CVE Intelligence
High Cryptography

CVE-2026-92543 — Docker Engine insecure-registry fallback via malicious DNS responses

Docker Engine classifies a registry hostname as insecure using an any-match DNS check. loadInsecureRegistries() injects 127.0.0.0/8 and ::1/128 as insecure CIDRs by default. isCIDRMatch resolves all of the hostname's addresses and returns true if a single address is in the insecure CIDR list. Because the transport re-dials the hostname rather than the CIDR-matching address, a DNS answer set of one loopback IP plus a non-loopback attacker IP disables certificate verification and enables HTTP fallback for the registry connection.

Published Oct 7, 2026 · Updated Oct 13, 2026 · Sources: NIST National Vulnerability Database, CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP · CNA: Docker

Who exploits it and how urgent it is

A 0–100 score combining confirmed exploitation, ransomware and APT use, public exploits, EPSS and severity.

No exploitation signal in the sources consulted so far.
How the score was calculated
  • EPSS 0.1% (30-day exploitation probability)+0
  • Technical severity (high)+6

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.

Exploitation
Not confirmed
Not in CISA KEV — an absence of record, not proof it is unexploited.
EPSS FIRST
0.09%
ahead of 0% of scored CVEs · Oct 14, 2026
Affects
Docker
Engine and 1 more
CVSS base
7.6
High · 2 source(s)

CISA SSVC assessment CISA

Three decision points CISA publishes for the CVEs it assesses (SSVC 2.0.3). A stakeholder decision, not a severity score.

Exploitation
None
none · proof-of-concept · active
Automatable
No
can an attacker script the kill-chain steps
Technical impact
Total
partial · total control of the vulnerable component

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.

  1. Identify exposed assets running the affected vendor/product/version combinations (Docker Engine, Moby Moby).
  2. The attack is network-based and needs no privileges: restrict exposure (ACLs, VPN, WAF) until patched.
  3. No fix documented in the sources: reduce exposure and monitor the vendor advisory.
  4. Exploitation requires user interaction: tighten email/web filtering and warn affected users.
  5. Search available logs for exploit probes matching the vulnerability class (cryptography), errors and authentication anomalies.

Affected scope

Vendor, product and versions as the sources word them.

VendorProductVersionsStatusSource
Docker Engine < 29.8.2 Vulnerable CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP
Moby Moby < v2.0.0-beta.25 Vulnerable CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP

Attack characteristics

The CVSS vector, decoded. It describes the attack, not your exposure to it.

Attack vector
Network
Attack complexity
High
Attack requirements
Present
Privileges required
None
User interaction
Passive
Scope
X
Confidentiality (vulnerable system)
High
Integrity (vulnerable system)
High
Availability (vulnerable system)
None
Confidentiality (subsequent)
None
Integrity (subsequent)
None
Availability (subsequent)
None

Every base score collected

Sources score independently and may disagree; each row says who scored it and under which version.

ScoreVersionSeverityExpl.ImpactScored by
7.6 CVSS 4.0 High — — security@docker.com via NIST National Vulnerability Database
7.6 CVSS 4.0 High — — Docker via CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:H/AT:P/PR:N/UI:P/VC:H/VI:H/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@docker.com)

Weakness MITRE

Weakness class according to MITRE’s CWE catalog.

CWE-295 · Improper Certificate Validation

Other CVEs with this weakness →

EPSS over time FIRST

Oct 13, 2026 → Oct 14, 2026 · 2 reading(s) · max 0.09%

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).
  • Check TLS negotiations and unexpected certificates in the component’s traffic.
web/proxy/WAF logsnetwork IDS/IPS

Timeline

What happened to this CVE, newest first.

  • 2026
  • Affected products added · docker/docker engine, moby/moby
    Oct 13, 2026 · CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP
  • SSVC assessment updated
    Oct 13, 2026 · CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP
  • Record published
    Oct 13, 2026
  • CVSS changed · 7.6
    Oct 13, 2026 · NIST National Vulnerability Database
  • Source status changed · → Awaiting Analysis
    Oct 13, 2026 · NIST National Vulnerability Database
  • Record created in this database
    Oct 13, 2026 · NIST National Vulnerability Database
  • CVE published
    Oct 7, 2026 · Docker

Source activity

Repeated readings are counted rather than listed.

  • 1× Official description updated · Oct 13, 2026 – Oct 13, 2026

References

1 on the record

Elsewhere on this site

Docker
every CVE for this vendor
Cryptography
same class
CWE-295
other pages naming this weakness

Related CVEs (same products)

  • CVE-2026-92542 Blind VXLAN injection into encrypted overlay networks from cluster peer 8d
  • CVE-2026-42306 Moby: Race condition in docker cp allows bind mount redirection to host path Jun 12, 2026
  • CVE-2026-41568 Moby: Race condition in docker cp allows creation of arbitrary empty files on the host via symlink swap Jun 12, 2026
  • CVE-2026-33997 Moby: Off-by-one error in plugin privilege validation Mar 31, 2026
  • CVE-2026-34040 Moby: AuthZ plugin bypass with oversized request body Mar 31, 2026

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 fixed version, patch or mitigation documented.
  • 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-2026-92543 is "Docker Engine insecure-registry fallback via malicious DNS responses", rated High. It affects Engine (Docker); versions are in the scope table. It is not in CISA KEV, which does not rule out exploitation. CVSS 7.6 describes technical severity. EPSS 0.09% estimates the probability of exploitation in 30 days; neither replaces your asset context. 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.