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

GHSA-798h-hpph-m24j

HIGH

GHSA-798h-hpph-m24j is a high-severity (CVSS 7.8) OS Command Injection vulnerability in linuxfabrik-lib. O3 Security confirms whether GHSA-798h-hpph-m24j is actually reachable in your code before you act, and blocks exploitation at runtime until you patch.

Linuxfabrik Monitoring Plugins have local privilege escalation using embedded command

Also known asCVE-2026-55426PYSEC-2026-2594
Published
Jul 6, 2026
Updated
Jul 13, 2026
Affected
1 pkg
Patched
1 / 1
Exploits
None indexed
Exploitation data as of Sep 14, 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.
  • A successful exploit gives an attacker total control of the affected component, not partial access.

Exploitation and automatability from CISA’s SSVC triage for GHSA-798h-hpph-m24j.

EPSS Exploitation Probability

via FIRST.org ↗
0.2%probability of exploitation in next 30 days
Lower Risk0.00%
Lower risk than most CVEs10th percentile — riskier than 10% of all scored CVEsHighest risk
0.00%0.23%0.46%0.70%0.2%0.2%Sep 26Sep 26

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

GHSA-798h-hpph-m24j 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 372,613 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

1 pkg affected
🐍linuxfabrik-lib

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

Description

Summary

When a check plugin places user provided input inside a command which is passed to shell_exec, an attacker can abuse this to run arbitrary commands. This is mainly dangerous for plugins which are listed in the sudoers file, because this allows an attacker controlling the nagios user to get root privileges.

Details

An example for this is the restic-check plugin, where the --repo argument is placed inside the command argument of shell_exec. As an example, an attacker could use the --repo argument |touch /root/nagios-was-here|. The full restic command is assembled to the string restic --json --repo=|touch /root/nagios-was-here| --password-file= check before it is passed to shell_exec. shell_exec then splits the command up in three parts at the | boundaries and executes the parts separately, which also executes the embedded command touch /root/nagios-was-here.

PoC

This PoC shows how the nagios user can use this to create a file inside /root.

nagios@test-vm:/$ sudo /usr/lib64/nagios/plugins/restic-check --repo '|touch /root/nagios-was-here|'

Impact

The vulnerability is a local privilege escalation.

Fix

Switch from | to an array

Remove the | split functionality. Instead, modify shell_exec to accept either a string or an array of strings. If an array is provided, the commands are chained together like they currently are when using |. If a string is provided, no split should be performed. You could also introduce a separate function like shell_exec_with_user_input() which implements this such that the current shell_exec function can stay like it is.

This leaves the problem that an attacker can still specify arbitrary arguments inside a command. An example for this would be to use the --repo argument sftp://example.com --cache-dir /tmp, which would lead to the execution of: restic --json --repo=sftp://example.com --cache-dir /tmp --password-file=None check. Please note that this example should mainly highlight the problem in general. To prevent the problem, there is either escaping or again array-syntax. Escaping would use shlex.quote to place the user provided argument inside quotes and which also escapes everything which needs to be escaped. Using array syntax would mean providing the full command as an array like ['restic', '--json', '--repo', 'sftp://example.com']. The array can then be given as-is to Popen. With this method, the proposed shell_exec_with_user_input would accept an array of array of strings.

Patches

The fix follows the array-syntax approach proposed above:

  • linuxfabrik-lib 5.0.0: lib.shell.shell_exec() requires the command as a list of arguments (argv) and always runs with shell=False. The | split functionality, command strings and the shell= parameter have been removed, so user-provided input can no longer break out of a command. lib.shell.safe_cli_value() additionally guards positional arguments (such as an ssh destination or a ping target) against option injection, and lib.ssh builds argument lists as well.
  • Linuxfabrik Monitoring Plugins: all plugins assemble their external commands as argv lists (commit 23bb570f4). Contained in every release after v5.2.0.

Affected Packages

1 total 1 fixed
EcosystemPackageVulnerable rangeFix
🐍PyPIlinuxfabrik-liball versions5.0.0

Detection & mitigation playbook

Open-source dependency
  1. Detect

    Scan your dependency tree (package-lock.json, pnpm-lock.yaml, requirements.txt, go.sum, etc.) for linuxfabrik-lib. O3's reachability analysis confirms whether the vulnerable code path is actually invoked in your application, so you act on real exposure instead of every transitive match.

  2. Fix

    Update linuxfabrik-lib to 5.0.0 or later, then make sure no transitive (indirect) dependency still pins the vulnerable range — O3 confirms GHSA-798h-hpph-m24j 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 pinpoints whether GHSA-798h-hpph-m24j is reachable in your code and exactly where to fix it, then blocks exploitation in production at runtime until the patched version is deployed.

Tailored to GHSA-798h-hpph-m24j. Runtime protection reduces exposure until a permanent patch is applied and verified — it complements patching, it doesn't replace it.

Frequently Asked Questions

### Summary When a check plugin places user provided input inside a command which is passed to `shell_exec`, an attacker can abuse this to run arbitrary commands. This is mainly dangerous for plugins which are listed in the sudoers file, because this allows an attacker controlling the nagios user to get root privileges. ### Details An example for this is the `restic-check` plugin, where the `--repo` argument is placed inside the command argument of `shell_exec`. As an example, an attacker could use the `--repo` argument `|touch /root/nagios-was-here|`. The full restic command is assembled to
O3 Security · Impact-Aware SCA

Is GHSA-798h-hpph-m24j in your dependencies?

O3 detects GHSA-798h-hpph-m24j across PyPI dependencies and uses function-level reachability to confirm whether the vulnerable code path is actually reachable — not just present. No false positives.

GHSA-798h-hpph-m24j: linuxfabrik (High 7.8) | O3 Security