CVE-2026-42812

CRITICALNVD 9.99.9
EchelonGraph scoreMEDIUM confidence

“—” beside the score: it is equal to NVD's CVSS score.

Score 9.9 from GitHub Security Advisory (severity: CRITICAL) published 2026-05-04. NVD baseline CVSS 9.9; sources differ by 0.0.

Triggered by: GitHub Security Advisory CVSS
Sources: EPSS, GitHub Security Advisory, NVD CVSS v3

Also known asEUVD-2026-27039 (ENISA EUVD) · GHSA-w76p-3cgp-qfcm (GitHub Security Advisories)Source: ENISA EUVD

9.9EG
EchelonGraph verdictPlan a fixRemediate within your standard update timelines (the SSVC decision on this page).
  • High severity, but no confirmed exploitation yet
CISA-KEV: Not listedEPSS PROB: 0.4%CVSS: 9.9Exploit: None knownExposed services: Not assessed

A fix is available — apply it.

In Apache Iceberg, the table's metadata files are control files: they tell readers which data files belong to the table and which table version to read.

write.metadata.path is an optional table property that tells Polaris where to write those metadata files. For a table already registered in a Polaris-managed catalog, changing only that property through an ALTER TABLE-style settings change (not a row-level INSERT, SELECT, UPDATE, or DELETE) bypasses the commit-time branch that is supposed to revalidate storage locations.

The full persisted / credential-vending variant requires the affected catalog to have polaris.config.allow.unstructured.table.location=true, with allowedLocations broad enough to include the attacker-chosen target.

allowedLocations is the admin-configured allowlist of storage paths that the catalog is allowed to use. Public project materials suggest that this flag is a real supported compatibility / layout mode, not just a contrived lab-only prerequisite.

In that configuration, a user who can change table settings can cause Apache Polaris itself to write new table metadata to an attacker-chosen reachable storage location before the intended location-validation branch runs.

If the later concrete-path validation also accepts that location, Polaris persists the resulting metadata path into stored table state. Later table-load and credential APIs can then return temporary cloud-storage credentials for the same location without revalidating it. In plain terms, Polaris can later hand out temporary storage access for the same attacker-chosen area.

That attacker-chosen area does not need to be limited to the poisoned table's own files. If it is a broader storage prefix, another table's prefix, or, depending on configuration or provider behavior, even a bucket/container root, the resulting disclosure or corruption scope can extend to any data and metadata Polaris can reach there.

The practical consequences are therefore similar to the staged-create credential-vending issue already discussed: data and metadata reachable in that storage scope can be exposed and, if write-capable credentials are later issued, modified, corrupted, or removed. Even before that later credential step, Polaris itself performs the metadata write to the unchecked location.

So the core issue is not only later credential vending.

The primary defect is that Polaris skips its intended location checks before performing a security- sensitive metadata write when only write.metadata.path changes.

When polaris.config.allow.unstructured.table.location=false, current code review suggests the later updateTableLike(...) validation usually rejects out-of-tree metadata locations before the unsafe path is persisted. That may reduce the persisted / credential-vending variant, but it does not prevent the underlying defect: Polaris still skips the intended pre-write location check when only write.metadata.path changes.

CVSS v3
9.9
EG Score
9.9CRITICALmedium confidence
EG Risk
45
EG Risk 45/100

EG Risk is EchelonGraph's 0–100 priority score. It fuses impact severity (EG Severity, the CVSS base score, never the KEV-floored or EPSS-lifted EG Score) with real-world exploitation and automatability, under weights EchelonGraph set by hand, so you can rank equal-severity CVEs and fix the most dangerous first. Higher = act sooner.

How it’s computed (value × EchelonGraph’s weight)
Severity99% × 45%
Impact severity (EG Severity): CVSS 9.9 of 10. Never the KEV-floored or EPSS-lifted EG Score.
Exploitation0.4% × 40%
FIRST EPSS: the 30-day exploitation probability when EchelonGraph scored this CVE.
Automatability0% × 15%
CISA's SSVC Automatable value: no (Vulnrichment).
SSVC (CISA's decision table, applied by EchelonGraph): Track at low or medium mission impact; Track* at high (mission-essential systems).
Exploitation none (CISA Vulnrichment) · Automatable no (CISA Vulnrichment) · Technical impact total (CISA Vulnrichment). All three are CISA's SSVC values (Vulnrichment). EchelonGraph applied CISA's decision table to them; CISA publishes SSVC inputs and the table, not a decision for each CVE.
Action: A fix is available. Apply it within your standard update timelines.
EPSS PROB
0.4%
EPSS %ILE
30th
KEV
Not listed

What the EG score is made of (scorer v4.0: the three questions the 0–10 score mixes, published apart · methodology)

The EG score (9.9): severity, escalated by confirmed exploitation. This CVE's 9.9 is its impact severity (EG Severity), not escalated.

EG Severity
9.9 CRITICALCVSS-B, impact only: no KEV listing, EPSS or EG-KEV tier raises it.GitHub Security Advisory CVSS
EG Likelihood
0.4% within 30 daysSource: FIRST EPSS (model v2026.06.15, score date 2026-11-12). FIRST's exploitation probability, not an EchelonGraph model.
Confirmed exploitation
None on record (CISA KEV, EG-KEV Tier 1)Reported apart from the likelihood: an observed fact, not a probability.
EG Priority
SSVC Track at medium mission impactTrack at low or medium mission impact; Track* at high (mission-essential systems).CISA BOD 26-04: 14 days if the affected system is publicly exposed; Fix on system upgrade if it is not.Each input and its source, and whom BOD 26-04 binds: the SSVC and BOD 26-04 blocks below.

SSVC (CISA's decision table, applied by EchelonGraph)Track at low or medium mission impact; Track* at high (mission-essential systems).

A fix is available. Apply it within your standard update timelines.

Exploitation none (CISA Vulnrichment) · Automatable no (CISA Vulnrichment) · Technical impact total (CISA Vulnrichment). All three are CISA's SSVC values (Vulnrichment). EchelonGraph applied CISA's decision table to them; CISA publishes SSVC inputs and the table, not a decision for each CVE. Mission impact is CISA's Mission & Well-being decision point, and only you can judge it. CISA's table makes it high when Mission Prevalence is Essential — the vulnerable component "directly provides capabilities that constitute at least one MEF for at least one entity" (MEF: mission essential function) — or when Public Well-Being Impact is Irreversible: "multiple fatalities are likely", the cyber-physical system "is likely lost or destroyed", "extreme or serious externalities" are imposed on other parties, or social systems such as elections or the financial grid "are destabilized and potentially collapse". CISA's decision table

BOD 26-04 (CISA's remediation timeline, Table 1)14 days if the affected system is publicly exposed; Fix on system upgrade if it is not.

The score's inputs: In CISA KEV no (CISA's KEV catalog) · Automatable no (CISA Vulnrichment) · Technical impact total (CISA Vulnrichment). Whether your system is publicly exposed is yours to answer. BOD 26-04 binds US Federal Civilian Executive Branch agencies; for anyone else it is CISA's published timeline, a reference rather than an obligation. The directive · how EchelonGraph applies it

Published

May 4, 2026

Last Modified

October 26, 2026

Advisory Details (2)

Auto-updated Nov 2, 2026
Patch available.
Web page

oss-security - CVE-2026-42812: Apache Polaris: No protection on `write.metadata.path`

http://www.openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2026/05/02/13

Vendor Advisories for CVE-2026-42812(1)

These vendors published their own advisory mentioning this CVE — often with vendor-specific remediation steps + affected product lists not in NVD.

Patch Availability(1)

Vendor / EcosystemFix (by version range) / PatchReleasedSource
mavenorg.apache.polaris:polaris-runtime-service @ 1.4.1 (fixes >= 0.9.0, < 1.4.1)—ghsa

Patches are aggregated from vendor advisories (Red Hat, Microsoft, Cisco, GitHub) and package ecosystems (OSV, GHSA). Multiple rows for the same upstream release have been deduplicated.

Affected Packages

(1 across 1 ecosystem)
Maven(1)
PackageVulnerable rangeFix by version rangeDependents
org.apache.polaris:polaris-runtime-service1.0.0-incubating ... 1.4.0 (6 versions)
  • 0.9.0 up to 1.4.1: fixed in 1.4.1
—

Weakness Classification(4)

MITRE Common Weakness Enumeration — the root-cause categories this CVE belongs to.

Data Freshness Timeline

(refreshed 14× in last 7d / 45× in last 30d)

Each row is a time one of our pipelines fetched, updated or re-scored this CVE. For example, "NVD update" means NVD published or revised its analysis for this CVE; "MITRE cvelistV5" means we ingested or refreshed its CVE.org record (CNA or CISA ADP). An arrow marks a change the record states ("CVSS v3 → 9.1"); EPSS and GHSA rows show the values recorded at that time, not what changed (EPSS values are rounded; hover one for the exact figures). "EchelonGraph re-scored" is our own recompute of this CVE's score, not an update from a source, and is not counted in the refreshes above. Most recent first.

Showing the most recent 100 of 250 rows on record for this CVE.

A repeat, a row identical to one the same pipeline wrote less than 10 seconds earlier, is not a separate refresh and is not counted. None are among the latest 100 rows. The 150 oldest rows on record are not shown and were not checked, so the counts can still include repeats.

  1. 2026-11-12 23:01 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  2. 2026-11-12 23:01 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-w76p-3cgp-qfcm · GitHub severity CRITICAL · GitHub CVSS 9.9
  3. 2026-11-12 16:33 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 30th percentile
  4. 2026-11-11 23:51 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  5. 2026-11-11 23:51 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-w76p-3cgp-qfcm · GitHub severity CRITICAL · GitHub CVSS 9.9
  6. 2026-11-11 16:39 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 30th percentile
  7. 2026-11-11 00:40 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  8. 2026-11-11 00:40 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-w76p-3cgp-qfcm · GitHub severity CRITICAL · GitHub CVSS 9.9
  9. 2026-11-10 16:44 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 30th percentile
  10. 2026-11-10 01:30 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  11. 2026-11-10 01:30 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-w76p-3cgp-qfcm · GitHub severity CRITICAL · GitHub CVSS 9.9
  12. 2026-11-09 16:35 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 30th percentile
  13. 2026-11-09 02:20 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  14. 2026-11-09 02:20 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-w76p-3cgp-qfcm · GitHub severity CRITICAL · GitHub CVSS 9.9
  15. 2026-11-08 16:39 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 30th percentile
  16. 2026-11-08 03:10 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  17. 2026-11-08 03:10 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-w76p-3cgp-qfcm · GitHub severity CRITICAL · GitHub CVSS 9.9
  18. 2026-11-07 16:39 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 30th percentile
  19. 2026-11-07 03:59 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  20. 2026-11-07 03:59 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-w76p-3cgp-qfcm · GitHub severity CRITICAL · GitHub CVSS 9.9
  21. 2026-11-06 16:38 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 30th percentile
  22. 2026-11-06 08:25 UTCOSV refresh
  23. 2026-11-06 04:49 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  24. 2026-11-06 04:49 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-w76p-3cgp-qfcm · GitHub severity CRITICAL · GitHub CVSS 9.9
  25. 2026-11-05 16:37 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 30th percentile
Show 75 more
  1. 2026-11-05 05:39 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  2. 2026-11-05 05:39 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-w76p-3cgp-qfcm · GitHub severity CRITICAL · GitHub CVSS 9.9
  3. 2026-11-04 16:35 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 30th percentile
  4. 2026-11-04 06:28 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  5. 2026-11-04 06:28 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-w76p-3cgp-qfcm · GitHub severity CRITICAL · GitHub CVSS 9.9
  6. 2026-11-03 16:48 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 30th percentile
  7. 2026-11-03 07:17 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  8. 2026-11-03 07:17 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-w76p-3cgp-qfcm · GitHub severity CRITICAL · GitHub CVSS 9.9
  9. 2026-11-02 16:44 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 30th percentile
  10. 2026-11-02 07:59 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  11. 2026-11-02 07:59 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-w76p-3cgp-qfcm · GitHub severity CRITICAL · GitHub CVSS 9.9
  12. 2026-11-01 16:34 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 30th percentile
  13. 2026-11-01 08:49 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-w76p-3cgp-qfcm · GitHub severity CRITICAL · GitHub CVSS 9.9
  14. 2026-11-01 07:50 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-w76p-3cgp-qfcm · GitHub severity CRITICAL · GitHub CVSS 9.9
  15. 2026-11-01 07:50 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  16. 2026-10-31 16:32 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 30th percentile
  17. 2026-10-31 09:38 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  18. 2026-10-30 16:34 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 30th percentile
  19. 2026-10-30 10:27 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  20. 2026-10-29 16:33 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 30th percentile
  21. 2026-10-29 11:17 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  22. 2026-10-28 16:32 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 30th percentile
  23. 2026-10-28 12:06 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  24. 2026-10-27 16:32 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 30th percentile
  25. 2026-10-26 19:26 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  26. 2026-10-26 16:31 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 30th percentile
  27. 2026-10-26 09:30 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  28. 2026-10-25 16:33 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 30th percentile
  29. 2026-10-25 14:29 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  30. 2026-10-25 10:20 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  31. 2026-10-24 16:33 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.6% · 47th percentile
  32. 2026-10-24 11:09 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  33. 2026-10-23 16:31 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.6% · 47th percentile
  34. 2026-10-23 11:54 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  35. 2026-10-22 16:34 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.6% · 47th percentile
  36. 2026-10-22 12:44 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  37. 2026-10-21 16:33 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.6% · 47th percentile
  38. 2026-10-21 13:32 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  39. 2026-10-20 16:33 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.6% · 47th percentile
  40. 2026-10-20 14:22 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  41. 2026-10-19 16:32 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.6% · 47th percentile
  42. 2026-10-19 13:23 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  43. 2026-10-18 16:32 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.6% · 47th percentile
  44. 2026-10-18 03:40 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  45. 2026-10-17 16:34 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.6% · 47th percentile
  46. 2026-10-17 13:46 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  47. 2026-10-16 16:42 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.6% · 47th percentile
  48. 2026-10-16 14:33 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  49. 2026-10-15 16:32 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.6% · 47th percentile
  50. 2026-10-15 15:10 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  51. 2026-10-14 16:33 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.6% · 46th percentile
  52. 2026-10-14 09:33 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  53. 2026-10-13 16:34 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.6% · 46th percentile
  54. 2026-10-13 07:09 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  55. 2026-10-12 16:34 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.6% · 46th percentile
  56. 2026-10-12 16:07 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  57. 2026-10-11 19:48 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  58. 2026-10-11 17:03 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  59. 2026-10-11 14:29 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  60. 2026-10-11 13:48 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.6% · 46th percentile
  61. 2026-10-10 20:00 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.6% · 46th percentile
  62. 2026-10-09 20:07 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.6% · 46th percentile
  63. 2026-10-08 17:12 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.6% · 46th percentile
  64. 2026-10-07 23:48 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.6% · 46th percentile
  65. 2026-10-06 15:17 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.6% · 46th percentile
  66. 2026-10-05 17:43 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.6% · 46th percentile
  67. 2026-10-04 23:22 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.6% · 46th percentile
  68. 2026-10-03 14:25 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.6% · 46th percentile
  69. 2026-10-01 19:50 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.6% · 46th percentile
  70. 2026-09-30 15:03 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.6% · 46th percentile
  71. 2026-09-30 10:47 UTCOSV refresh
  72. 2026-09-27 13:48 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.6% · 46th percentile
  73. 2026-09-26 15:58 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.6% · 46th percentile
  74. 2026-09-23 17:53 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 30th percentile
  75. 2026-09-20 20:15 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.4% · 30th percentile

Frequently asked(5)

What is CVE-2026-42812?
CVE-2026-42812 is a critical-severity vulnerability; its CVE record was published on May 4, 2026. In Apache Iceberg, the table's metadata files are control files: they tell readers which data files belong to the table and which table version to read. write.metadata.path is an optional table property that tells Polaris where to write those metadata files. For a table already registered in a…
When was the CVE record for CVE-2026-42812 published?
The CVE record for CVE-2026-42812 was published on May 4, 2026. That is the record's publication date; the vulnerability itself may have been made public earlier. EchelonGraph's copy of the record carries a last-modified date of October 26, 2026; the record at its source may have been updated since.
Is CVE-2026-42812 actively exploited?
CVE-2026-42812 is not currently on CISA's Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog. FIRST EPSS estimates a 0.4% probability of exploitation in the next 30 days (30th percentile of EPSS-scored CVEs).
What is the CVSS score of CVE-2026-42812?
CVE-2026-42812 has a CVSS v3 base score of 9.9 (NVD).
How do I remediate CVE-2026-42812?
A fix for CVE-2026-42812 is available: update to the fixed version the vendor names in its advisory. The vendor advisories EchelonGraph has for CVE-2026-42812 are linked in the Vendor Advisories panel on this page.

Dependency Blast Radius

See which npm, PyPI, Go, and Maven packages are affected by CVE-2026-42812

Explore →

Is Your Infrastructure Affected by CVE-2026-42812?

EchelonGraph automatically scans your cloud infrastructure and maps CVE exposure using blast radius analysis.