CVE-2026-49319 Vulnerability Analysis & Exploit Details

CVE-2026-49319
Vulnerability Scoring

6.5
/10
High Risk

If left unpatched, CVE-2026-49319 could lead to major system disruptions or data loss.

Attack Complexity Details

  • Attack Complexity: Low
    Exploits can be performed without significant complexity or special conditions.
  • Attack Vector: Adjacent_network
    Attack Vector Under Analysis
  • Privileges Required: None
    No privileges are required for exploitation.
  • Scope: Unchanged
    Exploit remains within the originally vulnerable component.
  • User Interaction: None
    No user interaction is necessary for exploitation.

CVE-2026-49319 Details

Status: Received on 25 Jun 2026, 15:16 UTC

Published on: 25 Jun 2026, 15:16 UTC

CVSS Release: version 3

CVSS3 Source

cve@asrg.io

CVSS3 Type

Secondary

CVSS3 Vector

CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:N

CVE-2026-49319 Vulnerability Summary

CVE-2026-49319: Remote Keyless Entry System (RKES), using the 433 MHz key fob bearing FCC ID CWTR53R0 manufactured by ALPS ALPINE CO., LTD., is vulnerable to a roll-back attack against its rolling-code authentication.  An attacker within RF range who records two consecutive lock or unlock transmissions from a legitimate key fob can later replay the same pair of transmissions repeatedly. During testing, replaying the first captured transmission caused the RKES to enter a state in which replaying the second captured transmission resulted in a successful lock or unlock operation of the vehicle. Tested and confirmed on a 2024 Suzuki Swift (SWIFT ISG GLS AC 1.2 5P 4x2 TM).

Assessing the Risk of CVE-2026-49319

Access Complexity Graph

The exploitability of CVE-2026-49319 depends on two key factors: attack complexity (the level of effort required to execute an exploit) and privileges required (the access level an attacker needs).

Exploitability Analysis for CVE-2026-49319

With low attack complexity and no required privileges, CVE-2026-49319 is an easy target for cybercriminals. Organizations should prioritize immediate mitigation measures to prevent unauthorized access and data breaches.

Understanding AC and PR

A lower complexity and fewer privilege requirements make exploitation easier. Security teams should evaluate these aspects to determine the urgency of mitigation strategies, such as patch management and access control policies.

Attack Complexity (AC) measures the difficulty in executing an exploit. A high AC means that specific conditions must be met, making an attack more challenging, while a low AC means the vulnerability can be exploited with minimal effort.

Privileges Required (PR) determine the level of system access necessary for an attack. Vulnerabilities requiring no privileges are more accessible to attackers, whereas high privilege requirements limit exploitation to authorized users with elevated access.

CVSS Score Breakdown Chart

Above is the CVSS Sub-score Breakdown for CVE-2026-49319, illustrating how Base, Impact, and Exploitability factors combine to form the overall severity rating. A higher sub-score typically indicates a more severe or easier-to-exploit vulnerability.

CIA Impact Analysis

Below is the Impact Analysis for CVE-2026-49319, showing how Confidentiality, Integrity, and Availability might be affected if the vulnerability is exploited. Higher values usually signal greater potential damage.

  • Confidentiality: None
    CVE-2026-49319 has no significant impact on data confidentiality.
  • Integrity: High
    CVE-2026-49319 could allow unauthorized modifications to data, potentially affecting system reliability and trust.
  • Availability: None
    CVE-2026-49319 does not impact system availability.

CVE-2026-49319 References

External References

CWE Common Weakness Enumeration

CWE-294

CAPEC Common Attack Pattern Enumeration and Classification

  • Session Sidejacking CAPEC-102 Session sidejacking takes advantage of an unencrypted communication channel between a victim and target system. The attacker sniffs traffic on a network looking for session tokens in unencrypted traffic. Once a session token is captured, the attacker performs malicious actions by using the stolen token with the targeted application to impersonate the victim. This attack is a specific method of session hijacking, which is exploiting a valid session token to gain unauthorized access to a target system or information. Other methods to perform a session hijacking are session fixation, cross-site scripting, or compromising a user or server machine and stealing the session token.
  • Kerberoasting CAPEC-509 Through the exploitation of how service accounts leverage Kerberos authentication with Service Principal Names (SPNs), the adversary obtains and subsequently cracks the hashed credentials of a service account target to exploit its privileges. The Kerberos authentication protocol centers around a ticketing system which is used to request/grant access to services and to then access the requested services. As an authenticated user, the adversary may request Active Directory and obtain a service ticket with portions encrypted via RC4 with the private key of the authenticated account. By extracting the local ticket and saving it disk, the adversary can brute force the hashed value to reveal the target account credentials.
  • Remote Services with Stolen Credentials CAPEC-555 This pattern of attack involves an adversary that uses stolen credentials to leverage remote services such as RDP, telnet, SSH, and VNC to log into a system. Once access is gained, any number of malicious activities could be performed.
  • Windows Admin Shares with Stolen Credentials CAPEC-561 An adversary guesses or obtains (i.e. steals or purchases) legitimate Windows administrator credentials (e.g. userID/password) to access Windows Admin Shares on a local machine or within a Windows domain.
  • Reusing Session IDs (aka Session Replay) CAPEC-60 This attack targets the reuse of valid session ID to spoof the target system in order to gain privileges. The attacker tries to reuse a stolen session ID used previously during a transaction to perform spoofing and session hijacking. Another name for this type of attack is Session Replay.
  • Use of Captured Hashes (Pass The Hash) CAPEC-644 An adversary obtains (i.e. steals or purchases) legitimate Windows domain credential hash values to access systems within the domain that leverage the Lan Man (LM) and/or NT Lan Man (NTLM) authentication protocols.
  • Use of Captured Tickets (Pass The Ticket) CAPEC-645 An adversary uses stolen Kerberos tickets to access systems/resources that leverage the Kerberos authentication protocol. The Kerberos authentication protocol centers around a ticketing system which is used to request/grant access to services and to then access the requested services. An adversary can obtain any one of these tickets (e.g. Service Ticket, Ticket Granting Ticket, Silver Ticket, or Golden Ticket) to authenticate to a system/resource without needing the account's credentials. Depending on the ticket obtained, the adversary may be able to access a particular resource or generate TGTs for any account within an Active Directory Domain.
  • Use of Known Kerberos Credentials CAPEC-652 An adversary obtains (i.e. steals or purchases) legitimate Kerberos credentials (e.g. Kerberos service account userID/password or Kerberos Tickets) with the goal of achieving authenticated access to additional systems, applications, or services within the domain.
  • Browser in the Middle (BiTM) CAPEC-701 An adversary exploits the inherent functionalities of a web browser, in order to establish an unnoticed remote desktop connection in the victim's browser to the adversary's system. The adversary must deploy a web client with a remote desktop session that the victim can access.
  • Adversary in the Middle (AiTM) CAPEC-94 An adversary targets the communication between two components (typically client and server), in order to alter or obtain data from transactions. A general approach entails the adversary placing themself within the communication channel between the two components.

Protect Your Infrastructure against CVE-2026-49319: Combat Critical CVE Threats

Stay updated with real-time CVE vulnerabilities and take action to secure your systems. Enhance your cybersecurity posture with the latest threat intelligence and mitigation techniques. Develop the skills necessary to defend against CVEs and secure critical infrastructures. Join the top cybersecurity professionals safeguarding today's infrastructures.

Other 5 Recently Published CVEs Vulnerabilities

  • CVE-2026-9800 – A flaw was found in Keycloak Policy Enforcer. This vulnerability allows any authenticated user to bypass all authorization policies, including role...
  • CVE-2026-9799 – A flaw was found in org.keycloak.authorization. An authenticated user with a granted User-Managed Access (UMA) permission ticket for one resource c...
  • CVE-2026-9705 – A flaw was found in Keycloak's client registration service. A remote attacker, possessing a previously issued Registration Access Token (RAT), coul...
  • CVE-2026-9099 – A flaw was found in Keycloak. A missing authorization check in the GroupResource.addChild() endpoint within the Admin REST API allows an authentica...
  • CVE-2026-9086 – A flaw was found in Keycloak. A remote attacker with administrative privileges, specifically those with `manage-client` permission or access to cli...