CVE-2026-85216: MISP LDAP and LinOTP Authentication Bypass via Empty or Invalid Credentials
Noroxi assessment
Priority: Monitor (action score 38/100)
- The sources we track (CISA KEV, Exploit-DB, Metasploit, Nuclei, GitHub) show no public exploit code or exploitation in the wild.
- Probability of exploitation in the next 30 days: 0.86% (FIRST EPSS); higher than 59% of all records.
- Anyone who can reach it over the internet can trigger it. No account or password is required. No user action is required. No special conditions are required; it is repeatable.
- No fixed version is recorded, but the references include a patch (commit or PR) link.
Low priority for now. See the fix and affected versions sections below.
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
Primary sources: NVD · CVE.org · FIRST EPSS
MISP contains an authentication bypass vulnerability in its LDAP and LinOTP authentication components due to insufficient validation of user-supplied credentials. The custom LdapAuthenticate and LinOTPAuthenticate components replace CakePHP's FormAuthenticate implementation but did not replicate its credential validation checks. As a result, empty or non-string values could reach the underlying authentication mechanisms. In the LDAP authentication path, an attacker able to identify a valid directory user's email address could submit an empty password. The empty credential could be passed to ldap_bind(), where an LDAP server accepting unauthenticated binds may return a successful result for a valid distinguished name combined with an empty password. MISP could consequently treat the attacker as the corresponding authenticated directory user without verification of the user's password. The issue also affected the LinOTP authentication component. Invalid credential types were not rejected before being processed, and when mixed authentication was enabled, an empty password could be checked against a locally stored MISP password hash. LDAP-provisioned MISP accounts could additionally be created with an empty local password because account creation skipped normal validation, resulting in a hash corresponding to an empty password. This could permit authentication through the local fallback mechanism when such an account was no longer resolved through LDAP. Successful exploitation could allow a remote unauthenticated attacker to impersonate an existing MISP user. If the targeted account has administrative or other privileged permissions, the attacker could gain corresponding access to sensitive threat-intelligence data, modify or delete information, alter configuration, or perform other privileged operations. The patch resolves the vulnerability by requiring authentication identifiers and passwords to be valid strings, rejecting empty passwords where they are not explicitly permitted, and assigning a randomly generated local password to LDAP-provisioned accounts instead of storing a hash derived from an empty password.
- Published
- Sep 3, 2026
- Updated
- Sep 10, 2026
- EPSS
- 0.8% · 59th percentile
- CWE
- CWE-521
Report tools
Action score
38
Monitor
Low priority for now.
- CVSS
- 38 / 40 · 9.5 / 10
- CISA KEV
- 0 / 30 · Not listed
- EPSS
- 0 / 30 · 0.8%
CISA SSVC decision
- Exploitation
- none
- Automatable
- no
- Technical impact
- total
Vulnrichment: CISA's decision-tree inputs.
CNA vs NVD score
- NVD
- —
- CNA · CIRCL
- 9.5
- NVD has not scored this yet; the score shown is the CNA’s.
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/SC:H/SI:H/SA:H
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
- No fixed version yet
If any of these changes, we'll tell you in the daily email digest.
Running WordPress? Scan your site free with WP Lens
Noroxi 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.
| Vendor | Product | CPE |
|---|---|---|
| misp-project | misp | cpe:2.3:a:misp-project:misp |
Affected versions
NVD version ranges (for catalog products). Add the product to your stack with a version and matching uses these.
- misp-project mispbefore 2.5.46
Versions reported by the vendor
Affected version ranges reported by the assigning authority (CIRCL). Independent of NVD's CPE analysis and usually ahead of it.
misp misp
- up to and including 2.5.45affected · semver
Same product
misp-project: all recordsOther highest-scoring records for the same primary product.
- CVE-2022-29528An issue was discovered in MISP before 2.4.158.40Plan
- CVE-2021-41326In MISP before 2.4.148, app/Lib/Export/OpendataExport.php mishandles parameter data that is used in a shell_exec call.40Plan
- CVE-2018-19908An issue was discovered in MISP 2.4.9x before 2.4.99.40Plan
Published before and after this one in the same product
- ← EarlierCVE-2026-56446Jun 22, 2026 · Authenticated Remote Code Execution via Arbitrary NDJSON Error Log Path in MISP34Monitor
- ← EarlierCVE-2026-56447Jun 22, 2026 · MISP remote code execution via arbitrary rdkafka configuration path37Monitor
- Later →CVE-2026-85221Sep 3, 2026 · MISP CurlClient TLS Peer Verification Disabled by Default Enables Man-in-the-Middle Attacks30Monitor
Remediation
Which version to upgrade to
Fix versions compiled from the vendor, package registries and Microsoft. Verify the vendor's note before upgrading.
No fix version is recorded for this entry. Check the references for vendor advisories.
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.
No dated events beyond publication.
FIRST EPSS daily score; only changes of 0.01 or more are recorded (step chart).
Patch and commit links
Commit, PR and diff links among the references. A starting point for patch-diffing and variant hunting; fixes, not exploits.
Credits
All researchersFinders, reporters and analysts named in the CNA record. Click a name for that researcher’s other records.
- Andras Iklodyremediation developer
- Claude Opus 5 (1M context)tool
- elhoim (David André)finder
Variant candidates
Same product, same weakness class, within 18 months. If the patch missed the root cause, the sibling bug is here.
—
Chain candidates
An authentication bypass and a privilege-requiring bug in the same product, published close together: combined they may become an unauthenticated path.
- CVE-2026-5644773 days apartMISP remote code execution via arbitrary rdkafka configuration path37Monitor
- CVE-2026-5644673 days apartAuthenticated Remote Code Execution via Arbitrary NDJSON Error Log Path in MISP34Monitor
- CVE-2026-863474 days apartMISP Missing Authorization on Template File Upload Allows Authenticated Disk Exhaustion28Monitor
- CVE-2026-864194 days apartMISP Insufficient Outbound URL Validation Allows SSRF and Credential Disclosure via Feed Redirects and TAXII Discovery28Monitor
Bug bounty scope
No known public program.
Source: bounty-targets-data (public HackerOne, Bugcrowd, Intigriti, YesWeHack listings).
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.
- No special conditions are required; it is repeatable.
If successful
- Confidentiality
- Integrity
- Availability
- Attack vector
- Network
- Attack complexity
- Low
- Privileges required
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- X
Weakness class (CWE)
CWE-521 · Weak Password RequirementsCVSS vector
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/SC:H/SI:H/SA:H/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)
- Brute ForceCAPEC-112High
- Dictionary-based Password AttackCAPEC-16likelihood: Medium · High
- Password Brute ForcingCAPEC-49likelihood: Medium · High
- KerberoastingCAPEC-509High
- Rainbow Table Password CrackingCAPEC-55likelihood: Medium · Medium
- Remote Services with Stolen CredentialsCAPEC-555Very High
- Windows Admin Shares with Stolen CredentialsCAPEC-561
- Password SprayingCAPEC-565likelihood: High · High
ATT&CK techniques
- Remote ServicesT1021
- Remote Services:SMB/Windows Admin SharesT1021.002
- Valid Accounts:Default AccountsT1078.001
- Brute ForceT1110
- Brute Force:Password GuessingT1110.001
- Brute Force:Password CrackingT1110.002
- Brute Force:Password SprayingT1110.003
- Email Collection:Remote Email CollectionT1114.002
- External Remote ServicesT1133
- Steal or Forge Kerberos Tickets:KerberoastingT1558.003
Change log
No changes recorded on tracked fields yet. Score, KEV, exploit maturity and fix status changes appear here.
References
Vendor advisories and official records. Exploit/PoC links are deliberately left out.