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 42245 net imap has quadratic complexity when reading
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-2026-42245GHSA-Q2MW-FVJ9-VVCW

net-imap has quadratic complexity when reading response literalsCVE-2026-42245

Answer in brief

CVE-2026-42245 records a Unknown severity vulnerability in net-imap has quadratic complexity when reading response literals. The current sources do not mark it as known exploited. The current feed maps net-imap (rubygems), net-imap (rubygems), net-imap (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 May 4, 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
3 mapped packages or products
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 net-imap (rubygems), net-imap (rubygems), net-imap (rubygems). Check affected ranges and fixed versions before updating.

Mapped affected packages and fixed versions
PackageAffected rangeFixed version
net-imaprubygems>=0.6.0 <0.6.40.6.4
net-imaprubygems>=0.5.0 <0.5.140.5.14
net-imaprubygems>=0 <0.4.240.4.24

Recommended response

  1. 1Check inventory. Check lockfiles and deployed manifests for net-imap, net-imap, net-imap.
  2. 2Review the reported fix. Update net-imap to 0.6.4; net-imap to 0.5.14; net-imap to 0.4.24 if you use the affected versions. Test the change in a non-production environment first.

Evidence timeline and material changes

  1. Published upstream

    May 4, 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
  • GitHub security advisorygithub.com
  • GitHub security advisorygithub.com
  • GitHub security advisorygithub.com
  • GitHub security advisorygithub.com
  • GitHub security advisorygithub.com
  • GitHub security advisorygithub.com
  • NVD vulnerability recordnvd.nist.gov
Upstream source description

### Summary `Net::IMAP::ResponseReader` has quadratic time complexity when reading large responses containing many string literals. A hostile server can send responses which are crafted to exhaust the client's CPU for a denial of service attack. ### Details For each literal in a response, `ResponseReader` rescans the entire growing response buffer. The regular expression that is used to scan the response buffer runs in linear time. With many literals, this becomes O(n²) total work. The regular expression should run in constant time: it is anchored to the end and only the last 23 bytes of the buffer are relevant. Because the algorithmic complexity is super-linear, this bypasses protection from `max_response_size`: a response can stay well below the default size limit while still causing very large CPU cost. `Net::IMAP::ResponseReader` runs continuously in the receiver thread until the connection closes. ### Impact This consumes disproportionate CPU time in the client's receiver thread. A hostile server could use this to exhaust the client's CPU for a denial of service attack. For a response near the default `max_response_size`, each individual regexp scan could take between 100 to 200ms on common modern hardware, and this may be repeated 200k times per megabyte of response. While the regexp is scanning, it retains the Global VM lock, preventing other threads from running. Although other threads should not be _completely_ blocked, their run time will be significantly impacted. ### Mitigation * Upgrade to a patched version of net-imap that reads responses more efficiently. * Do not connect to untrusted IMAP servers. * When connecting to untrusted servers, a _much_ smaller `max_response_size` (for example: 8KiB) will limit the impact. Although this is too small for fetching unpaginated message bodies, it should be enough for most other operations.

Quoted source text, attributed separately from HOL analysis.

Record context

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