HOL LogoGuard

Explore HOL

  • HOL home
  • AI agent registry
  • AI plugins
  • Open standards
  • HOL members

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.
  • SponsorKeep agent security open: sponsor a project, place a banner, or fund a security initiative.
PricingEnterpriseOpen AppInstall Guard
  1. Guard
  2. Security
  3. CVEs
  4. CVE 2026 95105 cloak aes ctr cipher lacks ciphertext
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
  • Contact
  • Blog
  • GitHub
  • Privacy
  • Terms of Service
Settings

Copyright © 2026 HOL DAO LLC. All rights reserved.

Back to active CVEs
High · CVSS 8.2CVE-2026-95105

Cloak AES-CTR cipher lacks ciphertext authentication, allowing chosen-plaintext forgery by bit flippingCVE-2026-95105

Answer in brief

CVE-2026-95105 records a High severity (CVSS 8.2) vulnerability in Cloak AES-CTR cipher lacks ciphertext authentication, allowing chosen-plaintext forgery by bit flipping. The current sources do not mark it as known exploited. The current feed maps danielberkompas/cloak (generic), danielberkompas/danielberkompas/cloak (generic). Check affected ranges and fixed versions before updating.

Analysis pending evidence review

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

Published Oct 6, 2026Updated Oct 6, 2026Source checked Oct 6, 2026First seen by HOL Oct 6, 2026Material review Oct 6, 2026
Upstream Advisory

Key facts

Risk
High · CVSS 8.2
Exploitation
Not marked as known exploited
Affected software
2 mapped packages or products
Fix availability
Available

Why this deserves its current priority

CVSS is 8.2. 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 danielberkompas/cloak (generic), danielberkompas/danielberkompas/cloak (generic). Check affected ranges and fixed versions before updating.

Mapped affected packages and fixed versions
PackageAffected rangeFixed version
danielberkompas/cloakgeneric>=0.1.0-pre <**
danielberkompas/danielberkompas/cloakgeneric>=2bd17019e285b55c5c218cc842537bf9280f24c3 <**

Recommended response

  1. 1Check inventory. Check lockfiles and deployed manifests for danielberkompas/cloak, danielberkompas/danielberkompas/cloak.
  2. 2Review the reported fix. Source-reported workaround: Configure the vault with Cloak.Ciphers.AES.GCM as the default cipher and re-encrypt existing values, for example with the cloak.migrate.ecto task from cloak_ecto. Then remove Cloak.Ciphers.AES.CTR and Cloak.Ciphers.Deprecated.AES.CTR from the vault configuration, so that ciphertext in the CTR format is no longer decrypted. AES-GCM authenticates the ciphertext and rejects modified values.

Evidence timeline and material changes

  1. Published upstream

    Oct 6, 2026

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

    Oct 6, 2026

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

    Oct 6, 2026

Sources and claim methodology

  • Source referencecna.erlef.org
  • GitHub security advisorygithub.com
  • Source referenceosv.dev
Upstream source description

Reliance on Obfuscation or Encryption of Security-Relevant Inputs without Integrity Checking vulnerability in danielberkompas cloak allows an attacker with write access to stored ciphertext to make it decrypt to a chosen value via bit flipping. Cloak.Ciphers.AES.CTR encrypts with AES-256 in CTR mode and stores the key tag, the IV and the ciphertext with no MAC. decrypt/2 checks only the key tag and the minimum length before it returns the plaintext, and Cloak.Ciphers.Deprecated.AES.CTR decrypts the legacy format the same way. CTR is a stream cipher, so a value XORed into the stored ciphertext is XORed into the plaintext at the same offset. An attacker who can write to the encrypted store (for example through SQL injection or a compromised replica) and who knows or can guess a stored plaintext can replace it with any value of the same length. The application receives that value with no error. This issue affects cloak: from 0.1.0-pre onward.

Quoted source text, attributed separately from HOL analysis.

Related CVEs

  • Insecure deserialization in the TrueLayer Magento 2 pluginSame generic ecosystem
  • Authenticated RCE via render-components Entry Type overridesSame generic ecosystem
  • Heap Buffer Overflow in GNU Aspell's prezip utilitySame generic ecosystem
  • Out-of-bounds Read in GNU AspellSame generic ecosystem
  • Integer Truncation Leading to Heap Corruption in GNU AspellSame generic ecosystem
  • Open Redirect in PingGateway Fragment FilterSame generic ecosystem

Record context

Vulnerability class
SQL Injection
EPSS
Not reported
CWE IDs
CWE-649
Source
CVE List V5
Source checked
Oct 6, 2026
References
3 linked sources
Open source record