CVE-2026-59247High· 7.6▾ TwilightInsufficient Verification of Data Authenticity vulnerability in Gleam allows an adversary in the middle to substitute forged Hex package contents during dependency resolution. During dependency resolution Gleam fetches package metadata …
▾ Twilight zone — High severity, or a signal on a lesser flaw
impact 41.8 · likelihood 0 · exploitation 0
Need a working PoC? Pro members can cast a request and our team develops one — it lands right here.
Stakeholder-Specific Vulnerability Categorization from CISA's ADP record at CVE.org: whether exploitation is observed, whether an attack can be automated, and how much of the system is at stake. The CVSS score shown above comes from the assigning CNA record, not NVD.
Exploit-prediction probability, daily snapshots since Sep 8.
Disclosure to exploitation, from the record and what we observed since indexing it.
Disclosed via NVD
Last analysed / modified upstream
0.1%
0.1% → 0.2%
Insufficient Verification of Data Authenticity vulnerability in Gleam allows an adversary in the middle to substitute forged Hex package contents during dependency resolution.
During dependency resolution Gleam fetches package metadata from the signature-verified Hex repository, which covers each release's dependency requirements and SHA-256 outer_checksum. After resolving versions, gleam_cli::dependencies::lookup_package makes a second request to the unsigned Hex API through gleam_core::hex::get_package_release and records the outer_checksum and dependency names from that JSON response into manifest.toml, instead of the values from the verified repository metadata. The Hex repository signature does not cover the API response.
An adversary in the middle who can intercept TLS with a certificate trusted by the Gleam process (for example a TLS-inspecting proxy using a CA in the operating system trust store or added through GLEAM_CACERTS_PATH), and who can modify both the API release response and the corresponding repository tarball, can supply a package archive with a matching forged checksum without the Hex repository signing key. Gleam verifies the forged tarball against the forged checksum, accepts it, and extracts it as a dependency source, resulting in loss of integrity of the downloaded package contents.
Only projects that resolve or update Hex dependencies are affected, which happens when the manifest is missing, a dependency is added or updated, or dependency requirements change. Builds that reuse an unchanged, known-good manifest.toml continue to verify tarballs against its pinned checksum. This issue affects gleam: from 0.18.0 before 1.18.0.
Refer to the linked advisories for vendor-supplied fixes and affected version ranges.
Connected by shared product, vendor, weakness, or advisory.
CVE-2025-31356NoneInsufficient verification of data authenticity for some Intel(R) Trust Domain Extensions (Intel(R) TDX) within Ring 0: Hypervisor may allow an information disclosure
CVE-2026-118377High· 7.5mews/pos through 2.0.0 Missing Hash Verification in 3D Pay and 3D Host Callbacks
CVE-2026-104381Medium· 6.0Fireware OS Missing Authentication in FireCluster State Sync Allows BOVPN Tunnel Denial of Service
CVE-2026-115408Medium· 5.5ML-KEM key-pair lookup can bind an unrelated or attacker-planted public key, exposing encapsulated shared secrets
CVE-2026-103359Medium· 5.3PayDunya WooCommerce Payment Gateway 1.1.6 - Unauthenticated Order Payment Completion via Webhook Forgery
CVE-2026-116608Medium· 5.4DAMO Academy VideoLLaMA2 Model Loading __init__.py load_pretrained_model integrity check