A large-scale software supply-chain attack has compromised thousands of GitHub accounts and exposed secrets across more than 1,800 reposit...
Tracked as CVE-2026-123710, the flaw carries a CVSS severity score of 9.8 out of 10, placing it in the critical category. According to Red Hat, the vulnerability affects deployments in which the service responsible for managing signing keys is accessible to untrusted clients.
The vulnerability exists in Quay's service key server, which manages the cryptographic keys used to sign registry access tokens. These tokens determine whether users and applications can download or upload container images.
According to Red Hat's security advisory, an unauthenticated attacker can exploit weaknesses in the key rotation mechanism to install an unauthorized signing key that the registry automatically trusts. When anonymous access is enabled, an attacker can obtain a registry token and use it to manipulate the key rotation process.
Once the malicious key has been installed, attackers can generate their own registry tokens with read and write permissions across repositories. This allows them to access private container images belonging to other users or organizations without following the platform's normal access restrictions.
According to Red Hat's Bugzilla report, "rotation also deletes the legitimate instance key as a side effect, and the attacker key can delete replacement instance keys."
Beyond stealing images, attackers could also replace or overwrite repository contents. Such modifications could affect software development and deployment processes, particularly when automated systems download compromised images from the registry. Sensitive credentials and other secrets stored within container images could also be exposed.
Another scaring aspect of the vulnerability is the persistence of unauthorized access. The malicious signing key can be configured without an expiration date and remains active even after the registry is restarted. Red Hat also warned that attackers could use the compromised key to delete legitimate signing keys, potentially disrupting normal image uploads and downloads.
Disabling anonymous access does not completely eliminate the risk, as users with valid Quay accounts can also exploit the vulnerability. Similarly, changing account passwords or regenerating robot account tokens will not invalidate an unauthorized signing key.
Red Hat recommends administrators immediately restrict access to the key-management service.
Red Hat cautioned that removing malicious keys alone may not provide lasting protection until a fixed version is installed, as attackers could potentially reinstall them.
The vulnerability was discovered by Red Hat researcher Dave O'Connor. Fixes for the issue were merged into the project's GitHub repository on November 11.
Fortinet issued 89 security advisories on November 11, covering close to 100 vulnerabilities across its product lineup, with roughly 17 rated critical and nearly 80 classified as high severity. The release stands as one of the company's largest single-day patch drops, touching nearly every major product in its portfolio.
FortiMail received the heaviest concentration of critical fixes. FortiAuthenticator, FortiOS, FortiManager and FortiAnalyzer followed close behind. FortiSASE and FortiClient also received updates resolving critical issues.
The critical vulnerabilities span a wide range of attack classes. Among those fixed are arbitrary code execution flaws, authentication bypass conditions, account takeover paths, unauthorized access to Virtual Domains (VDOMs), server-side request execution, and a command execution bug that could allow an attacker to run commands with super-admin privileges. FortiMail-specific issues include paths that expose secure email accounts and allow IBE webmail session compromise, along with flaws enabling unauthorized webmail password resets.
High-severity fixes address cross-site scripting, code injection, arbitrary file uploads, denial-of-service conditions, man-in-the-middle attack vectors, privilege escalation, and information disclosure. Fortinet has not attributed any of these vulnerabilities to active exploitation in the wild.
A Notable Standalone Finding
One vulnerability drew particular attention from the security research community. Kevin Joensen, a principal security consultant at Baldur Security, identified and named a FortiClient flaw he called "Fortinet2Shell." The root cause is a CORS misconfiguration that allows attacker-controlled web pages to communicate with a local service running on the target machine.
If a victim visits a malicious website while FortiPAM is enabled, an attacker could achieve arbitrary code execution on that system. The flaw is conditional but the bar for triggering it is low: simply visiting a crafted page is enough. Joensen's research illustrates how client-side software that communicates with local services over HTTP remains a consistent attack surface, one that often gets less scrutiny than server-facing products.
AI in the Testing Pipeline
The scale of this release tracks directly to a shift in how Fortinet approaches internal security testing. Carl Windsor, the company's CISO, confirmed that Fortinet has been running frontier AI models alongside its own on-premises models in vulnerability testing for several months.
The program operates in two phases. In the first, models analyzed firmware without access to source code, mapping how products function and identifying potential attack vectors. Those leads were then validated through penetration testing and red teaming. The black-box phase returned few directly exploitable flaws, but the models showed strong capability in comparing firmware versions across releases and building proof-of-concept exploits for bugs that had already been patched.
The second phase involved source code analysis. Across more than 100 tests spanning 30 product families, roughly 40 percent of findings were genuine vulnerabilities, 30 percent were false positives, and the remaining 30 percent were security improvements that did not rise to the level of exploitability.
Windsor did not frame AI-assisted testing as a silver bullet. He acknowledged that the same tools available to Fortinet's internal teams are available to attackers, and he warned that the gap between public disclosure and active exploitation is getting shorter. "The window between disclosure and exploitation continues to shrink, and we expect it to keep shrinking," he said.
The Urgency Behind Early Disclosure
Fortinet's decision to hold technical details until a fixed release is available reflects a deliberate strategy. Once a patch ships, researchers and threat actors alike can reverse-engineer the changes to identify what was fixed and where. For organizations running unpatched versions, that creates a narrow and shrinking window of practical anonymity.
Windsor noted that internet-facing systems should be prioritized for immediate patching. For organizations that cannot apply fixes right away, interim steps include restricting administrative access to trusted IP ranges, keeping FortiManager off public networks, enforcing strong and unique credentials, and requiring multi-factor authentication for all admin accounts. He was direct that none of these measures replace upgrading the software.
Fortinet's PSIRT page at fortiguard.com/psirt carries the full list of advisories and affected version ranges.
The November batch comes weeks after the company released urgent fixes for FortiOS and FortiManager, some of which were also flagged as AI-assisted discoveries. The cadence suggests Fortinet is now committing to more frequent and larger release cycles as a direct consequence of expanding its AI testing program, a move that will likely increase pressure on enterprise security teams to maintain tighter patch windows across Fortinet deployments.
The incident was confirmed by Polish Digital Affairs Minister Krzysztof Gawkowski, who said security teams had responded immediately after identifying the attack. In a social media statement, Gawkowski said the cyberattack against the state-run ePUAP system had been detected and halted, while technical teams were working to restore its full functionality.
The ePUAP platform is a central part of Poland's digital government infrastructure. It allows individuals and businesses to submit official documents, communicate with government departments and complete various administrative procedures online. Its temporary closure has therefore affected an important channel through which people interact with public authorities.
Gawkowski also confirmed that the infrastructure of the Central Information Technology Center, the government agency responsible for maintaining ePUAP and other essential digital services, remained secure. Officials stressed that the platform was taken offline as a precautionary measure rather than because the cyberattack had caused damage or disrupted its operations.
Marek Gieorgica, spokesperson for Poland's Digital Affairs Ministry, told the Polish news agency PAP that the system had not been compromised by the incident. He explained that authorities had deliberately disabled the platform to reduce potential risks while security teams assessed the situation.
However, the government has not disclosed technical details about the attack, including the methods used by the attackers or the identity of those responsible. There is also no public confirmation that hackers gained unauthorized access to government systems or managed to steal sensitive information.
According to a notice published on the government's website, ePUAP electronic mailboxes are currently unavailable to both citizens and public institutions. The disruption could also temporarily affect Poland's Trusted Profile digital identity service, which enables users to access online government services and electronically sign official documents.
Authorities have not announced a specific timeline for restoring the platform. Services are expected to resume after cybersecurity specialists complete their investigations and necessary technical checks.
The incident comes amid a series of cyberattacks targeting Polish government institutions, critical infrastructure and private organizations in recent months. In October, online invoicing provider Fakturownia reported a data breach that potentially exposed information belonging to its users, customers and business partners.
Earlier, in September, hackers stole data from Qbusoft, a Polish healthcare software provider, following a separate security incident involving medical technology company MyDr. Polish authorities said the MyDr breach could have affected information associated with approximately 19 million individuals and around 12,000 healthcare organizations.