MISP LDAP and LinOTP Authentication Bypass via Empty or Invalid Credentials (CVE-2026-85216)
Published Last modified Sources: CVE.org, EUVD, BSI
What is affected, what to do
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.
Update misp to version 2.5.46, MISP to version 2.5.46.
- Affected
- MISP
lte *..2.5.45
- MISP
Not sure whether and how you are affected? Ask a question about this vulnerability
Metrics
9.8
Priority
XIEM Effective CVSS: highest available CVSS rating from NVD and vendor data.
Source: NVD, CVSS v3
9.8
CVSS v3
Severity Critical on the scale from 0 to 10.
Source: CVE.org, EUVD, BSI
0.9 %
EPSS score
Low — model estimates < 1% exploitation likelihood.
Source: FIRST EPSS, percentile 58.9
Show all metrics
- Severity
- Critical
Priority (0–325)
The priority score is a consolidated metric that condenses several individual signals into a single, action-guiding ranking: technical severity (CVSS), exploitation likelihood (EPSS), known-exploited status (KEV) and the context of the affected asset. The aim is to answer the only truly important question in vulnerability management: what first?
Read in glossary- 101.32 Methodology
Exploit maturity
An exploit is code or a technique that specifically uses a concrete vulnerability to force unintended behaviour — such as executing code or escalating privileges. It is the tool that turns a theoretical flaw into a practical attack.
Read in glossary- no public PoC known
XIEM Effective CVSS
XIEM® is the tiered managed-security operating model from NEOSEC and a registered trademark of NEOSEC GmbH. It extends classic SIEM — the central collection, normalisation and correlation of security-relevant events — with endpoint forensics, network visibility and deception technology, and consolidates them into three building tiers: Sentry, Orchestrate and Command.
Read in glossary- 9.8 Methodology
CVSS v3
CVSS is the globally established, open standard for assessing the technical severity of a vulnerability on a scale from 0 to 10. It describes how easily a flaw can be exploited and what damage it can cause — but not how likely its actual exploitation is. CVSS and the complementary EPSS deliberately answer different questions.
Read in glossary- 9.8
CVSS v4
CVSS is the globally established, open standard for assessing the technical severity of a vulnerability on a scale from 0 to 10. It describes how easily a flaw can be exploited and what damage it can cause — but not how likely its actual exploitation is. CVSS and the complementary EPSS deliberately answer different questions.
Read in glossary- 9.5
EPSS score
The EPSS score is the absolute model output for an individual vulnerability: the estimated probability of real-world exploitation within the next 30 days, expressed as a value between 0 and 1 (i.e. 0 % to 100 %). A score of 0.42 means „the model estimates a 42 % chance of real-world exploitation within 30 days“.
Read in glossary- 0.9 %
- Low — model estimates < 1% exploitation likelihood.
EPSS percentile
The EPSS percentile is the relative position of a vulnerability within all EPSS-scored CVEs, expressed as a value between 0 and 1. A percentile of 0.90 means „this CVE has a higher EPSS score than 90 % of all other scored CVEs“. Unlike the EPSS score, it is not a probability — but a positioning within a ranking.
Read in glossary- 58.9
- High — this CVE ranks above the median of all CVEs scored today (rank ≥ 36%).
KEV status
The KEV catalogue is a list maintained by the US authority CISA of vulnerabilities for which active exploitation in the wild has been confirmed. It answers not the question „how severe?“ but „is it already being attacked?“ — thereby sharply prioritising patching.
Read in glossary- —
- Published
- CISA assessment (SSVC)
- Exploitation: none known · not automatable · Technical impact: total
- Source: CISA Vulnrichment, as of 3 September 2026
CWE
CWE is a catalogue of typical weakness types in software and hardware — such as flawed input validation, unsafe memory handling or poor authentication. Where a CVE names a concrete vulnerability in a concrete product, a CWE describes the underlying class of defect.
Read in glossary- CWE-521
Detection rules
No NEOSEC detection rule is available for this vulnerability yet.
Classification under NIS2 and CRA
Rule-based classification from exploitation status and severity. It does not replace a case-by-case assessment.
NIS2
NIS2 is EU Directive (EU) 2022/2555 to raise the level of cybersecurity across the Union. It substantially broadens obligations compared with the first NIS directive: more sectors, mandatory risk management, staged reporting duties and personal accountability of senior management.
Read in glossary- High technical severity: assess and remediate the vulnerability in vulnerability handling under Art. 21(2)(e) NIS2 and document the decision.
CRA
The CRA is EU Regulation (EU) 2024/2847 setting horizontal cybersecurity requirements for „products with digital elements“ — from industrial controllers and software to connected consumer devices. For the first time manufacturers must ensure security across the entire product lifecycle, handle vulnerabilities and provide security updates.
Read in glossary- From 11.12.2027, Annex I Part II CRA requires manufacturers of affected products with digital elements to handle vulnerabilities without delay and provide security updates.
ISO/IEC 27001
ISO/IEC 27001 is the internationally leading standard for an information security management system (ISMS). It describes a risk-based, process-oriented framework to systematically plan, implement, review and improve information security.
Read in glossary- Control A.8.8, management of technical vulnerabilities: assess relevance to your systems, plan remediation and keep evidence.
Description
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.
Source: NVD (NIST), ENISA EUVD, cvelistv5, BSI WID Portal, BSI CSAF
Affected products
The following versions are affected. Older releases of the same product line are also vulnerable unless stated otherwise.
| Affected versions | Fixed in | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| misp | misp |
|
|
| misp-project | misp |
|
|
| Open Source | MISP |
|
|
Vendors and products
Weakness classes (CWE)
CWE-521Weak Password Requirements
Base
The product does not require that users should have strong passwords.
Entry at MITRE CWE-521
References & sources
- github.comMISP/MISP/commit/0ee058548Patch
Changes to this CVE
Who changed this CVE and when: NVD (analysis, affected products, CVSS), the CVE publisher (CNA) and additional providers such as CISA (ADP).
Initial analysis by NVDNVD
Newly listed as affected:- MISP (before 2.5.46)
CVSS V3.1: AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
New references:Show 3 original changes
Individual changes of this event as published by NVD Type Action Before After CVSS added —AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:HProduct configuration added —OR *cpe:2.3:a:misp-project:misp:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:* versions up to (excluding) 2.5.46Reference type added —CIRCL: https://github.com/MISP/MISP/commit/0ee058548 Types: PatchSource identifier: nvd@nist.gov
Embed badge
Show the severity and KEV status of this vulnerability on your site – with a link back here. The image is updated hourly.
<a href="https://intel.neosec.eu/en/cve/CVE-2026-85216"><img src="https://intel.neosec.eu/badge/cve/CVE-2026-85216.svg?lang=en" alt="CVE-2026-85216 – NEOSEC Intel" height="20"></a>