Cyber Resilience

CVE-2026-28402

Nimiq Proof-Of-Stake ≤ 1.2.2

Published
27 February 2026
Modified
04 May 2026
Patch / advisory
CVSS Score v3.1 7.1
Click a component to see what it means
Raw vectorCVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:H
EPSS Score 0.0020 11th percentile
Risk Priority 52 floored blend · peak EPSS

Summary

CVE-2026-28402 is a high-severity Improper Validation of Integrity Check Value (CWE-354) vulnerability in Nimiq Nimiq Proof-Of-Stake. Its CVSS base score is 7.1 (High).

Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Supply Chain Compromise (T1195); ranked at the 11th percentile by exploit likelihood (below the median); it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog.

The strongest mitigations our analysis identified map to SC-13 (Cryptographic Protection) and SC-8 (Transmission Confidentiality and Integrity) — see the control section below for these in your framework.

Deeper analysis AI-assisted summary

Synthesised by an AI model from the NVD description and linked references — a reading aid, not an authoritative source.

CVE-2026-28402 affects nimiq/core-rs-albatross, a Rust implementation of the Nimiq Proof-of-Stake protocol based on the Albatross consensus algorithm, in versions prior to 1.2.2. The vulnerability arises in macro block proposal verification, where a proposer can submit a proposal with a `header.body_root` that does not match the hash of the actual macro body. The verification process checks the header but skips validating the binding between `body_root` and `hash(body)`, allowing the malformed proposal to pass initial checks. Subsequent code assumes this binding holds true, potentially triggering a panic and crash on validator nodes when processing the mismatch. This issue is classified under CWE-354 (Improper Validation of Integrity Check Value) with a CVSS v3.1 base score of 7.1 (AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:H).

Exploitation requires a malicious or compromised validator to be elected as proposer, granting low-privilege (PR:L) network access (AV:N) with low complexity (AC:L) and no user interaction (UI:N). The attacker publishes the tampered macro block proposal, which validators accept during proposal verification but fail to process correctly later, leading to panics and crashes. This results in a denial-of-service on affected validator nodes, with high availability impact (A:H) and low integrity impact (I:L), but no confidentiality loss (C:N). The scope remains unchanged (S:U), and impacts are limited to validator nodes only.

The patch, released in version 1.2.2, adds explicit verification of the `body_root == hash(body)` binding during proposal checks, as detailed in the GitHub security advisory (GHSA-7wh6-rmxx-ww47), pull request #3623, commit 6454c26d966858c5520f55739a30b94c17656c85, and release notes. No workarounds are available.

EU & UK References

Vulnerability Data

nimiq/core-rs-albatross is a Rust implementation of the Nimiq Proof-of-Stake protocol based on the Albatross consensus algorithm. Prior to version 1.2.2, a malicious or compromised validator that is elected as proposer can publish a macro block proposal where `header.body_root` does not…

more

match the actual macro body hash. The proposal can pass proposal verification because the macro proposal verification path validates the header but does not validate the binding `body_root == hash(body)`; later code expects this binding and may panic on mismatch, crashing validators. Note that the impact is only for validator nodes. The patch for this vulnerability is formally released as part of v1.2.2. The patch adds the corresponding body root verification in the proposal checks. No known workarounds are available.

CWE(s)

Related Threats

MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques

T1195 Supply Chain Compromise Initial Access
Adversaries may manipulate products or product delivery mechanisms prior to receipt by a final consumer for the purpose of data or system compromise.
T1195.001 Compromise Software Dependencies and Development Tools Initial Access
Adversaries may manipulate software dependencies and development tools prior to receipt by a final consumer for the purpose of data or system compromise.
T1195.002 Compromise Software Supply Chain Initial Access
Adversaries may manipulate application software prior to receipt by a final consumer for the purpose of data or system compromise.
T1565 Data Manipulation Impact
Adversaries may insert, delete, or manipulate data in order to influence external outcomes or hide activity, thus threatening the integrity of the data.
T1565.002 Transmitted Data Manipulation Impact
Adversaries may alter data en route to storage or other systems in order to manipulate external outcomes or hide activity, thus threatening the integrity of the data.
T1601 Modify System Image Defense Impairment
Adversaries may make changes to the operating system of embedded network devices to weaken defenses and provide new capabilities for themselves.
Derived from this CVE’s CWE(s) via the direct CWE→ATT&CK cross-walk.

CVEs Like This One

CVE-2026-34068Same product: Nimiq Nimiq Proof-Of-Stake
CVE-2026-34061Same product: Nimiq Nimiq Proof-Of-Stake
CVE-2026-33471Same product: Nimiq Nimiq Proof-Of-Stake
CVE-2026-34064Same product: Nimiq Nimiq Proof-Of-Stake
CVE-2026-34067Same product: Nimiq Nimiq Proof-Of-Stake
CVE-2026-34069Same product: Nimiq Nimiq Proof-Of-Stake
CVE-2026-34066Same product: Nimiq Nimiq Proof-Of-Stake
CVE-2026-33184Same product: Nimiq Nimiq Proof-Of-Stake
CVE-2026-34065Same product: Nimiq Nimiq Proof-Of-Stake
CVE-2026-32605Same product: Nimiq Nimiq Proof-Of-Stake

Affected Assets

nimiq
nimiq proof-of-stake
≤ 1.2.2

Mitigating Controls

Control response

Prevent
Stop it (NIST 800-53)

Detect
Catch it (NIST detect / respond)

Harden
Shrink the surface (DISA STIG)
  • 10 hardening rules · 4 OS baselines
Validate
Prove the fix (OWASP ASVS)
  • V10.4.12

Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI

Requires integrity verification tools that detect unauthorized changes when checksum validation is missing or flawed.

Mandates cryptographic mechanisms that include integrity protection, preventing improper checksum validation.

Requires protection of transmitted information integrity, directly mandating correct validation of integrity checks.

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.

PR.DS-01 mostly match
prevents

Requires cryptographic hashes and signatures that directly enforce integrity-check validation for data at rest.

PR.DS-02 mostly match
prevents

Requires cryptographic hashes and signatures that directly enforce integrity-check validation for data in transit.

ID.RA-09 partial match
prevents

Mandates pre-acquisition integrity assessment, addressing only the initial portion of the weakness lifecycle.

RC.RP-03 partial match
prevents

Requires verification of backup integrity, covering validation only within recovery scenarios.

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.

prevents

Cryptographic controls mandate integrity mechanisms whose correct validation directly prevents CWE-354.

prevents

Secure coding standards require proper implementation and validation of checksums or MACs.

finds

Security testing can detect missing integrity validation but does not itself implement the control.

prevents

Application security requirements include integrity checks on messages and data, mitigating improper validation.

none

Network security policies may require integrity protection on transit data, indirectly addressing the weakness.

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` (authoritative 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. prevents CWE-354
  • 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. prevents CWE-354
Oracle Linux 9 (1 rule)
  • V-271523 OL 9 must check the GPG signature of locally installed software packages before installation. prevents CWE-354
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. prevents CWE-354
  • 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. prevents CWE-354
RHEL 8 (2 rules)
  • 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. prevents CWE-354
  • V-230265 RHEL 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. prevents CWE-354

References