CVE-2026-127079: OpsTree BuildPiper before 2.7.0 OTP Brute Force via password_reset/check_otp
Noroxi assessment
Priority: Monitor (action score 36/100)
- The sources we track (CISA KEV, Exploit-DB, Metasploit, Nuclei, GitHub) show no public exploit code or exploitation in the wild.
- Anyone who can reach it over the internet can trigger it. No account or password is required. No user action is required. Special conditions such as timing or configuration are required.
- Fixed version: OpsTree Solutions BuildPiper 2.7.0.
Low priority for now. Upgrade to OpsTree Solutions BuildPiper 2.7.0 or later.
Generated automatically from the record's data: CVSS (NVD and CNA), CISA KEV and SSVC, FIRST EPSS, exploit sources, fixed versions. How we calculate it
OpsTree BuildPiper before 2.7.0 lacks rate limiting on password-reset OTP verification, allowing unauthenticated attackers to brute force 6-digit OTPs. Attackers can initiate a reset and submit unthrottled guesses to the check_otp endpoint, resetting the target's password and taking over the account.
- Published
- Nov 13, 2026
- Updated
- Nov 13, 2026
- EPSS
- —
- CWE
- CWE-307
Report tools
Action score
36
Low priority for now.
- CVSS
- 36 / 40 · 9.1 / 10
- CISA KEV
- 0 / 30 · Not listed
- EPSS
- 0 / 30 · —
CNA vs NVD score
- NVD
- —
- CNA · VulnCheck
- 9.1
- NVD has not scored this yet; the score shown is the CNA’s.
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:H/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N
The score given by the assigning authority versus NVD’s independent score. A gap means the severity is contested.
Get told when this record changes
- Not in KEV: no record of exploitation in the wild
- No public exploit code on record
- A fix has been released
If any of these changes, we'll tell you in the daily email digest.
Is your version affected? Check itNoroxi analysis
What does it mean in your environment?
The assessment above is generated automatically from the record's data; it doesn't know your environment. Our team verifies on your systems whether this vulnerability is actually exploitable and which mitigation is enough.
We use this product, ask for helpAffected systems
Is your version affected?
Pick the product and type the version you run. It's compared with this record's version ranges in your browser; the version isn't sent anywhere.
—
Versions reported by the vendor
Affected version ranges reported by the assigning authority (VulnCheck). Independent of NVD's CPE analysis and usually ahead of it.
OpsTree Solutions BuildPiper
- before 2.7.0affected · semver
Same product
opstree solutions: all recordsOther highest-scoring records for the same primary product.
- CVE-2026-127080OpsTree BuildPiper before 2.7.0 Container Escape via Unrestricted HostPath Volumes37Monitor
- CVE-2026-127073OpsTree BuildPiper before 2.7.0 Privilege Escalation via Additional Manifest37Monitor
- CVE-2026-127078OpsTree BuildPiper before 2.7.0 Authorization Bypass via project_env_id Parameter28Monitor
Published before and after this one in the same product
- ← EarlierCVE-2026-127076Nov 13, 2026 · OpsTree BuildPiper before 2.7.0 Broken Access Control via git_repo API28Monitor
- ← EarlierCVE-2026-127077Nov 13, 2026 · OpsTree BuildPiper before 2.7.0 Authorization Bypass via Environment Creation API28Monitor
- Later →CVE-2026-127081Nov 13, 2026 · OpsTree BuildPiper before 2.7.0 Authorization Bypass via Pipeline Stage project_env_id21Monitor
Remediation
Which version to upgrade to
Fix versions compiled from the vendor, package registries and Microsoft. Verify the vendor's note before upgrading.
| Product / package | Fixed version | Source |
|---|---|---|
| OpsTree Solutions BuildPiper | 2.7.0 | Vendor (CNA) |
Exploit status
No known public exploit
No public exploit has been observed yet. That doesn't mean you're safe, only that the bar is a little higher.
Research context
For pentesters and researchers: attack profile, score disagreement, timeline, patch commits, credits, variant and chain candidates, bug bounty scope. All derived from existing data; no exploit code.
Timeline
From publication to today: proof of concept, Metasploit module, CISA KEV and fix record. Dates are as reported by the sources.
- Published
- Fix recordedsame day
- TodayNov 13, 2026same day
Credits
All researchersFinders, reporters and analysts named in the CNA record. Click a name for that researcher’s other records.
- Neel Saurabh Kotnisfinder
Not on record for this CVE: EPSS history · patch commit or PR link · variant or chain candidate · public bounty program.
Technical details
Attack conditions
- Anyone who can reach it over the internet can trigger it.
- No account or password is required.
- No user action is required.
- Special conditions such as timing or configuration are required.
If successful
- Confidentiality
- Integrity
- Availability
- Attack vector
- Network
- Attack complexity
- High
- Privileges required
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- X
Weakness class (CWE)
CWE-307 · Improper Restriction of Excessive Authentication AttemptsCVSS vector
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:H/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:X/CR:X/IR:X/AR:X/MAV:X/MAC:X/MAT:X/MPR:X/MUI:X/MVC:X/MVI:X/MVA:X/MSC:X/MSI:X/MSA:X/S:X/AU:X/R:X/V:X/RE:X/U:X
nvd-secondary
Attack context
MITRE CAPEC attack patterns and ATT&CK techniques for this weakness class (CWE). A starting point for detection rules and threat hunting.
Attack patterns (CAPEC)
- Dictionary-based Password AttackCAPEC-16likelihood: Medium · High
- Password Brute ForcingCAPEC-49likelihood: Medium · High
- Use of Known Domain CredentialsCAPEC-560likelihood: High · High
- Password SprayingCAPEC-565likelihood: High · High
- Credential StuffingCAPEC-600likelihood: High · High
- Use of Known Kerberos CredentialsCAPEC-652likelihood: Medium · High
- Use of Known Operating System CredentialsCAPEC-653likelihood: High · High
Change log (2)
- Exploit maturity— → none
- Fix✗ → ✓
For records you follow, these changes also arrive as notifications. →
References
Show all references (2 more)Show less
Vendor advisories and official records. Exploit/PoC links are deliberately left out.