Your RSA-2048 keys break in 2030. Find every one of them before attackers do.
🐹
🐹 Go
Not in CISA KEV
HIGH severity

CVE-2026-35172 v3

HIGHFix: distribution/distribution@078b078

CVE-2026-35172 is a high-severity (CVSS 7.5) CWE-284 vulnerability in github.com/distribution/distribution/v3. A fix is available for github.com/distribution/distribution/v3 — see the affected versions and patch details below.

Distribution has stale blob access resurrection via repo-scoped redis descriptor cache invalidation

Also known asBIT-distribution-2026-35172GHSA-f2g3-hh2r-cwgcGO-2026-4942
Published
Apr 6, 2026
Updated
Sep 16, 2026
Affected
2 pkgs
Patched
1 / 2
Exploits
None indexed
Exploitation data as of Sep 23, 2026 · OSV.dev, NVD, FIRST.org (EPSS)

Exploitation Status

Proof-of-concept exploit code exists

  • CISA’s SSVC triage found public proof-of-concept exploit code for this CVE, though no confirmed active exploitation.
  • CISA assesses this as automatable — exploitation doesn’t require manual, per-target effort, which raises the odds of mass scanning and opportunistic attacks.

Exploitation and automatability from CISA’s SSVC triage for CVE-2026-35172.

EPSS Exploitation Probability

via FIRST.org ↗
0.5%probability of exploitation in next 30 days
Lower Risk0.00%
Lower risk than most CVEs39th percentile — riskier than 39% of all scored CVEsHighest risk

EPSS (Exploit Prediction Scoring System) is a daily probability model maintained by FIRST.org. It estimates the likelihood a CVE will be exploited in production environments within the next 30 days, derived from real-world threat intelligence signals.

How urgent is this, really

CVE-2026-35172 plotted by exploitation likelihood (EPSS) against impact (CVSS). The shaded corner — EPSS 50%+ and CVSS 7.0+ — is where this CVE doesn't sit, though severity or exploitability alone can still warrant action.

Where this sits among everything scored

Of 377,636 CVEs with a current EPSS score, this one falls in the < 10% band (highlighted). Real counts from FIRST.org, not a sample — log-scaled since the landscape is heavily right-skewed.

Real-World Exposure

2 pkgs affected
🐹github.com/distribution/distribution/v3🐹github.com/distribution/distribution

Real-time download stats are indexed for npm and PyPI packages. This vulnerability affects Go packages — download data is not available via public APIs for these ecosystems.

Description

summary:

distribution can restore read access in repo a after an explicit delete when storage.cache.blobdescriptor: redis and storage.delete.enabled: true are both enabled. the delete path clears the shared digest descriptor but leaves stale repo-scoped membership behind, so a later Stat or Get from repo b repopulates the shared descriptor and makes the deleted blob readable from repo a again.

Severity

HIGH

justification: this is a repo-local authorization bypass after explicit delete, with concrete confidentiality impact and no requirement for write access after the delete event. CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N (7.5). CWE-284.

affected version

details

the backend access model is repository-link based: once repo a deletes its blob link, later reads from repo a should continue returning ErrBlobUnknown even if the same digest remains linked in repo b.

the issue is the split invalidation path in the redis cache backend:

  1. linkedBlobStore.Delete calls blobAccessController.Clear during repository delete handling.
  2. cachedBlobStatter.Clear forwards that invalidation into the cache layer.
  3. repositoryScopedRedisBlobDescriptorService.Clear checks that the digest is a member of repo a, but then only calls upstream.Clear.
  4. upstream.Clear deletes the shared digest descriptor and does not remove the digest from the repository membership set for repo a.
  5. when repo b later stats or gets the same digest, the shared descriptor is recreated.
  6. repositoryScopedRedisBlobDescriptorService.Stat for repo a accepts the stale membership and now trusts the repopulated shared descriptor, restoring access in the repository that already deleted its link.

this creates a revocation gap at the repository boundary. the blob is briefly inaccessible from repo a right after delete, which confirms the backend link was removed, and then becomes accessible again only because stale redis membership survived while a peer repository repopulated the shared descriptor.

attack scenario

  1. an operator runs distribution with storage.cache.blobdescriptor: redis and storage.delete.enabled: true.
  2. the same digest exists in both repo a and repo b.
  3. the operator deletes the blob from repo a and expects repository-local access to be revoked.
  4. repo a correctly returns blob unknown immediately after the delete.
  5. an anonymous or unprivileged user requests the same digest from repo b, which still legitimately owns it and repopulates the shared descriptor.
  6. a later request for the digest from repo a succeeds again because stale repo-a membership was never revoked from redis.

PoC

attachment: poc.zip

the attached PoC is a deterministic integration harness using miniredis and the pinned distribution source tree.

steps to reproduce

canonical:

unzip -q -o poc.zip -d poc
cd poc
make canonical

expected output:

[CALLSITE_HIT]: repositoryScopedRedisBlobDescriptorService.Clear->upstream.Clear->repositoryScopedRedisBlobDescriptorService.Stat
[PROOF_MARKER]: repo_a_access_restored=true repo_a_delete_miss=true repo_b_peer_warm=true
[IMPACT_MARKER]: repo_a_post_delete_read=true confidentiality_boundary_broken=true

control:

unzip -q -o poc.zip -d poc
cd poc
make control

expected control output:

[CALLSITE_HIT]: repositoryScopedRedisBlobDescriptorService.Clear->repositoryScopedRedisBlobDescriptorService.Stat
[NC_MARKER]: repo_a_access_restored=false repo_b_peer_warm=true

expected vs actual

  • expected: after repo a deletes its blob link, later reads from repo a should keep returning blob unknown even if repo b still references the same digest and warms cache state.
  • actual: repo a first returns blob unknown, then repo b repopulates the shared descriptor, and repo a serves the deleted digest again through stale repo-scoped redis membership.

impact

the confirmed impact is repository-local confidentiality failure after explicit delete. an operator can remove sensitive content from repo a, observe revocation working immediately after the delete, and still have the same content become readable from repo a again as soon as repo b refreshes the shared descriptor for that digest.

this is not a claim about global blob deletion. the bounded claim is that repository-local revocation fails, which breaks the expectation that deleting a blob link from one repository prevents further reads from that repository.

remediation

the safest fix is to make redis invalidation revoke repo-scoped state together with the backend link deletion. in practice that means removing the digest from the repository membership set, deleting the repo-scoped descriptor hash, and keeping that cleanup atomic enough that peer-repository warming cannot restore access in the repository that already deleted its link.

poc.zip PR_DESCRIPTION.md attack_scenario.md

Affected Packages

2 total 1 fixed
EcosystemPackageVulnerable rangeFix
🐹Gogithub.com/distribution/distribution/v3all versions3.1.0go get github.com/distribution/distribution/v3@v3.1.0
🐹Gogithub.com/distribution/distributionall versionsNo fix

Detection & mitigation playbook

Open-source dependency
  1. Detect

    Scan your dependency tree (package-lock.json, pnpm-lock.yaml, requirements.txt, go.sum, etc.) for github.com/distribution/distribution/v3, including transitive dependencies — a direct dependency you never call can still pull in a vulnerable version.

  2. Fix

    Update github.com/distribution/distribution/v3 to 3.1.0 or later, then make sure no transitive (indirect) dependency still pins the vulnerable range — O3 confirms CVE-2026-35172 is resolved across your whole dependency graph.

  3. Workarounds

    If you can't upgrade right away: gate or disable the affected feature, validate untrusted input at the boundary, and avoid passing attacker-controlled data into the vulnerable path. O3's runtime protection blocks exploitation in production as an interim safeguard until the upgrade lands.

  4. How O3 protects you

    O3 Security's impact-aware SCA analyses which vulnerable code paths your application actually calls, so a match like CVE-2026-35172 can be triaged on real exposure rather than presence alone.

Tailored to CVE-2026-35172. Runtime protection reduces exposure until a permanent patch is applied and verified — it complements patching, it doesn't replace it.

Fixing This On Your OS

If you run this on a Linux distribution, patch through your package manager against the distro's own security advisory below — it tracks the exact backported fix for your release, which can ship on a different timeline (and sometimes a different severity) than the upstream project.

Red HatImportant
ProductFixed inAdvisory
Red Hat OpenShift Container Platform 4.12openshift4/ose-operator-lifecycle-manager:1781122773RHSA-2026:26529
Red Hat OpenShift Container Platform 4.13openshift4/ose-operator-lifecycle-manager:1781123052RHSA-2026:26543
Red Hat OpenShift Container Platform 4.14openshift4/ose-operator-lifecycle-manager:1781833795RHSA-2026:28893
Red Hat OpenShift Container Platform 4.15openshift4/ose-operator-lifecycle-manager-rhel9:1779915499RHSA-2026:23234
Red Hat OpenShift Container Platform 4.16openshift4/ose-operator-lifecycle-manager-rhel9:1780957268RHSA-2026:25045
Red Hat Openshift Data Foundation 4.22odf4/cephcsi-rhel9:1782932114RHSA-2026:37387

Frequently Asked Questions

## summary: distribution can restore read access in `repo a` after an explicit delete when `storage.cache.blobdescriptor: redis` and `storage.delete.enabled: true` are both enabled. the delete path clears the shared digest descriptor but leaves stale repo-scoped membership behind, so a later `Stat` or `Get` from `repo b` repopulates the shared descriptor and makes the deleted blob readable from `repo a` again. ## Severity HIGH justification: this is a repo-local authorization bypass after explicit delete, with concrete confidentiality impact and no requirement for write access after the del
O3 Security · Impact-Aware SCA

Is CVE-2026-35172 in your dependencies?

O3 Security finds CVE-2026-35172 across Go dependencies, including transitive ones, and its impact-aware SCA ranks findings by whether your code actually calls the vulnerable path.

CVE-2026-35172: v3 (High 7.5) | O3 Security