vciy

CVE-2026-48859

INDEX BUILT · 2026-09-20

No source can show you its own past. This one can.

Print this page to keep the view as it stands on this date. Everything hidden behind a disclosure opens, and every receipt prints with its value.

SSH server timing side-channel in ssh_auth:check_password/3 allows unauthenticated username enumeration

CVE-2026-488594 of 4 sources documented this
17

rank 17 = 0 + 13 + 0 + 4 + 0

rank@v1 · backlog

Someone is already using it

CISA KEV catalog · public proof-of-concept · FIRST EPSS

EPSS 0.00354  ·  without this subject the record ranks 17

What it costs you if it fires

NVD CVSS base score, then the CNA's own

CVSS 5.3, from NVD  ·  without this subject the record ranks 4

It is getting worse, not staying still

FIRST EPSS series, rescorings and bad loads removed

no persisting rise in 365 days  ·  without this subject the record ranks 17

How much of the world it touches

NVD CPE configurations

2 products in the CPE ranges  ·  without this subject the record ranks 13

Someone else already set the date

CISA KEV remediation due date

no CISA due date  ·  without this subject the record ranks 17

Unaudited dollar value2 of 3 inputs carry a receipt
Exposure$4,250over the next 30 days, if this record is yours
Movementno material movementthe record holds only daily drift and scoring model releases
Basisassumeda published average, not your estate

$4,250 = $4.99M incident cost x 0.24048551839932833 exposure x 0.00354 likelihood

udv@v1 · unaudited · wrong for you until you say what you run

$4.99M is the cost of a breach that happened, from IBM Cost of a Data Breach Report 2026, global average. It is not the value of any asset of yours. That average already covers breaches of every severity, so scaling it by exposure understates a partial-impact record. That is an assumption, not a measurement. Your own asset value goes in the decision record.

Hindsight · the state

0.00354EPSSNOT IN KEVas of 2026-09-20
Severity6.3 MEDIUMreceipt
Harmunauthenticated · networkreceipt
Exploitationnone in held sources
Defensefix version namedreceipt
Movementrisenreceipt
RISING10Risen from 0.00263 to 0.00354 across 3 observations. arc-rules@v1

Foresight · where to check next

No weakness class or product neighbourhood is held for this record, so this index cannot name anywhere to check next. That is an absence in the record, not a finding about the software.

Color is a claim, not decoration:the hostile worldthe defenseno signal

Sources disagree here.

Severity score
EEF6.3 MEDIUMreceipt
NVD5.3 MEDIUMreceipt
Scoring standard
EEFCVSS v4.0receipt
NVDCVSS v3.1receipt

Both shown, dated. We don't pick winners. disagreement-rules@v1

Running Erlang OTP? Check your version

A deterministic range check against the ranges this record publishes. It tells you where a version sits in the record, not whether your deployment is exploitable. No account needed.

Watch this record

Matches your own product list against every record this index holds, and tells you when one of them moves.

What counts as a move

Set up a watchlist (needs a Practitioner account)

Record your call

Keep your verdict, your reason and the evidence together. The record takes its date when you save it.

AcceptDeferPatch by…Not affectedMitigated

Choose your verdict, then sign in or use an email link. Your first 100 records are free. Evidence is frozen when the record is created.

Private to your organization unless you share it. Put the proof link in your ticket so a reviewer can inspect the basis for your call. See how decision records work.

Harm, if it fires from the vector and the weakness

Written for the ticket you're about to file.

Reachnetwork-reachable · no privileges required · no user interaction · low attack complexity · attack requirements presentreceipt
ImpactPartial confidentiality lossreceipt
Scored fromCVSS v4.0 · the CNA's vectorreceipt
Weakness classCWE-208 Observable Timing Discrepancyreceipt
Published consequencesCWE-208: Confidentiality, Access Control: Read Application Data, Bypass Protection Mechanism[email protected]

CISA KEV & Federal Remediation Deadline from the record and CISA

The fix, and how long it's been waiting.

Fixed in29.0.2; 6.0.1receipt
Patch available sinceNo dated patch-availability record in held sources. The index holds reference URLs without dates and only the current revision of the CVE record, so the day a fix first existed cannot be derived. Only the versions it landed in.

Exploit Status & Known PoCs a ladder, not a score

Current rung: Nothing observed in held sources.

  • RUNG 1Nothing observed in held sources
  • RUNG 2Proof-of-concept published
  • RUNG 3Exploited in the wild · CISA KEV listed
  • RUNG 4Ransomware campaign use known

Authority who says so

CVSS, the CNA6.3 MEDIUMreceipt
CVSS, NVD5.3 MEDIUMreceipt
Exploit probability0.00354 · top 71% of all CVEsreceipt
Blast breadth2 products across 2 vendorsderived
Assigned byEEFreceipt
Recorded changes3 · last 19 Sep 2026derived

Affected & Fixed Versions as published

Affected productErlang OTPreceipt
Published rangeserlang\/otp >= 29.0 < 29.0.2; erlang\/ssh >= 6.0 < 6.0.1receipt
Fixed in29.0.2; 6.0.1receipt

A rung lights from a row in the index, never from an assessment. "Held sources" is the true scope of the claim: this index reads the CVE record, NVD, CISA KEV, FIRST's EPSS and public proof-of-concept repositories, and it does not observe attacks.

Did this affect your environment?Answering needs an account.

What it is stated by the CNA

Observable Timing Discrepancy vulnerability in Erlang/OTP ssh (ssh_auth, ssh_options modules) allows unauthenticated remote username enumeration via timing side-channel in password authentication. When the SSH daemon is configured with the user_passwords or password option, ssh_auth:check_password/3 performs a PBKDF2-SHA256 computation with 600,000 iterations (~300ms) for valid usernames, but returns immediately (~0ms) for invalid usernames via the ssh_options:get_password_option/2 path. receipt

Read the rest of the CNA's description

This timing difference is detectable in a single authentication attempt and allows an unauthenticated attacker to distinguish valid from invalid usernames. The user_passwords and password options are documented as intended for test purposes; the recommended alternative is pwdfun, which is not affected by this vulnerability. This vulnerability is associated with program files lib/ssh/src/ssh_auth.erl and lib/ssh/src/ssh_options.erl. This issue affects OTP from OTP 29.0 before OTP 29.0.2, corresponding to ssh from 6.0 before 6.0.1.

NVD's analysis a second authority

severity
5.3 CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N
weakness
CWE-208
affected versions
erlang\/otp >= 29.0 < 29.0.2; erlang\/ssh >= 6.0 < 6.0.1
also scored by
6.3 CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:L/VI:N/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

The CNA scored it 6.3 and NVD 5.3. Both are shown because both were published; we do not pick one.

check it yourself github.com cna.erlef.org osv.dev erlang.org github.com receipt

Movement the material steps

11 Jun 20260.00263
15 Jun 20260.00466 · scoring model v2026.06.15
16 Jun 20260.00354
Show all 3 observations
11 Jun 20260.00263
15 Jun 20260.00466
16 Jun 20260.00354

3 observations held. A highlighted step crossed a promotion threshold. A step marked with a scoring model moved because the instrument was replaced, not because the vulnerability changed. receipt

The full biography

EPSS 0.00354Published2026-06-10Index as of2026-06-16

The record had been public for 6 days when this index was last written.

Published 2026-06-10 receipt · Index as of 2026-06-16 derived

Siblings and hubs

Records related to this one

Browse the index from here

These are index-wide views, not findings about CVE-2026-48859.

What usually comes next

Everything above needs no account. What is below is work: assembling it, scoping it to your estate, watching it, and handing it to someone else.

Everything on this page is free. Public data. Withholding it protects nothing.