389-ds-base: 389-ds-base: non-constant-time comparison in pbkdf2-sha256 password verification
Products / packages Red Hat Directory Server 11 · Red Hat Directory Server 12 · Red Hat Directory Server 13 · 5 more
Published
Severity and exploitation
KEV coverage does not rule out exploitation.
Assessment vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:NSeverity
low3.7CVSS measures technical severity, not the likelihood of an attack.
Known exploitation
Not listed in the checked CISA KEV catalog
Absence from CISA KEV does not rule out attacks.
Public exploit
Not established by this record
Missing evidence does not mean no public exploit exists.
Remediation
Source guidance available
Review the recorded instructions. Guidance may be a workaround rather than a fixed version.
What this means
A flaw in 389 Directory Server's PBKDF2-SHA256 password verification uses a non-constant-time comparison, potentially allowing a remote attacker to infer partial hash information through timing measurements. The affected products include Red Hat Directory Server 11, 12, and 13, and Red Hat Enterprise Linux 7, 8, 9, and 10. Practical exploitation is extremely difficult due to computational overhead.
Summarized by @cf/meta/llama-3.3-70b-instruct-fp8-fast. Verify details against the original sources.Attack conditions
No attack-condition excerpt has been identified here. Review the full source description and references for authentication, network access, and configuration requirements.
Review supporting sources →Affected versions
Check the exact model, release, and any platform requirements against your installation.
Red Hat · redhat
Red Hat Directory Server 11
0 ranges
Red Hat · redhat
Red Hat Directory Server 11
Compare with this publisher’s ranges. This does not inspect your installation.
Other versions: affected
Product identifiers (CPE)
cpe:/a:redhat:directory_server:11Red Hat · redhat
Red Hat Directory Server 12
0 ranges
Red Hat · redhat
Red Hat Directory Server 12
Compare with this publisher’s ranges. This does not inspect your installation.
Other versions: affected
Product identifiers (CPE)
cpe:/a:redhat:directory_server:12Red Hat · redhat
Red Hat Directory Server 13
0 ranges
Red Hat · redhat
Red Hat Directory Server 13
Compare with this publisher’s ranges. This does not inspect your installation.
Other versions: affected
Product identifiers (CPE)
cpe:/a:redhat:directory_server:13Red Hat · redhat
Red Hat Enterprise Linux 10
0 ranges
Red Hat · redhat
Red Hat Enterprise Linux 10
Compare with this publisher’s ranges. This does not inspect your installation.
Other versions: affected
Product identifiers (CPE)
cpe:/a:redhat:enterprise_linux:10Red Hat · redhat
Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6
0 ranges
Red Hat · redhat
Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6
Compare with this publisher’s ranges. This does not inspect your installation.
Other versions: unaffected
Product identifiers (CPE)
cpe:/o:redhat:rhel_els:6Red Hat · redhat
Red Hat Enterprise Linux 7
0 ranges
Red Hat · redhat
Red Hat Enterprise Linux 7
Compare with this publisher’s ranges. This does not inspect your installation.
Other versions: affected
Product identifiers (CPE)
cpe:/o:redhat:rhel_els:7Red Hat · redhat
Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8
0 ranges
Red Hat · redhat
Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8
Compare with this publisher’s ranges. This does not inspect your installation.
Other versions: affected
Product identifiers (CPE)
cpe:/a:redhat:enterprise_linux:8Red Hat · redhat
Red Hat Enterprise Linux 9
0 ranges
Red Hat · redhat
Red Hat Enterprise Linux 9
Compare with this publisher’s ranges. This does not inspect your installation.
Other versions: affected
Product identifiers (CPE)
cpe:/a:redhat:enterprise_linux:9What to do
Compare your installed product and version with the affected versions above. A matching product name alone does not confirm exposure.
If possible, configure 389 Directory Server to use an alternative password storage scheme (e.g., SSHA512 or GOST-Yescrypt) which uses constant-time comparison.
cve.new guidance unless attributed to a publisher. This page does not inspect your installation.
Public exploit evidence
No public exploit reference is identified in the imported evidence. This is not a claim that no exploit exists.
Original source description
Read the full publisher description
A flaw was found in 389 Directory Server. The PBKDF2-SHA256 password verification function uses standard memcmp() for comparing password hashes instead of a constant-time comparison function. A remote attacker could potentially use timing measurements of LDAP bind attempts to infer partial hash information, though practical exploitation is extremely difficult due to PBKDF2 computational overhead.
References
2 sourcesInside the record
Evidence available
Describes the evidence in this view, not whether the product is safe.
Original records
CVE-2026-15041View the latest unmodified CVE JSON from the official source. It may be newer than this imported page.
cve.new JSON →Underlying weaknesses
The source’s classification of what caused the vulnerability.
Contributing organizations · 2
Assigning organization
Additional data publisher
Timeline
All times UTCAdvisory published
Publication date supplied by the source.
Source updated
Latest modification date supplied by the source.
Last imported by cve.new
Latest catalog import, not the date we first saw this advisory.
What changed
Follow changesLarge field values are marked as truncated previews. Original source snapshots remain retained.