CVE-2026-102822

CVE-2026-102822 is a low-severity security vulnerability in russh (rust), affecting versions <= 0.63.0. It is fixed in 0.63.1.

Does this CVE actually affect you?

Kodem shows which CVEs are reachable and running in your applications, so you fix what's exploitable, not just what's listed.

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.

Runtime intelligence, not another scanner.

Summary

russh: negotiating a MAC-requiring block cipher (CTR/CBC) with mac=none causes a slice-index-out-of-range panic

SshBlockCipher implementations (AES-CBC, AES-CTR, 3DES-CBC, etc.) report needs_mac() == true, meaning they are documented/intended to always be paired with a separate integrity MAC. However, key-exchange negotiation only checks needs_mac() inside the fallback branch of MAC algorithm selection (used when no common MAC algorithm exists). If both peers' preferred MAC lists simply contain none and it is successfully negotiated through the normal selection path, nothing rejects pairing none with a cipher that requires a MAC. Once negotiated, a single crafted packet from either peer causes cipher::read() to shrink an already-allocated buffer below the number of bytes it is about to index, causing a Rust slice-index-out-of-range panic and killing that connection's task.

Details

In russh/src/cipher/mod.rs, read() for a block cipher:

  1. Reads packet_length_to_read_for_block_length() bytes up front (16 bytes for any SshBlockCipher) into buffer.buffer.
  2. Decrypts the first block to recover the plaintext packet-length field len.
  3. Computes buffer.len = len + cipher.tag_len().
  4. Calls buffer.buffer.resize(buffer.len + 4, 0).
  5. Immediately indexes buffer.buffer[16..] (via the constant used for the first block read) to continue decrypting/reading the rest of the packet.

When the negotiated MAC is none, tag_len() == 0. If the attacker (or a MITM holding the session key, or simply the accepting peer testing a hostile client) sends a packet whose decrypted length field is 0, then buffer.len = 0 and resize(0 + 4, 0) shrinks the buffer that was already grown to 16 bytes in step 1 down to 4 bytes. The subsequent slice operation buffer.buffer[16..] then panics with range start index 16 out of range for slice of length 4.

The file already defines a MINIMUM_PACKET_LEN constant, but it is only consulted on the write/padding side, never on the read path, so nothing prevents an incoming packet from declaring a length shorter than the bytes already buffered.

Negotiation gap: negotiation.rs's Select MAC-selection logic only special-cases needs_mac() when negotiation would otherwise fail (no common MAC), substituting none only if the cipher does not need one. It never re-validates the case where none is a common/successfully-negotiated MAC on both sides regardless of what the chosen cipher requires. So an application (or a malicious peer, since negotiation is attacker-influenced on one side) that includes none in its own preferred MAC list, while still allowing the default CTR/CBC cipher suite, ends up with an invalid, panic-inducing combination that the library itself should refuse.

PoC

  1. Configure one side's Preferred config to include mac::NONE in the MAC list (this is a supported, non-default configuration exposed by the crate's public Preferred API, used e.g. for legacy/interop compatibility), while leaving the default cipher list (which includes aes256-ctr/aes256-cbc) untouched.
  2. Complete a normal key exchange; negotiation lands on {cipher: aes*-ctr (or -cbc), mac: none} because none is present and preferred/common on both sides, and nothing during negotiation rejects this pairing.
  3. From the peer, send one transport packet whose decrypted packet-length field is 0 (trivial to construct once the session keys are known to that peer, or for the peer that legitimately owns the connection to simply hand-craft, e.g. a modified client for testing).
  4. cipher::read() on the receiving side panics: range start index 16 out of range for slice of length 4.
  5. Because each connection is handled in its own tokio::spawn'ed task (see the per-connection select! loop that calls into cipher::read()), the panic unwinds only that task by default, but it unconditionally terminates that SSH connection/session, a working, currently-unauthenticated, already-established connection is killed with no attacker interaction beyond the one crafted packet, and the check runs on every inbound packet including pre-auth ones.

Impact

Denial of service: a remote peer that can influence MAC preference negotiation (or a MITM in possession of the session key) can crash any individual SSH connection/session that ends up negotiating a block cipher together with mac=none, with a single crafted packet, pre-authentication. This does not affect the process as a whole (panic is scoped to that connection's task under panic=unwind), and does require a non-default configuration that permits none as a preferred MAC, hence Low severity.

CVE-2026-102822 has a CVSS score of 3.7 (Low). The vector is network-reachable, no privileges required, and no user interaction. A CVSS score reflects the worst-case severity of the vulnerability, not your specific exposure. Whether this affects your application depends on whether the vulnerable code is present and reachable in your environment. A fixed version is available (0.63.1); upgrading removes the vulnerable code path.

Affected versions

russh (<= 0.63.0)

Security releases

russh → 0.63.1 (rust)

Kodem intelligence

Severity tells you how bad this could be in the worst case. It does not tell you whether you are exposed. Exploitability and impact are functions of runtime truth: whether the vulnerable code is present, reachable, and actually executes in your application. A vulnerable package can sit in your dependency tree and never run.

Kodem, an Intelligent Application Security platform, uses runtime intelligence to reveal which vulnerabilities actually execute in production, so teams prioritize the ones that genuinely matter. Kodem's runtime-powered SCA identifies whether this CVE is reachable in your applications.

Already deployed Kodem?

See it in your environmentNew to Kodem? Get a demo →

Remediation advice

In the MAC-selection logic in negotiation.rs, reject (or force substitution of) mac::NONE whenever the negotiated cipher's needs_mac() is true, regardless of how none came to be selected, not only in the "no common MAC" fallback branch. Defensively, cipher::read() could also refuse to shrink a buffer below the number of bytes already consumed for the length-field block, returning a protocol error instead of resizing blindly.

For credit/changelog purposes, please use: Yazan Balawneh, Cystack.ps

Frequently Asked Questions

  1. What is CVE-2026-102822? CVE-2026-102822 is a low-severity security vulnerability in russh (rust), affecting versions <= 0.63.0. It is fixed in 0.63.1.
  2. How severe is CVE-2026-102822? CVE-2026-102822 has a CVSS score of 3.7 (Low). This score reflects the worst-case severity of the vulnerability, not your specific exposure. Whether it represents real risk in your environment depends on whether the vulnerable code is present and reachable.
  3. Which versions of russh are affected by CVE-2026-102822? russh (rust) versions <= 0.63.0 is affected.
  4. Is there a fix for CVE-2026-102822? Yes. CVE-2026-102822 is fixed in 0.63.1. Upgrade to this version or later.
  5. Is CVE-2026-102822 exploitable, and should I be worried? Whether CVE-2026-102822 is exploitable in your environment depends on whether the vulnerable code is present and reachable. A CVSS score is a worst-case rating; it does not account for your specific deployment, configuration, or usage patterns. Kodem, an Intelligent Application Security platform, uses runtime intelligence to show which vulnerabilities actually execute in production, so you can focus on the ones that represent real risk. Get a demo
  6. What actually determines whether CVE-2026-102822 is exploitable, and how bad it is? Exploitability and impact are not fixed properties of a CVE. They depend on runtime truth: whether the vulnerable code is present, reachable, and actually executes in your application. A high CVSS score on a dependency that never runs is not the same as real risk. Kodem, an Intelligent Application Security platform, uses runtime intelligence to reveal which vulnerabilities actually execute in production, so teams prioritize the ones that genuinely matter.
  7. How do I fix CVE-2026-102822? Upgrade russh to 0.63.1 or later.

Other vulnerabilities in russh

Stop the waste.
Protect your environment with Kodem.