulnerability in Ubuntu's OpenJDK packages allows a compromised sandboxed application with access to the xdg-desktop-portal-gtk OpenURI portal to write a malicious .jar file to the host filesystem, set its executable bit, and trigger the mailcap-configured .jar MIME handler to execute arbitrary code outside the sandbox.
Verify against the referenced sources before acting — the references below are authoritative for this CVE, this summary is not.
CVSS breakdown How the score is builtThe industry scoring standard. It rates how the flaw is reached, what it takes to exploit, and what an attacker gains — the score is derived from those, not the other way round.
From the vector- Attack vector
- Local
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- Low
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Changed
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H
Am I affected? How to checkSteps we derive from the advisory and the affected-version data, so you can decide whether this CVE reaches your setup. They are a guide, not a scan — your own configuration is the authority.
dbcve checksWork through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.
-
Confirm Ubuntu or Debian-based distributionRun: cat /etc/os-release | grep -E '^(ID|VERSION)='Affected if System is not Ubuntu or a derivative using OpenJDK packages from Ubuntu repositories
-
Identify installed OpenJDK packagesRun: dpkg -l | grep -E 'openjdk.*jdk' or dpkg -l | grep -E 'openjdk.*jre'Affected if OpenJDK packages from Ubuntu are installed (any version)
-
Verify mailcap package installationRun: dpkg -l mailcap or dpkg -s mailcapAffected if mailcap package is installed (status shows ii)
-
Check xdg-desktop-portal-gtk presenceRun: dpkg -l xdg-desktop-portal-gtk or which xdg-desktop-portal-gtkAffected if xdg-desktop-portal-gtk is installed on the system
-
Confirm OpenURI portal availabilityRun: flatpak list --system 2>/dev/null | grep -i portal; or check /usr/share/xdg-desktop-portal/portals/ for openuri.portalAffected if xdg-desktop-portal with OpenURI portal is accessible to sandboxed applications
A user is affected if running Ubuntu with OpenJDK installed, the mailcap package present, and xdg-desktop-portal-gtk with the OpenURI portal available to sandboxed applications.
Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.
Remediation Closing itWhat it takes to close this. Where a vendor fix exists we point at it; where none exists we say so plainly, and can build one. Effort estimates are scoped from the advisory, not from your codebase.
From vendor dataRestrict or disable the xdg-desktop-portal-gtk OpenURI portal in sandboxed environments, and modify mailcap configuration to prevent .jar MIME handlers from executing files marked as executable.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation6.0 h
- Testing4.0 h
- Review / QA2.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $4,544.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-10037 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.
References Go to the primary sourcePrimary sources — vendor advisories, patches and trackers. Where our summary and a reference disagree, the reference wins.
Primary sourcesPractitioner notes
ContributedPeer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2026-10037 in production — separate from our analysis above.
The advisory tells you what broke. It rarely tells you what actually worked. If you’ve dealt with this one, that detail is what the next engineer is searching for.
- The version that genuinely resolved it — not the one the vendor claimed
- A config change or rule that shut the vector down
- A gotcha in the upgrade path that cost you an afternoon
No notes yet
Be the first to add a field note for this CVE — a mitigation you’ve verified, a version caveat, or a link to a working fix. Sign in above to contribute.
A place for practitioners to share what actually worked: a mitigation you’ve tested, a configuration change, a version- or environment-specific caveat, or a link to a verified patch. The most useful notes rise to the top as peers upvote them, so the signal stays high.
- Verified mitigations, workarounds, and config changes
- Version or environment caveats, and links to real fixes
- No weaponised exploit code, or anything meant to cause harm
- No spam, self-promotion, credentials, or personal data