CVE-2026-108126 — temporal-proxy payload decryption is not bound to the request namespace
temporal-proxy 0.2.0 through 0.8.0 does not bind encrypted payloads to the namespace they were encrypted for. When payload encryption is enabled, the proxy chooses the decryption key by an identifier stored in the payload rather than by the namespace of the request, and nothing in the ciphertext records that namespace. A caller whom the proxy authorizes only for namespace B, and who has obtained an encrypted payload from namespace A, can therefore have the proxy decrypt it. In 0.8.0, the caller can submit the payload to the codec server's /decode endpoint. In every affected version, a caller who can also write to namespace B on the Temporal server directly can place the payload there and read it back through the proxy. This holds whether namespaces share the default key or each has its own, because a single proxy holds every key it is configured with. The issue does not give the attacker encrypted payloads they could not already obtain, and does not allow encrypted payloads to be modified.
Who exploits it and how urgent it is
A 0–100 score combining confirmed exploitation, ransomware and APT use, public exploits, EPSS and severity.
How the score was calculated
- Technical severity (medium)+3
The score orders the patch queue; it does not replace your asset context (internet exposure, criticality, compensating controls).
Triage
Is it exploited, how likely is exploitation, what does it touch, and how severe do the sources call it.
Remediation
Fixes and mitigations documented by the sources — linked to the original advisory.
No fix documented by the sources we poll. That does not mean none exists: check the vendor advisory.
First 24 hours
Ordered from the record’s own fields — exposure first, because you cannot patch what you have not found. A rule-generated starting point.
- Identify exposed assets running the affected vendor/product/version combinations (Temporal Technologies, Inc. Temporal-proxy).
- No fix documented in the sources: reduce exposure and monitor the vendor advisory.
- Search available logs for exploit probes matching the vulnerability class (access control), errors and authentication anomalies.
Affected scope
Vendor, product and versions as the sources word them.
| Vendor | Product | Versions | Status | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Temporal Technologies, Inc. | Temporal-proxy | ≥ 0.2.0 and < 0.9.0 | Vulnerable | CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP |
Attack characteristics
The CVSS vector, decoded. It describes the attack, not your exposure to it.
Every base score collected
Sources score independently and may disagree; each row says who scored it and under which version.
| Score | Version | Severity | Expl. | Impact | Scored by |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 6.0 | CVSS 4.0 | Medium | — | — | security@temporal.io via NIST National Vulnerability Database |
| 6.0 | CVSS 4.0 | Medium | — | — | Temporal via CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP |
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:L/UI:N/VC:H/VI:N/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:X (score shown at the top: security@temporal.io) Weakness MITRE
Weakness class according to MITRE’s CWE catalog.
CWE-639 · Authorization Bypass Through User-Controlled Key (IDOR)
Detection
Read off the CVSS vector and the weakness class. Starting points, not tested rules.
- Prioritize edge telemetry for the network-reachable component (proxy, WAF, IDS/IPS).
- Audit administrative actions and access to resources outside each user’s normal pattern.
Timeline
What happened to this CVE, newest first.
- 2026
- Affected products added · temporal technologies, inc./temporal-proxy
- Record published
- CVSS changed · 6.0
- Source status changed · → Received
- Record created in this database
- CVE published
Source activity
Repeated readings are counted rather than listed.
- 1× References added · Oct 15, 2026 – Oct 15, 2026
- 1× Official description updated · Oct 15, 2026 – Oct 15, 2026
References
9 on the record
- github.com/temporalio/temporal-proxy/pull/222
- github.com/temporalio/temporal-proxy/pull/221
- github.com/temporalio/temporal-proxy/commit/6843a2c4626aa2c7f00fbf54e4e9fa98f625
- github.com/temporalio/temporal-proxy/commit/508991c298b9ac31915dd7349ffa88d79fad
- github.com/temporalio/temporal-proxy/blob/v0.8.0/pkg/crypto/kek.go
- github.com/temporalio/temporal-proxy/blob/v0.8.0/pkg/crypto/vault.go
- github.com/temporalio/temporal-proxy/blob/v0.8.0/pkg/crypto/dek.go
- github.com/temporalio/temporal-proxy/discussions/146
- github.com/temporalio/temporal-proxy/releases/tag/v0.9.0
Elsewhere on this site
Not in any source we poll
Listed rather than left blank: an empty field and an unmeasured one look identical on screen, and only one is a reason to look elsewhere.
- No FIRST EPSS score.
- No fixed version, patch or mitigation documented.
- No CISA SSVC assessment.
- No confirmed IOCs, IP addresses, domains, file hashes, or malware artifacts supplied.
- No organization-specific asset inventory, compensating-control status, or patch deployment evidence supplied.
- No exploit packet captures, log samples, or incident case IDs supplied.
Answered from this record
Text assembled only from the fields above — no additional claims.
What should defenders know first?
CVE-2026-108126 is "temporal-proxy payload decryption is not bound to the request namespace", rated Medium. It affects Temporal-proxy (Temporal Technologies, Inc.); versions are in the scope table. It is not in CISA KEV, which does not rule out exploitation. CVSS 6.0 describes technical severity. First verify whether exposed or business-critical assets run the affected versions, apply vendor fixes or mitigations, and preserve logs for review.
Comments
Moderated technical discussion. Read the community guidelines.
No comments yet.
Sign in or create an account to comment and suggest corrections.