CVE Intelligence
Medium Access control

CVE-2026-95835 — Missing ownership check on the shared memory object named by the kitty askpass escape code

Missing Authorization in the askpass escape code handler in kitty from 0.25.0 before 0.49.0 allows a local user other than the one running the terminal to obtain the text typed into a prompt that kitty itself displays, because handle_remote_askpass() in kitty/window.py opens the POSIX shared memory object named in the escape code, parses a prompt definition out of it, and writes the user's answer back into an object of that same name, without at any point checking that the object is owned by the user running kitty or that its permissions exclude other users. The equivalent consumer of the same SharedMemory class in the ssh kitten performs exactly that check; the askpass path did not. The handler is reached through a device control string processed from the byte stream of the window, so the attacker must also cause bytes of their choosing to be displayed by the victim's terminal. Where the POSIX shared memory namespace is shared between the two users, a second local user can create an object with permissions that allow the victim to read and write it, cause the victim's kitty to render a prompt of the attacker's choosing, including a masked password prompt, and read the typed secret back out of the object afterwards. The prompt text is additionally passed to the display without control character sanitisation, so it can overwrite the warning line kitty prints above it. The answer is written by reopening an object of that name when the user answers, rather than through the handle already held. This results in disclosure of a secret typed by the victim to a second local user, and does not require any privilege on the victim's account.

Published Sep 25, 2026 · Updated Oct 15, 2026 · Sources: NIST National Vulnerability Database, CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP · CNA: Secur0

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 (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.

Exploitation
Not confirmed
Not in CISA KEV — an absence of record, not proof it is unexploited.
EPSS FIRST
0.1%
ahead of 1% of scored CVEs · Oct 15, 2026
Affects
Kovidgoyal
Kitty
CVSS base
5.6
Medium · 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
Partial
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 (Kovidgoyal Kitty).
  2. No fix documented in the sources: reduce exposure and monitor the vendor advisory.
  3. Exploitation requires user interaction: tighten email/web filtering and warn affected users.
  4. 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.

VendorProductVersionsStatusSource
Kovidgoyal Kitty ≥ 0.25.0 and < 0.49.0 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
Local
Attack complexity
Low
Attack requirements
Present
Privileges required
Low
User interaction
Active
Scope
X
Confidentiality (vulnerable system)
High
Integrity (vulnerable system)
Low
Availability (vulnerable system)
None
Confidentiality (subsequent)
High
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
5.6 CVSS 4.0 Medium — — 4daa8cea-433a-44bd-9456-53b127fc289a via NIST National Vulnerability Database
5.6 CVSS 4.0 Medium — — Secur0 via CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP
CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:P/PR:L/UI:A/VC:H/VI:L/VA:N/SC:H/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: 4daa8cea-433a-44bd-9456-53b127fc289a)

Weakness MITRE

Weakness class according to MITRE’s CWE catalog.

CWE-862 · Missing Authorization

Other CVEs with this weakness →

Detection

Read off the CVSS vector and the weakness class. Starting points, not tested rules.

  • Local/physical vector: focus on endpoint telemetry (EDR) from affected hosts.
  • Audit administrative actions and access to resources outside each user’s normal pattern.
endpoint telemetry (EDR)authentication logsapplication logs

Timeline

What happened to this CVE, newest first.

  • 2026
  • Affected products added · kovid goyal/kitty
    Oct 15, 2026 · CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP
  • SSVC assessment updated
    Oct 15, 2026 · CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP
  • Record published
    Oct 15, 2026
  • CVSS changed · 5.6
    Oct 15, 2026 · NIST National Vulnerability Database
  • Source status changed · → Awaiting Analysis
    Oct 15, 2026 · NIST National Vulnerability Database
  • Record created in this database
    Oct 15, 2026 · NIST National Vulnerability Database
  • CVE published
    Sep 25, 2026 · Secur0

Source activity

Repeated readings are counted rather than listed.

  • 1× Official description updated · Oct 15, 2026 – Oct 15, 2026

References

3 on the record

Elsewhere on this site

Kovidgoyal
every CVE for this vendor
Access control
same class
CWE-862
other pages naming this weakness

Related CVEs (same products)

  • Medium CVE-2026-95834 Use after free in the kitty drag and drop protocol when a drag source item is aborted mid-transfer 20d
  • Medium CVE-2026-80432 Missing authorization in the kitty drag and drop protocol allows a client to obtain dragged file contents without a drop 20d
  • Medium CVE-2026-80430 Improper link resolution in the kitty drag and drop protocol allows a client to create files outside the staging directory 21d
  • Medium CVE-2026-80431 Out-of-bounds write in the kitty text sizing protocol allows termination of the terminal process 21d
  • Critical CVE-2026-95832 Reflected unknown field names in the kitty colour control escape code allow command execution in the user's shell 21d
  • High CVE-2026-72913 Kitty: Command injection into the child shell via chained @kitty-echo + @kitty-ssh DCS escape sequences Aug 10, 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-2026-95835 is "Missing ownership check on the shared memory object named by the kitty askpass escape code", rated Medium. It affects Kitty (Kovidgoyal); versions are in the scope table. It is not in CISA KEV, which does not rule out exploitation. CVSS 5.6 describes technical severity. EPSS 0.10% 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.