Vulnerability from bitnami_vulndb
Published
2026-09-02 14:37
Modified
2026-09-02 15:04
Summary
Ceph RGW SigV4 handler accepts unsigned x-amz-* headers on presigned requests, allowing privilege escalation
Details

Ceph is an open-source distributed storage platform providing object, block, and file storage. In versions prior to 20.2.4 and 19.2.6, the Ceph Object Gateway (RGW) SigV4 handler does not reject requests that carry x-amz- headers absent from the signed header set, allowing anyone holding a presigned URL to attach arbitrary unsigned x-amz- headers that RGW will honor. AWS S3 requires every x-amz-* header on a SigV4 request to be signed and rejects requests bearing additional unsigned headers, but RGW validates only the headers listed in X-Amz-SignedHeaders and ignores any extra ones, so they take effect without being covered by the signature. By adding such headers to a presigned PUT URL, an attacker can grant themselves more capabilities than the URL's signer intended and escalate their privileges. This issue is fixed in versions 20.2.4 and 19.2.6.


{
  "affected": [
    {
      "package": {
        "ecosystem": "Bitnami",
        "name": "ceph",
        "purl": "pkg:bitnami/ceph"
      },
      "ranges": [
        {
          "events": [
            {
              "introduced": "19.0.0"
            },
            {
              "fixed": "19.2.6"
            },
            {
              "introduced": "20.0.0"
            },
            {
              "fixed": "20.2.4"
            }
          ],
          "type": "SEMVER"
        }
      ],
      "severity": [
        {
          "score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N",
          "type": "CVSS_V3"
        }
      ]
    }
  ],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2026-54330"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cpes": [
      "cpe:2.3:a:linuxfoundation:ceph:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*"
    ],
    "severity": "High"
  },
  "details": "Ceph is an open-source distributed storage platform providing object, block, and file storage. In versions prior to 20.2.4 and 19.2.6, the Ceph Object Gateway (RGW) SigV4 handler does not reject requests that carry x-amz-* headers absent from the signed header set, allowing anyone holding a presigned URL to attach arbitrary unsigned x-amz-* headers that RGW will honor. AWS S3 requires every x-amz-* header on a SigV4 request to be signed and rejects requests bearing additional unsigned headers, but RGW validates only the headers listed in X-Amz-SignedHeaders and ignores any extra ones, so they take effect without being covered by the signature. By adding such headers to a presigned PUT URL, an attacker can grant themselves more capabilities than the URL\u0027s signer intended and escalate their privileges. This issue is fixed in versions 20.2.4 and 19.2.6.",
  "id": "BIT-ceph-2026-54330",
  "modified": "2026-09-02T15:04:30.450Z",
  "published": "2026-09-02T14:37:35.258Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/ceph/ceph/commit/5837aa8e60471128dbb672b0ff6f1b1feebe08a7"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/ceph/ceph/commit/5978c866d4a0812fbb024745c4f1e79aaecd6c6a"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/ceph/ceph/security/advisories/GHSA-rmjq-ffrm-j6vj"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-54330"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.6.2",
  "summary": "Ceph RGW SigV4 handler accepts unsigned x-amz-* headers on presigned requests, allowing privilege escalation"
}



Log in or create an account to share your comment.




Tags
Taxonomy of the tags.


Loading…

Loading…

Loading…

Forecast uses a logistic model when the trend is rising, or an exponential decay model when the trend is falling. Fitted via linearized least squares.

Sightings

Author Source Type Date Other

Nomenclature

  • Seen: The vulnerability was mentioned, discussed, or observed by the user.
  • Confirmed: The vulnerability has been validated from an analyst's perspective.
  • Published Proof of Concept: A public proof of concept is available for this vulnerability.
  • Exploited: The vulnerability was observed as exploited by the user who reported the sighting.
  • Patched: The vulnerability was observed as successfully patched by the user who reported the sighting.
  • Not exploited: The vulnerability was not observed as exploited by the user who reported the sighting.
  • Not confirmed: The user expressed doubt about the validity of the vulnerability.
  • Not patched: The vulnerability was not observed as successfully patched by the user who reported the sighting.

Loading…

Loading…

Loading…

Related by attack behaviour

Vulnerabilities whose description is nearest to this one in the vector space of the CIRCL/vulnerability-attack-technique-biencoder model. This is a similarity search over the bi-encoder space (plain cosine), not a classification, and it has no measured accuracy.


Loading…