CVE-2026-44604
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 command injection vulnerability was discovered in the `rpmuncompress` utility of RPM. When extracting certain archive formats (ZIP, 7z, GEM) to a specified destination directory, the tool inserts the archive's top-level folder name into a shell command without properly sanitizing it. A specially crafted archive containing shell metacharacters in its folder name can execute arbitrary commands as the user running the extraction.
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 confidenceThe rpmuncompress utility in RPM contains a command injection vulnerability when extracting ZIP, 7z, or GEM archives to a specified destination. The tool constructs a shell command using the archive's top-level folder name without sanitizing shell metacharacters, allowing arbitrary command execution via specially crafted archive filenames.
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
- High
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- Required
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:N/UI:R/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.
-
Locate the rpmuncompress utilityRun 'which rpmuncompress' or 'rpm -ql rpm | grep rpmuncompress' to find if the utility is installedAffected if rpmuncompress is not found on the system, meaning the vulnerability does not apply
-
Identify the installed RPM versionRun 'rpm --version' or 'rpm -q rpm' to retrieve the RPM package version numberAffected if The installed version falls within an unpatched version range and matches the vulnerable version timeline
-
Verify if ZIP/7z/GEM extraction to custom destinations is usedSearch shell history, log files, or automation scripts for commands like 'rpmuncompress -d <dir> <archive>' involving .zip, .7z, or .gem filesAffected if Extraction of ZIP, 7z, or GEM archives to user-specified directories has been performed with untrusted archives
-
Inspect archive handling behaviorReview any recent ZIP, 7z, or GEM archives processed by rpmuncompress and check if their top-level folder names contain shell metacharacters such as $, `, ;, |, or >Affected if Archive filenames used with rpmuncompress contain unsanitized shell metacharacters in the top-level folder structure
A user is affected if rpmuncompress is present, the RPM version is unpatched, and ZIP/7z/GEM archives have been extracted to specified destinations using potentially untrusted archives.
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 dataUpgrade to the patched version of RPM when available. As a workaround, avoid extracting untrusted archives using rpmuncompress with destination directories, or validate archive contents before extraction.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing8.0 h
- Review / QA4.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $6,656.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-44604 — 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-2026-44604 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