HOL LogoGuard

Explore HOL

  • HOL home
  • AI agent registry
  • AI plugins
  • Open standards
  • HOL members
  • Sponsor HOL
  • Advertise with HOL

Guard product

  • Guard overviewLocal security and control for AI agents and the tools they use.
  • FeaturesRuntime protection, policy routing, review, and evidence.

Explore Guard

  • Product previewWalk through Guard surfaces in read-only demo mode.
  • ComparisonCompare Guard with native controls and AI security vendors.

AI tools

  • All AI toolsEvery supported AI tool and how Guard applies policy to it.
  • Codex
  • Claude Code
  • Cursor
  • Antigravity CLI
  • OpenCode
  • Hermes
  • OpenClaw
  • GitHub Copilot CLI
  • Antigravity
  • Kimi
  • Grok
  • Pi / Oh My Pi
  • Zcode

Extensions

  • All extensionsBrowse command and MCP coverage with owners and stated limits.
  • Command coverageShell command protection across clouds, databases, backups, and packages.
  • MCP server coverageSee how Guard maps risk state across MCP tools and servers.
  • Core safetyThe safety floor listings that ship with Guard.
  • Data and resilienceBackup and storage command protection.
  • Cloud and infrastructureAWS, Azure, GCP, Kubernetes, and more.

Security

  • AI security hubSecurity research, advisories, and agent safety coverage.
  • AI tool securitySecurity profiles for each supported coding agent.
  • Safe labsHands-on attack simulations with safe boundaries.
  • Redacted warningsReal blocked actions with sensitive details removed.
  • AdvisoriesCoordinated disclosure reports for AI tooling.
  • Active CVEsSearch active CVEs affecting AI tooling.

Learn

  • Security guidesPractical guides for securing AI agent workflows.
  • DocsInstall, configure, and operate Guard with confidence.
  • ResearchPublished security research, benchmarks, and methodology.

Community

  • ReleasesVersion history, shipped changes and upgrade notes.
  • ContributorsThe people and contributions behind HOL Guard.
  • AffiliatesShare Guard with your audience and earn from referrals.
  • SponsorFund agreed research, implementation and shared testing through the HOL Partner Program.
  • AdvertiseCompare README logo placements, previews and monthly prices, or promote a plugin or extension.
PricingEnterpriseOpen AppInstall Guard
  1. Guard
  2. Security
  3. CVEs
  4. CVE 2026 39324 racksessioncookie secrets decrypt failure
HOL Guard

Public security guidance for teams protecting AI harnesses, MCP servers, skills, prompts, and local tool execution.

Install Guard

AI Security

  • Prompt injection
  • MCP security
  • OWASP MCP mapping
  • Supply chain

Resources

  • Trust packet
  • Harness setup
  • Redacted warnings
  • Safe labs

Product

  • Install Guard
  • Pricing
  • Open dashboard
Guard
  • Guard Overview
  • Releases
  • Contributors
  • Install Guard
  • Pricing
Docs
  • Documentation Index
  • Developer Hub
  • API Reference
  • Root OpenAPI
  • Registry OpenAPI
  • Run in Postman
  • Standards
  • Submit ERC-8004 Contract
  • Feature Your Agent
Best Plugins
  • Browse Plugins
  • Plugin Launches
  • Best Claude Plugins
  • Best Codex Plugins
  • Best Grok Plugins
  • Best Kimi Plugins
  • Best DeepSeek Plugins
  • Best Antigravity Plugins
  • Best MCP Servers
  • Best Cursor Plugins
  • Best OpenCode Plugins
Best Agents
  • Best ERC-8004 Agents
  • Best Virtuals Agents
  • Best MCP Servers
  • Best A2A Agents
  • Best x402 Payable
  • All Categories
Community
  • Telegram
  • X
More
  • About HOL
  • Sponsor
  • Advertise
  • Contact
  • Blog
  • GitHub
  • Privacy
  • Terms of Service
Settings

Copyright © 2026 HOL DAO LLC. All rights reserved.

Back to active CVEs
Unknown severity · Source severity not reportedCVE-2026-39324GHSA-33QG-7WPP-89CQ

Rack::Session::Cookie secrets: decrypt failure fallback enables secretless session forgery and Marshal deserializationCVE-2026-39324

Answer in brief

CVE-2026-39324 records a Unknown severity vulnerability in Rack::Session::Cookie secrets: decrypt failure fallback enables secretless session forgery and Marshal deserialization. The current sources do not mark it as known exploited. The current feed maps rack-session (rubygems). Check affected ranges and fixed versions before updating.

Analysis pending evidence review

HOL Guard separates source facts from reviewed analysis. See the methodology.

Published Apr 8, 2026Updated Sep 10, 2026Source checked Oct 26, 2026First seen by HOL Aug 7, 2026Material review Sep 10, 2026
Upstream Advisory

Key facts

Risk
Unknown severitySource severity not reported
Exploitation
Not marked as known exploited
Affected software
1 mapped package or product
Fix availability
Available

Why this deserves its current priority

A CVSS score is not reported in the current record. The current sources do not mark it as known exploited. Treat this as a source-backed prioritization signal, not a statement about your environment.

Analysis status

Analysis pending evidence review

Factual feed record only; HOL analysis is not approved for indexing. Read the methodology.

Affected scope and exposure questions

The current feed maps rack-session (rubygems). Check affected ranges and fixed versions before updating.

Mapped affected packages and fixed versions
PackageAffected rangeFixed version
rack-sessionrubygems>=2.0.0 <2.1.22.1.2

Recommended response

  1. 1Check inventory. Check lockfiles and deployed manifests for rack-session.
  2. 2Review the reported fix. Update rack-session to 2.1.2 if you use the affected versions. Test the change in a non-production environment first.

Evidence timeline and material changes

  1. Published upstream

    Apr 8, 2026

    Evidence: source:osv:source_dates:source-dates:record
  2. Source modified

    Sep 10, 2026

    Evidence: source:osv:source_dates:source-dates:record
  3. First seen by HOL

    Aug 7, 2026

Sources and claim methodology

  • GitHub security advisorygithub.com
  • GitHub security advisorygithub.com
  • GitHub security advisorygithub.com
  • NVD vulnerability recordnvd.nist.gov
Upstream source description

`Rack::Session::Cookie` incorrectly handles decryption failures when configured with `secrets:`. If cookie decryption fails, the implementation falls back to a default decoder instead of rejecting the cookie. This allows an unauthenticated attacker to supply a crafted session cookie that is accepted as valid session data without knowledge of any configured secret. Because this mechanism is used to load session state, an attacker can manipulate session contents and potentially gain unauthorized access. ## Details When `secrets:` is configured, `Rack::Session::Cookie` attempts to decrypt incoming session cookies using one of the configured encryptors. If all decrypt attempts fail, the implementation does not reject the cookie. Instead, it falls back to decoding the cookie using a default coder. This fallback path processes attacker-controlled cookie data as trusted session state. The behavior is implicit and occurs even when encrypted cookies are expected. The fallback decoder is applied automatically and does not require the application to opt into a non-encrypted session format. As a result, a client can send a specially crafted cookie value that bypasses the intended integrity protections provided by `secrets:`. This issue affects both default configurations and those using alternative serializers for encrypted payloads. ## Impact Any Rack application using `Rack::Session::Cookie` with `secrets:` may be affected. > [!NOTE] > Rails applications are typically not affected — Rails uses `ActionDispatch::Session::CookieStore`, which is a separate implementation backed by `ActiveSupport::MessageEncryptor` and does not share the vulnerable code path. An unauthenticated attacker can supply a crafted session cookie that is accepted as valid session data. This can lead to authentication bypass or privilege escalation in applications that rely on session values for identity or authorization decisions. Depending on application behavior and available runtime components, processing of untrusted session data may also expose additional risks. ## Mitigation * Update to a patched version of`rack-session` that rejects cookies when decryption fails under the `secrets:` configuration. * After updating, rotate session secrets to invalidate existing session cookies, since attacker-supplied session data may have been accepted and re-issued prior to the fix.

Quoted source text, attributed separately from HOL analysis.

Record context

Vulnerability class
Deserialization
EPSS
Not reported
CWE IDs
Not reported
Source
OSV
Source checked
Oct 26, 2026
References
4 linked sources
Open source record