CVE-2026-21423
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 · uneditedDell PowerScale OneFS, versions prior to 9.10.1.6 and versions 9.11.0.0 through 9.12.0.1, contains an incorrect default permissions vulnerability. A high privileged attacker with local access could potentially exploit this vulnerability, leading to code execution, denial of service, elevation of privileges, and information disclosure.
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 confidenceDell PowerScale OneFS contains incorrect default file/system permissions that allow a high-privileged local attacker to potentially escalate privileges, execute arbitrary code, cause denial of service, or access sensitive information. The vulnerability stems from overly permissive default settings on the storage system.
Verify against the referenced sources before acting — the references below are authoritative for this CVE, this summary is not.
Affected products & versions What the vendor confirmedThe version ranges the vendor confirmed as vulnerable. If your version sits inside a range here, treat yourself as exposed until you have upgraded.
NVD · CPE data< 9.10.1.6>= 9.11.0.0, < 9.13.0.0CVSS 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
- High
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:U/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.
-
Identify installed PowerScale OneFS versionRun 'isi version' or 'isi --version' from the OneFS CLI to retrieve the current firmware versionAffected if The version is less than 9.10.1.6 OR falls between 9.11.0.0 and 9.12.0.1 inclusive (or less than 9.13.0.0 for the 9.11+ branch) indicating the system is in the affected version range
-
Verify default file permissions on system directoriesInspect default permissions on critical directories such as /etc, /var, and /home using 'ls -ld /etc /var /home' to identify if world-readable or group-writable permissions exist unexpectedlyAffected if Any system directories display permissions beyond the expected restrictive defaults (such as 755 or more open) indicating overly permissive settings
-
Check for world-writable system filesSearch for files with world-writable permissions (permissions containing 'w' for 'other') in system directories using 'find / -perm -002 -type f 2>/dev/null' to locate incorrectly configured filesAffected if Any system-critical files are found with world-writable permissions, which could allow unauthorized modification
-
Review default ACL or umask settingsCheck the system's default umask value via 'umask' command and review any custom ACL configurations that may govern default file creation permissionsAffected if The umask is set to a value that results in overly permissive file creation (such as 000 or 002) or non-standard ACLs that grant broader access than intended
A system is affected if it runs a OneFS version in the vulnerable range AND exhibits default permissions that are more open than the secure baseline (world-readable/writable files or overly permissive default ACLs).
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.
dbcve · scoped9.10.1.69.13.0.0
Apply the vendor patch (version 9.10.1.6 or later for older branches, or the appropriate fix for 9.11.0.0-9.12.0.1) to remediate the incorrect default permissions configuration.
OneFS 9.13.0.0 or later
- 1. Identify the current PowerScale OneFS version by running `isi get` or checking the cluster management interface
- 2. Schedule a maintenance window for the upgrade (this is a firmware/software upgrade requiring downtime
- 3. Back up all critical data and cluster configuration
- 4. Download the fixed OneFS version (9.13.0.0 or later) from the Dell Support portal at support.dell.com
- 5. Follow Dell PowerScale OneFS upgrade documentation to apply the update
- 6. Verify the upgrade was successful by checking the OneFS version post-upgrade
- 7. Confirm the vulnerability is resolved
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation4.0 h
- Testing3.0 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 $3,088.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-21423 — 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-2026-21423 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