CVE-2026-47242

ADVISORY - github

Summary

Summary

Two Net::IMAP commands, #id and #enable, do not validate their arguments. Arguments to either command could be used by an attacker to inject arbitrary IMAP commands.

Please note that passing untrusted inputs to these commands is usually inappropriate and expected to be uncommon.

Details

When Net::IMAP#id is called with a hash argument, although the ID field value strings are correctly quoted (escaping quoted specials), they were not validated to prohibit CRLF sequences.

While Net::IMAP#enable does process its arguments for aliases, it does not validate them as valid atoms (or as a list of valid atoms). The #to_s value is sent verbatim.

Impact

This is expected to impact very few users: use of untrusted user input for either command is expected to be very uncommon.

The documentation for #enable explicitly warns that using any arguments that are not in the explicitly supported list may result in undocumented behavior. Using arbitrary untrusted user input for #enable will always be inappropriate.

Although client ID field values will most commonly be static and hardcoded, dynamic input sources may be used. For example, client ID fields may be set by configuration or version numbers. Using untrusted user inputs for client ID fields is expected to be uncommon. But any untrusted inputs to client ID can trivially exploit this vulnerability.

Untrusted inputs to either command may include a CRLF sequence followed by a new IMAP command (like DELETE mailbox). Although this does not directly enable data exfiltration, it could be combined with other attack vectors or knowledge of the target system's attributes, e.g.: shared mail folders or the application's installed response handlers.

Mitigation

Update to a version of net-imap which validates #id and #enable arguments.

Untrusted inputs should never be used for #enable arguments.

If net-imap cannot be upgraded:

  • do not use untrusted inputs for client ID field values
  • or add validation that client ID field values must not contain any CR or LF bytes.

Common Weakness Enumeration (CWE)

ADVISORY - github

Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in a Command ('Command Injection')

Improper Neutralization of CRLF Sequences ('CRLF Injection')


GitHub

CREATED

UPDATED

EXPLOITABILITY SCORE

-

EXPLOITS FOUND
-
COMMON WEAKNESS ENUMERATION (CWE)

CVSS SCORE

5.8medium
PackageTypeOS NameOS VersionAffected RangesFix Versions
net-imapgem--<=0.5.140.5.15
net-imapgem-->=0.6.0,<=0.6.40.6.4.1

CVSS:4 Severity and metrics

The CVSS metrics represent different qualitative aspects of a vulnerability that impact the overall score, as defined by the CVSS Specification.

The vulnerable component is not bound to the network stack and the attacker's path is via read/write/execute capabilities. Either: The attacker exploits the vulnerability by accessing the target system locally (e.g., keyboard, console), or remotely (e.g., SSH); or the attacker relies on User Interaction by another person to perform actions required to exploit the vulnerability (e.g., using social engineering techniques to trick a legitimate user into opening a malicious document).

Specialized access conditions or extenuating circumstances do not exist. An attacker can expect repeatable success when attacking the vulnerable component.

The successful attack depends on the presence of specific deployment and execution conditions of the vulnerable system that enable the attack. These include: A race condition must be won to successfully exploit the vulnerability. The successfulness of the attack is conditioned on execution conditions that are not under full control of the attacker. The attack may need to be launched multiple times against a single target before being successful. Network injection. The attacker must inject themselves into the logical network path between the target and the resource requested by the victim (e.g. vulnerabilities requiring an on-path attacker).

The attacker is unauthenticated prior to attack, and therefore does not require any access to settings or files of the vulnerable system to carry out an attack.

Successful exploitation of this vulnerability requires limited interaction by the targeted user with the vulnerable system and the attacker's payload. These interactions would be considered involuntary and do not require that the user actively subvert protections built into the vulnerable system. Examples include: utilizing a website that has been modified to display malicious content when the page is rendered (most stored XSS or CSRF) running an application that calls a malicious binary that has been planted on the system using an application which generates traffic over an untrusted or compromised network (vulnerabilities requiring an on-path attacker).

There is no loss of confidentiality within the Vulnerable System.

There is no loss of confidentiality within the Subsequent System or all confidentiality impact is constrained to the Vulnerable System.

There is a total loss of integrity, or a complete loss of protection. For example, the attacker is able to modify any/all files protected by the Vulnerable System. Alternatively, only some files can be modified, but malicious modification would present a direct, serious consequence to the Vulnerable System.

There is no loss of integrity within the Subsequent System or all integrity impact is constrained to the Vulnerable System.

Performance is reduced or there are interruptions in resource availability. Even if repeated exploitation of the vulnerability is possible, the attacker does not have the ability to completely deny service to legitimate users. The resources in the Vulnerable System are either partially available all of the time, or fully available only some of the time, but overall there is no direct, serious consequence to the Vulnerable System.

There is no impact to availability within the Subsequent System or all availability impact is constrained to the Vulnerable System.

Chainguard

CREATED

UPDATED

ADVISORY ID

CGA-3p52-q9cm-66f5

EXPLOITABILITY SCORE

-

EXPLOITS FOUND
-
COMMON WEAKNESS ENUMERATION (CWE)-
RATING UNAVAILABLE FROM ADVISORY

minimos

CREATED

UPDATED

ADVISORY ID

MINI-5rrx-5qwr-wqvm

EXPLOITABILITY SCORE

-

EXPLOITS FOUND
-
COMMON WEAKNESS ENUMERATION (CWE)-
RATING UNAVAILABLE FROM ADVISORY

minimos

CREATED

UPDATED

ADVISORY ID

MINI-6r5v-vjhv-qgrg

EXPLOITABILITY SCORE

-

EXPLOITS FOUND
-
COMMON WEAKNESS ENUMERATION (CWE)-
RATING UNAVAILABLE FROM ADVISORY

minimos

CREATED

UPDATED

ADVISORY ID

MINI-fpqq-fpjx-cr84

EXPLOITABILITY SCORE

-

EXPLOITS FOUND
-
COMMON WEAKNESS ENUMERATION (CWE)-
RATING UNAVAILABLE FROM ADVISORY

minimos

CREATED

UPDATED

ADVISORY ID

MINI-m4mm-6g6w-q6hw

EXPLOITABILITY SCORE

-

EXPLOITS FOUND
-
COMMON WEAKNESS ENUMERATION (CWE)-
RATING UNAVAILABLE FROM ADVISORY

minimos

CREATED

UPDATED

ADVISORY ID

MINI-p5c7-gv53-jf2w

EXPLOITABILITY SCORE

-

EXPLOITS FOUND
-
COMMON WEAKNESS ENUMERATION (CWE)-
RATING UNAVAILABLE FROM ADVISORY

minimos

CREATED

UPDATED

ADVISORY ID

MINI-pcgg-wv5g-pfr2

EXPLOITABILITY SCORE

-

EXPLOITS FOUND
-
COMMON WEAKNESS ENUMERATION (CWE)-
RATING UNAVAILABLE FROM ADVISORY

minimos

CREATED

UPDATED

ADVISORY ID

MINI-qjhr-4qc2-qfpr

EXPLOITABILITY SCORE

-

EXPLOITS FOUND
-
COMMON WEAKNESS ENUMERATION (CWE)-
RATING UNAVAILABLE FROM ADVISORY

minimos

CREATED

UPDATED

ADVISORY ID

MINI-rh55-x2w5-88rc

EXPLOITABILITY SCORE

-

EXPLOITS FOUND
-
COMMON WEAKNESS ENUMERATION (CWE)-
RATING UNAVAILABLE FROM ADVISORY

minimos

CREATED

UPDATED

ADVISORY ID

MINI-vjc3-gxhx-7458

EXPLOITABILITY SCORE

-

EXPLOITS FOUND
-
COMMON WEAKNESS ENUMERATION (CWE)-
RATING UNAVAILABLE FROM ADVISORY

minimos

CREATED

UPDATED

ADVISORY ID

MINI-xhpx-xg48-q48c

EXPLOITABILITY SCORE

-

EXPLOITS FOUND
-
COMMON WEAKNESS ENUMERATION (CWE)-
RATING UNAVAILABLE FROM ADVISORY