CVE Vulnerabilities

CVE-2026-12628

Use of Hard-coded Credentials

Published: Jun 22, 2026 | Modified: Jun 22, 2026
CVSS 3.x
N/A
Source:
NVD
CVSS 2.x
RedHat/V2
RedHat/V3
Ubuntu
root.io logo minimus.io logo echo.ai logo

IBM Storage Protect Client 8.1.0.0 through 8.2.1.0 and IBM Storage Protect Snapshot For Windows 8.1.0.0 through 8.2.1.0 could allow a remote attacker to bypass authentication due to the use of a hardcoded credential in the FlashCopy Manager (FCM) authentication mechanism. The application contains a static credential embedded in multiple authentication code paths, and does not properly validate authentication responses, which may allow an unauthenticated attacker to establish a trusted session and access protected services. This vulnerability affects client components across multiple versions and may allow an attacker to impersonate legitimate clients, potentially leading to unauthorized access to system resources.

Weakness

The product contains hard-coded credentials, such as a password or cryptographic key.

Extended Description

There are two main variations:

Potential Mitigations

  • For outbound authentication: store passwords, keys, and other credentials outside of the code in a strongly-protected, encrypted configuration file or database that is protected from access by all outsiders, including other local users on the same system. Properly protect the key (CWE-320). If you cannot use encryption to protect the file, then make sure that the permissions are as restrictive as possible [REF-7].
  • In Windows environments, the Encrypted File System (EFS) may provide some protection.
  • For inbound authentication using passwords: apply strong one-way hashes to passwords and store those hashes in a configuration file or database with appropriate access control. That way, theft of the file/database still requires the attacker to try to crack the password. When handling an incoming password during authentication, take the hash of the password and compare it to the saved hash.
  • Use randomly assigned salts for each separate hash that is generated. This increases the amount of computation that an attacker needs to conduct a brute-force attack, possibly limiting the effectiveness of the rainbow table method.
  • For front-end to back-end connections: Three solutions are possible, although none are complete.

References