CVE-2026-85216
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.
MISP LDAP and LinOTP Authentication Bypass via Empty or Invalid Credentials
rank 27 = 0 + 25 + 0 + 2 + 0
rank@v1 · scheduled
Someone is already using it
CISA KEV catalog · public proof-of-concept · FIRST EPSS
EPSS 0.00495 · without this subject the record ranks 27
What it costs you if it fires
NVD CVSS base score, then the CNA's own
CVSS 9.8, from NVD · without this subject the record ranks 2
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 27
How much of the world it touches
NVD CPE configurations
1 product in the CPE ranges · without this subject the record ranks 25
Someone else already set the date
CISA KEV remediation due date
no CISA due date · without this subject the record ranks 27
$24,700 = $4.99M incident cost x 1 exposure x 0.00495 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
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.
Sources disagree here.
Both shown, dated. We don't pick winners. disagreement-rules@v1
Running misp? 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.
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 affectedMitigatedChoose 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.
CISA KEV & Federal Remediation Deadline from the record and CISA
The fix, and how long it's been waiting.
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
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.
What it is stated by the CNA
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. receipt
Read the rest of the CNA's description
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.
NVD's analysis a second authority
- severity
- 9.8 CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
- weakness
- CWE-521
- affected versions
- misp-project misp < 2.5.46
- also scored by
- 9.5 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
The CNA scored it 9.5 and NVD 9.8. Both are shown because both were published; we do not pick one.
check it yourself github.com receipt
Movement the material steps
Show all 2 observations
2 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
The record had been public for 11 days when this index was last written.
Siblings and hubs
Records related to this one
None. No alias set, and nothing in the corpus cites this identifier or shares its product family within 60 days.
Browse the index from here
These are index-wide views, not findings about CVE-2026-85216.
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.