GHSA-9pm7-6g36-6j78 CVE-2026-24004 GO-2026-4563
Fleet: Unauthenticated Android device disenrollment vulnerability via Pub/Sub endpoint
Medium
Go
- Severity
- 0.0 / 10
- Medium · CVSS 4.0
- Exploit chance (EPSS)
- 0.30%
- Chance of exploitation in the next 30 days. Higher than 22.49% of scored vulnerabilities.
- Known exploited
- No
- Not in CISA's catalog
- Fix
4.80.1- Upgrade github.com/fleetdm/fleet/v4 to this version or later
Description
Summary
A vulnerability in Fleet’s Android MDM Pub/Sub handling could allow unauthenticated requests to trigger device unenrollment events. This may result in unauthorized removal of individual Android devices from Fleet management.
Impact
If Android MDM is enabled, an attacker could send a crafted request to the Android Pub/Sub endpoint to unenroll a targeted Android device from Fleet without authentication.
This issue does not grant access to Fleet, allow execution of commands, or provide visibility into device data. Impact is limited to disruption of Android device management for the affected device.
Workarounds
If an immediate upgrade is not possible, affected Fleet users should temporarily disable Android MDM.
For more information
If there any questions or comments about this advisory:
Email Fleet at security@fleetdm.com Join #fleet in osquery Slack
Credits
Fleet thanks @secfox-ai for responsibly reporting this issue.
Affected versions
Go
| Package | Vulnerable | Fixed in |
|---|---|---|
| github.com/fleetdm/fleet/v4 | < 4.80.1 |
4.80.1 |
How to fix
Move to the fixed version or later with your package manager, update the lockfile, and run your tests. If the package only arrives through another dependency, upgrade that dependency first. If none of its releases pulls a fixed version yet, force the version with your package manager's override.
github.com/fleetdm/fleet/v4 Go → 4.80.1
- go
go get github.com/fleetdm/fleet/v4@v4.80.1 && go mod tidy
Severity breakdown
CVSS 4.0 0.0
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:L
- Attack vector
- Network
- Attack complexity
- Low
- Attack requirements
- Present
- Privileges required
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Confidentiality (vulnerable system)
- None
- Integrity (vulnerable system)
- None
- Availability (vulnerable system)
- None
- Confidentiality (subsequent systems)
- None
- Integrity (subsequent systems)
- None
- Availability (subsequent systems)
- Low
CVSS 3.1 5.3
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N
- Attack vector
- Network
- Attack complexity
- Low
- Privileges required
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- None
- Integrity
- Low
- Availability
- None
Weakness
CWE-306: Missing Authentication for Critical Function
The product does not perform any authentication for functionality that requires a provable user identity or consumes a significant amount of resources.
How to prevent it
- Architecture and Design: Divide the software into anonymous, normal, privileged, and administrative areas. Identify which of these areas require a proven user identity, and use a centralized authentication capability. Identify all potential communication channels, or other means of interaction with the software, to ensure that all channels are appropriately protected, including those channels that are assumed to be accessible only by authorized parties. Developers sometimes perform authentication at the primary channel, but open up a secondary channel that is assumed to be private. For example, a login mechanism may be listening on one network port, but after successful authentication, it may open up a second port where it waits for the connection, but avoids authentication because it assumes that only the authenticated party will connect to the port. In general, if the software or protocol allows a single session or user state to persist across multiple connections or channels, authentication and appropriate credential management need to be used throughout.
- Architecture and Design: For any security checks that are performed on the client side, ensure that these checks are duplicated on the server side, in order to avoid CWE-602. Attackers can bypass the client-side checks by modifying values after the checks have been performed, or by changing the client to remove the client-side checks entirely. Then, these modified values would be submitted to the server.
- Architecture and Design: Where possible, avoid implementing custom, "grow-your-own" authentication routines and consider using authentication capabilities as provided by the surrounding framework, operating system, or environment. These capabilities may avoid common weaknesses that are unique to authentication; support automatic auditing and tracking; and make it easier to provide a clear separation between authentication tasks and authorization tasks. In environments such as the World Wide Web, the line between authentication and authorization is sometimes blurred. If custom authentication routines are required instead of those provided by the server, then these routines must be applied to every single page, since these pages could be requested directly.
- Architecture and Design: Use a vetted library or framework that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid. For example, consider using libraries with authentication capabilities such as OpenSSL or the ESAPI Authenticator [REF-45].
- Implementation, System Configuration, Operation: When storing data in the cloud (e.g., S3 buckets, Azure blobs, Google Cloud Storage, etc.), use the provider's controls to require strong authentication for users who should be allowed to access the data [REF-1297] [REF-1298] [REF-1302].
CWE-862: Missing Authorization
The product does not perform an authorization check when an actor attempts to access a resource or perform an action.
How to prevent it
- Architecture and Design: Divide the product into anonymous, normal, privileged, and administrative areas. Reduce the attack surface by carefully mapping roles with data and functionality. Use role-based access control (RBAC) [REF-229] to enforce the roles at the appropriate boundaries. Note that this approach may not protect against horizontal authorization, i.e., it will not protect a user from attacking others with the same role.
- Architecture and Design: Ensure that access control checks are performed related to the business logic. These checks may be different than the access control checks that are applied to more generic resources such as files, connections, processes, memory, and database records. For example, a database may restrict access for medical records to a specific database user, but each record might only be intended to be accessible to the patient and the patient's doctor [REF-7].
- Architecture and Design: Use a vetted library or framework that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid. For example, consider using authorization frameworks such as the JAAS Authorization Framework [REF-233] and the OWASP ESAPI Access Control feature [REF-45].
- Architecture and Design: For web applications, make sure that the access control mechanism is enforced correctly at the server side on every page. Users should not be able to access any unauthorized functionality or information by simply requesting direct access to that page. One way to do this is to ensure that all pages containing sensitive information are not cached, and that all such pages restrict access to requests that are accompanied by an active and authenticated session token associated with a user who has the required permissions to access that page.
- System Configuration, Installation: Use the access control capabilities of your operating system and server environment and define your access control lists accordingly. Use a "default deny" policy when defining these ACLs.
References
Advisories
Packages
Other links
Timeline
- Published
- Last updated by the source
- Latest EPSS score
Related advisories
| Advisory | Severity | Why it's related |
|---|---|---|
| GHSA-rxhg-vcww-2mpw Fleet: ORDER BY column injection on activity list endpoints | Low | Also affects github.com/fleetdm/fleet/v4 |
| GHSA-q9c5-pp7m-fm2g Fleet: Unauthenticated download of in-house iOS app binaries via predictable URLs | Medium | Also affects github.com/fleetdm/fleet/v4 |
| GO-2026-6264 Fleet: SQL injection in Okta conditional access endpoint allows host-controlled compromise of the Fleet database | High | Also affects github.com/fleetdm/fleet/v4 |
| GHSA-88p2-jj8w-j8qg Fleet: Observer-class users can view team enroll secrets and credential-bearing configuration via target search endpoint | Medium | Also affects github.com/fleetdm/fleet/v4 |
| GHSA-gm7f-v959-fr2g Fleet DM Vulnerable to Cross-Team Policy Data Exposure via Global Policy Read Endpoint | Medium | Also affects github.com/fleetdm/fleet/v4 |
| GHSA-x4qr-qw6h-wvxq Fleet: Observer-level enrollment secret extraction via ORDER BY oracle on Apple MDM commands endpoint | Medium | Also affects github.com/fleetdm/fleet/v4 |
| GHSA-vxm7-9x8v-8gm4 Fleet has observer-level enrollment secret extraction via ORDER BY oracle on labels host-listing endpoint | Medium | Also affects github.com/fleetdm/fleet/v4 |
| GHSA-mxmp-wr3w-rvqx Fleet: IP spoofing allows bypassing API rate limiting | High | Also affects github.com/fleetdm/fleet/v4 |
MergeHarbor checks every repository's dependencies against this database, ranks what matters by exploitability and reachability, routes it to the owning team and opens the fix pull request.
Check your repos with MergeHarbor