CVE-2026-3605
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 · uneditedAn authenticated user with access to a kvv2 path through a policy containing a glob may be able to delete secrets they were not authorized to read or write, resulting in denial-of-service. This vulnerability did not allow a malicious user to delete secrets across namespaces, nor read any secret data. Fxed in Vault Community Edition 2.0.0 and Vault Enterprise 2.0.0, 1.21.5, 1.20.10, and 1.19.16.
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 · high confidenceIn HashiCorp Vault, an authenticated user with access to a KVv2 path via a policy containing glob patterns may be able to delete secrets they were not authorized to read or write, causing denial-of-service. The vulnerability exploits improper policy evaluation for glob-matched paths in the KVv2 secrets engine.
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>= 0.10.0, < 1.19.16>= 0.10.0, < 2.0.0>= 1.20.0, < 1.20.10>= 1.21.0, < 1.21.5CVSS 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
- Network
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- Low
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- None
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/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.
-
Check installed Vault versionRun `vault version` to retrieve the running Vault versionAffected if The version is >= 0.10.0 and < 1.19.16; or >= 1.20.0 and < 1.20.10; or >= 1.21.0 and < 1.21.5; or >= 2.0.0 (these latter two ranges indicate the user has patched versions)
-
Verify KVv2 secret engine is enabledRun `vault secrets list` and look for paths with type `kv` and options containing `version=2`Affected if Any KVv2 secret engine is mounted (the vulnerability exists in the KVv2 glob matching logic)
-
Identify policies with glob patterns on KVv2 pathsRun `vault policy list` to get policy names, then `vault policy read <policy>` for each and search for path entries containing `*` (wildcard) that target KVv2 mount paths (e.g., `secret/data/*` or `secret/*`)Affected if Any policy contains a glob pattern granting access to KVv2 secret paths (these policies may allow unauthorized delete operations)
-
Examine delete capabilities on glob-patterned KVv2 pathsFor each policy with glob KVv2 paths from step 3, review the capabilities array. Look for `delete` permission on paths like `secret/data/*` or `secret/*`Affected if A policy grants delete capability on a glob-patterned KVv2 path, indicating the vulnerability could be exploited to delete unauthorized secrets
A user is affected if their Vault version falls within the affected ranges AND they have KVv2 secret engines with policies containing glob patterns that grant delete capabilities on those paths.
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 · scoped1.19.161.20.101.21.5
Upgrade Vault to version 2.0.0 (Community or Enterprise), 1.21.5, 1.20.10, or 1.19.16 to patch this vulnerability. Review existing policies with glob patterns to ensure they follow least-privilege principles.
1.19.16+ / 1.20.10+ / 1.21.5+ / 2.0.0+ (minimum fixed version in your release line)
- 1. Identify the current Vault version using `vault version` or checking the version file
- 2. Determine the appropriate upgrade path based on your current version line: if on 1.19.x upgrade to 1.19.16+, if on 1.20.x upgrade to 1.20.10+, if on 1.21.x upgrade to 1.21.5+, or if on 0.10.x-1.18.x upgrade to 2.0.0 or later
- 3. Review Vault upgrade documentation at https://developer.hashicorp.com/vault/docs/upgrading
- 4. Create a backup of Vault data or take a snapshot before upgrading
- 5. Test the upgrade in a non-production environment first
- 6. Schedule a maintenance window as upgrade will require a restart
- 7. Upgrade Vault to the appropriate fixed version (1.19.16, 1.20.10, 1.21.5, or 2.0.0+)
- 8. Verify the upgrade was successful and Vault is operational
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- 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-2026-3605 — 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-2026-3605 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