CVE-2026-9651
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 · uneditedCWE-732 Incorrect Permission Assignment for Critical Resource vulnerability that could cause unauthorized disclosure of password hashes and potential account compromise when an attacker with privileged local access reads improperly protected system files.
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 confidenceThis is a CWE-732 (Incorrect Permission Assignment for Critical Resource) vulnerability where system files containing password hashes have overly permissive access controls. An attacker with privileged local access can read these improperly protected files, exposing password hashes that could be cracked for account compromise.
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
- High
- Authentication
- X
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- X
CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:N/PR:H/UI:N/VC:H/VI:N/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:X/CR:X/IR:X/AR:X/MAV:X/MAC:X/MAT:X/MPR:X/MUI:X/MVC:X/MVI:X/MVA:X/MSC:X/MSI:X/MSA:X/S:X/AU:X/R:X/V:X/RE:X/U:X
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 password hash storage filesLocate the password hash file on your system. On Linux/Unix systems, this is typically /etc/shadow. On Windows systems, check for the SAM database at C:\Windows\System32\config\SAM and the SECURITY file in the same directory.Affected if The file exists and contains encrypted or hashed password data.
-
Check file permissions on the password hash fileRun 'ls -la /etc/shadow' on Linux/Unix or use icacls 'icacls C:\Windows\System32\config\SAM' on Windows to view current access control lists.Affected if Any user account other than root (Linux) or SYSTEM/Administrators (Windows) is granted read or write access to the password hash file.
-
Verify non-privileged user cannot read the fileCreate or use an existing non-admin user account and attempt to read the password hash file using that account (e.g., 'su - nonadminuser -c "cat /etc/shadow"' on Linux).Affected if The non-privileged user successfully reads the file contents containing password hashes.
-
Compare permissions against secure baselineOn Linux, verify /etc/shadow permissions are 000 or owner=root with mode 400/600 (readable only by root). On Windows, verify only SYSTEM and Administrator accounts appear in the ACL.Affected if Permissions allow any standard user or group (Users, Everyone, etc.) read access to the file.
-
Check for world-readable password database backupsSearch for any backup copies of password files (e.g., shadow.bak, SAM.db, /etc/passwd with + signs indicating world readability) using 'find / -name "*shadow*" -o -name "*passwd*"' with appropriate permissions.Affected if Backup or derivative files containing password hashes have broader permissions than the primary file.
Your environment is affected if password hash files are readable by any non-privileged, non-administrative user account.
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 file permissions on password hash files to only allow read access by privileged system accounts (e.g., root), removing all access for non-admin users and groups. Verify the fix by attempting to read the files as a non-privileged user.
- Consultation1.0 h
- Implementation2.0 h
- Testing1.0 h
- Review / QA1.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $1,424.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-9651 — 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-2026-9651 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