Hard-coded CredentialsWeakness · CWE-798

CVE-2026-45039

CRITICAL · 9.8 CVSS v3.1 Published 2026-05-28
Mitigation only
No fix yet — a mitigation exists. There is no fixed release. A documented workaround reduces exposure in the meantime.
See remediation →
100/100
Remediation priority · Urgent
Remotely reachable No privileges Zero-click

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 · unedited
RustFS is a distributed object storage system built in Rust. Prior to 1.0.0-beta.2, the internode RPC layer authenticates every request with an HMAC-SHA256 signature using a shared secret. The function that produces this secret, get_shared_secret() in crates/ecstore/src/rpc/http_auth.rs, falls back to the public, source-tree-embedded DEFAULT_SECRET_KEY = "rustfsadmin" when neither the RUSTFS_RPC_SECRET environment variable nor the global S3 secret key has been configured. This vulnerability is fixed in 1.0.0-beta.2.

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 confidence

The internode RPC layer in RustFS uses HMAC-SHA256 authentication with a shared secret. The get_shared_secret() function in crates/ecstore/src/rpc/http_auth.rs falls back to a hardcoded default secret key 'rustfsadmin' when neither RUSTFS_RPC_SECRET nor the global S3 secret key is configured. This allows unauthenticated attackers to authenticate to the RPC layer using the known default key.

MitigationConfigure the RUSTFS_RPC_SECRET environment variable or ensure the global S3 secret key is properly set on all nodes before deployment, and upgrade to version 1.0.0-beta.2 or later.

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
Network
Complexity
Low
Privileges
None
User interaction
None
Scope
Unchanged
Confidentiality
High
Integrity
High
Availability
High

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/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 checks

Work through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.

  1. Identify RustFS installation
    Check for RustFS binary, service, or process on the system (e.g., ps aux | grep rustfs, which rustfs, or check installed packages)
    Affected if RustFS is installed and running as a service
  2. Verify RUSTFS_RPC_SECRET environment variable
    Inspect environment variables for the running RustFS process (e.g., cat /proc/<pid>/environ | tr '\0' '\n' | grep RUSTFS_RPC_SECRET) or check shell environment (echo $RUSTFS_RPC_SECRET)
    Affected if RUSTFS_RPC_SECRET is not set or is empty
  3. Inspect RustFS configuration files
    Review RustFS configuration files (typically in /etc/rustfs/, ~/.config/rustfs/, or the application's config directory) for rpc_secret, secret_key, or authentication settings
    Affected if No explicit RPC secret is configured in any config file
  4. Check for hardcoded default secret in use
    Examine logs, configuration, or code for references to 'rustfsadmin' as the default credential, or attempt to correlate authentication behavior with the default secret
    Affected if The default secret 'rustfsadmin' is being used for RPC authentication
  5. Confirm internode RPC exposure
    Check network listeners or firewall rules to determine if the RustFS RPC port (typically 3000-4000 range or as configured) is exposed to untrusted networks
    Affected if Internode RPC layer is accessible from untrusted network segments

You are affected if RustFS is running with internode RPC enabled and the RUSTFS_RPC_SECRET environment variable is unset or empty, causing fallback to the default hardcoded secret 'rustfsadmin'.

Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.

Check your environment

Paste your version and any relevant configuration and it will be compared against the affected criteria above. Do not include secrets or credentials.

AI-assisted, checked against the advisory. Informational, not a guarantee.

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 · scoped
Mitigation available No clean upgrade yet — mitigate in the meantime
Mitigation

Configure the RUSTFS_RPC_SECRET environment variable or ensure the global S3 secret key is properly set on all nodes before deployment, and upgrade to version 1.0.0-beta.2 or later.

Recommended fix High confidence

1.0.0-beta.2

  1. Upgrade RustFS to version 1.0.0-beta.2 or later
  2. After upgrading, configure either the RUSTFS_RPC_SECRET environment variable or the global S3 secret key to ensure the hard-coded default is not used
Caveat This is a beta release; review release notes for any breaking changes before upgrading

Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.

Have this fixed Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation2.0 h
  • Implementation2.0 h
  • Testing3.0 h
  • Review / QA1.0 h
8.0 hours of engineering $1,390
Get help mitigating

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $2,224.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-45039 — 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 sources

Practitioner notes

Contributed

Peer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2026-45039 in production — separate from our analysis above.

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.

What this is

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.

What belongs here
  • 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