High [CVE-2026-72746] Authentication bypass in RDSTLS handshake via PDU-type confusion
This high-severity Red Hat Linux advisory covers CVE-2026-72746.
Aggregated and source-linked by VulniPulse. Data sources, validation and limitations.
VulniPulse record published Record updated
Android app · Google Play
Monitor future Red Hat Linux CVEs from your phone.
Choose a whole vendor or a precise platform, then receive matching security advisories by phone notification, email, or both. Coverage follows 34 official vendor sources and 160+ reviewed platform categories.
Summary
FreeRDP before 3.30.0 contains a server-side authentication bypass in the RDSTLS handshake. When a server is configured with RdstlsSecurity = TRUE, the handshake dispatches inbound PDUs based solely on the attacker-supplied wire pduType without verifying that the received PDU is the one required at the current step.
Because the rdpRdstls object is calloc-zeroed, its resultCode defaults to 0 (RDSTLS_RESULT_SUCCESS).
An unauthenticated remote client can send a Capabilities PDU instead of the required Authentication Request PDU; rdstls_process_capabilities() returns success without ever setting resultCode, so the server responds with an AUTHRSP carrying resultCode SUCCESS and treats the session as authenticated without evaluating any password, redirection GUID, or auto-reconnect cookie.
This affects the released FreeRDP 3.x series (e.g., 3.27.1) and master HEAD; at the time of the advisory no patched version was available. By sending a Capabilities PDU instead of the expected Authentication Request PDU, the server incorrectly processes the request, leading to a successful authentication without validating any credentials.
This allows the attacker to gain unauthorized access to a session. This CVE ID has been rejected or withdrawn by its CVE Numbering Authority as it's a duplicate of CVE-2026-73241.
- < 3.30.0
- 3.27.1
Official advisory · high-confidence parse· fetched 1 month ago·verify at source
Fixed versions
No fixed release is recorded yet. That does not prove no patch exists — confirm against the vendor advisory.
Official advisory · high-confidence parse· fetched 1 month ago·verify at source
Mitigation
The source record does not include mitigation steps. That is not a statement that no fix exists — read the vendor advisory below for the authoritative guidance.
Official advisory · high-confidence parse· fetched 1 month ago·verify at source
Discussion(0)
No comments yet. Share field notes, upgrade gotchas, or questions — verify against the vendor advisory before acting on community advice.
Sign in to join the discussion.