CVE-2026-32148
Published: 30 April 2026
Summary
CVE-2026-32148 is a high-severity Improper Validation of Integrity Check Value (CWE-354) vulnerability in Hex Hex. Its CVSS base score is 8.9 (High).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Compromise Software Dependencies and Development Tools (T1195.001); ranked at the 9.0th percentile by exploit likelihood (below the median); it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog; a public proof-of-concept is referenced.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2026-26404
Vulnerability details
Insufficient Verification of Data Authenticity vulnerability in hexpm hex (Hex.RemoteConverger module) allows dependency integrity bypass via unverified lockfile checksums. Hex stores checksums for dependencies in the mix.lock file to ensure reproducible and integrity-checked builds. However, Hex.RemoteConverger.verify_resolved/2 never executes checksum verification…
more
because the lock data returned by Hex.Utils.lock/1 uses string-based dependency names, while the verification logic compares against atom-based names. This type mismatch causes the verification code path to be silently skipped. Checksums are still validated when packages are initially downloaded from the registry, but mismatches between the lockfile and resolved dependencies are not detected. An attacker who can influence cached packages (e.g., via local cache poisoning or a compromised registry) can provide modified dependency contents that will be accepted without detection. The mix.lock file is silently rewritten with the checksum values from the registry, erasing evidence of tampering. This issue affects hex: from 0.16.0 before 2.4.2.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise TechniquesAI
Why these techniques?
Type mismatch bypasses lockfile checksum verification, directly enabling undetected modification of resolved dependencies (supply chain dependency compromise).
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Likely Mitigating Controls AI
Per-CVE control mapping for this CVE has not run yet; the list below is derived from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry.
Proper validation of integrity check values is required for reliable tamper detection, directly reducing undetected modification risks.
Requires use of proper integrity verification tools, reducing the chance an incorrect check value is accepted.
Requires proper validation of integrity mechanisms, directly mitigating flawed check-value handling.
Policies can require integrity verification of software prior to installation, reducing risks from unverified downloads.
Blocks installation of components lacking a valid signature, mitigating download or installation of code without integrity checks.
Acquisition and maintenance portions of the strategy drive requirements for integrity verification of downloaded or supplied code.
Mandating integrity control and approved-only changes during development prevents incorporation of code or components lacking integrity validation.
Supply chain protection requires integrity verification of acquired components, directly reducing insertion or tampering of malicious code during delivery.