CVE-2026-108699
Raw vector
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:L/VI:H/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:X/CR:X/IR:X/AR:X/MAV:X/MAC:X/MAT:X/MPR:X/MUI:X/MVC:X/MVI:X/MVA:X/MSC:X/MSI:X/MSA:X/S:X/AU:X/R:X/V:X/RE:X/U:XCVSS and EPSS are reproduced from their sources (NVD, FIRST EPSS). Risk Priority is our own derived reading, not an NVD score.
Summary
CVE-2026-108699 is a high-severity Improper Verification of Cryptographic Signature (CWE-347) vulnerability in Hackmd (inferred from references). Its CVSS base score is 8.3 (High).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Junk Data (T1001.001); ranked at the 3th percentile by exploit likelihood (below the median); it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog; a public proof-of-concept is referenced.
This vulnerability is AI-related — categorised as AI Agent Protocols and Integrations; in the Protocol-Specific Risks risk domain.
The strongest mitigations our analysis identified map to SC-13 (Cryptographic Protection) and SC-23 (Session Authenticity) — see the control section below for these in your framework.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2026-96999
Vulnerability Data
hyper-mcp through 0.8.3 contains an improper signature verification vulnerability that allows attackers to load malicious WebAssembly plugins because cosign_verify_args() accepts any signer identity and OIDC issuer by default. Attackers controlling a plugin image reference can sign a malicious image with…
more
a free Sigstore keyless certificate to execute plugins with configured host, filesystem, and environment capabilities.
- CWE(s)
AI Security AnalysisAI
- AI Category
- AI Agent Protocols and Integrations
- Risk Domain
- Protocol-Specific Risks
- OWASP Top 10 for LLMs 2025
- None mapped
- Classification Reason
- Matched keywords: mcp
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
- 14 hardening rules · 5 OS baselines
—
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Requiring cryptographic protection mechanisms forces correct signature verification to be implemented for data protection.
Protecting session authenticity requires correct verification of cryptographic signatures or equivalent mechanisms.
Mandating integrity verification tools directly requires proper cryptographic signature checking to detect unauthorized changes.
Mitigating Controls (NIST CSF 2.0) AI
Derived directly from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry via our AI-authored CWE→CSF cross-walk (authority under review) — links open the control.
Requires assessing authenticity and integrity of acquired assets, which commonly relies on signature verification but is limited to pre-acquisition.
Digital signatures are explicitly cited to protect integrity of data-at-rest, so proper verification directly mitigates the weakness.
Digital signatures are explicitly cited to protect integrity of data-in-transit, so proper verification directly mitigates the weakness.
Secure SDLC practices include code signing and signature verification requirements, addressing the weakness during development.
Mitigating Controls (ISO/IEC 27001:2022 Annex A) AI
Derived directly from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry via our AI-authored CWE→ISO cross-walk (authority under review) — links open the control.
Hardening callouts derived
Configuration rules from DISA STIG baselines that bear on weaknesses of the type cited by this CVE. Each rule is shown with the relationship its mapping actually records, against the CWE it was authored against. Derived via CVE→CWE over `controls_xwalks` (higher-evidence rows only; rows rated `none` are excluded).
Oracle Linux 8 (2 rules)
- V-248574 YUM must be configured to prevent the installation of patches, service packs, device drivers, or OL 8 system components that have not been digitally signed using a certificate that is recognized and approved by the organization. blocks CWE-347
- V-248575 OL 8 must prevent the installation of software, patches, service packs, device drivers, or operating system components of local packages without verification they have been digitally signed using a certificate that is issued by a Certificate Authority (CA) that is recognized and approved by the organization. blocks CWE-347
Oracle Linux 9 (2 rules)
- V-271525 OL 9 must have GPG signature verification enabled for all software repositories. blocks CWE-347
- V-271523 OL 9 must check the GPG signature of locally installed software packages before installation. blocks CWE-347
RHEL 7 (2 rules)
- V-204447 The Red Hat Enterprise Linux operating system must prevent the installation of software, patches, service packs, device drivers, or operating system components from a repository without verification they have been digitally signed using a certificate that is issued by a Certificate Authority (CA) that is recognized and approved by the organization. blocks CWE-347
- V-204448 The Red Hat Enterprise Linux operating system must prevent the installation of software, patches, service packs, device drivers, or operating system components of local packages without verification they have been digitally signed using a certificate that is issued by a Certificate Authority (CA) that is recognized and approved by the organization. blocks CWE-347
RHEL 8 (1 rule)
- V-230264 RHEL 8 must prevent the installation of software, patches, service packs, device drivers, or operating system components from a repository without verification they have been digitally signed using a certificate that is issued by a Certificate Authority (CA) that is recognized and approved by the organization. blocks CWE-347
RHEL 9 (1 rule)
- V-257822 RHEL 9 must have GPG signature verification enabled for all software repositories. blocks CWE-347