Skip to content

CVE-2026-46529

Is CVE-2026-46529 real, exploitable, or a false positive? Here's the community verdict.

signals

public sources

Exploited in wild
Not listed
CISA KEV
Public exploit
None known
Metasploit/EDB/PoC
Base severity
7.8 High
CVSS
Exploitation prob.
0.5%
FIRST EPSS
Weakness
CWE-77
CWE

High CVSS base score, but low real-world exploitation probability (EPSS). Likely less urgent than the score implies.

baseline read

auto · not a community verdict

Real, but low real-world risk

A genuine vulnerability on paper, but EPSS shows little real-world exploitation — the base score may overstate urgency. This is not the same as a false positive.

Based on CVSS · FIRST EPSS

Confirm or dispute →

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

Atril Document Viewer is the default document reader of the MATE desktop environment for Linux. A single-click remote code execution vulnerability in versions prior to 1.26.3 and 1.28.4 allows an attacker to achieve arbitrary code execution as the user by tricking them into clicking a link inside a malicious PDF document. The PDF can be packaged as a polyglot file that is simultaneously a valid PDF and a valid ELF shared library, making the attack a single-file, single-click, configuration-independent RCE on stock atril installations. The root cause is `shell/ev-application.c:ev_spawn`, which builds a command line from attacker-controlled PDF link-destination fields without applying `g_shell_quote`. The cmdline is then handed to `g_app_info_create_from_commandline`, which shell-parses it back into argv — splitting any embedded `--gtk-module=PATH` into a separate argv element. GTK then `dlopen()`s the path during init, running any `__attribute__((constructor))` it finds. Versions 1.26.3 and 1.28.4 contain a patch for the issue. This is the same defect class as CVE-2023-51698 (CBT `--checkpoint-action` injection in `comics-document.c`, fixed in 1.6.2) but in a different code path (`shell/ev-application.c`) that the original patch did not touch.

Published

Embed this verdict
TruePositive verdict for CVE-2026-46529
Markdown
[![TruePositive verdict](https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-46529/badge.svg)](https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-46529)
HTML
<a href="https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-46529"><img src="https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-46529/badge.svg" alt="TruePositive verdict for CVE-2026-46529"></a>

Live badge that updates automatically as the community verdict changes.

Community ground truth

Be the first practitioner to weigh in

So far this is only TruePositive's editorial baseline from public sources. Add your real-world verdict below — it becomes the signal the next person triaging this relies on.

🥇 The first 50 practitioners to contribute earn a Founding Contributor badge.

In your experience, is this finding real and exploitable?

awaiting field verdicts
Real, but not a risk here
Not a real issue

Curated baseline: A curated baseline from public sources, shown separately from community verdicts.

No account needed. Anonymous verdicts post as an unverified signal. Log in to make yours verified and earn reputation.

Field notes & remediation

Verdicts are the quick signal. Notes are the evidence and fixes behind them.

  • 0
    Field note · TruePositive EditorialCurated

    This scores high on paper (CVSS 7.8) but the real-world signal is low. It is not in CISA KEV and no public exploit was found, and near-term exploitation looks unlikely (EPSS about 1%). Verify your own exposure before treating it as urgent. It needs local access, so it reads more as a privilege-escalation or post-access risk than a remote one. Not an emergency for most teams, but patch it in your normal cycle and check whether the affected component is actually exposed in your setup.

Add a field note or remediationoptional
Note type

What are you adding?

Markdown supported · minimum 20 characters.

Same weakness: CWE-77.