Skip to content
CVE Ledger
  • Newest CVEsPage
  • Recently added to KEVPage
  • Rising exploitation (EPSS)Page
  • Weekly digestPage
  • StatisticsPage
  • WatchlistPage
  • API docsPage
  • MCP serverPage
  • AboutPage
  • Data sourcesPage
  • Data statusPage
  • ChangelogPage
  • How it's builtPage
  • Support the projectPage

14 results

Back

CVE-2026-42791OCSP responder certificate validity period not checked in public_key

Description

Improper Certificate Validation vulnerability in Erlang OTP public_key (pubkey_ocsp module) allows forged OCSP responses signed with an expired responder certificate to be accepted as valid. OCSP response verification in pubkey_ocsp:verify_response/5 and pubkey_ocsp:is_authorized_responder/3 in lib/public_key/src/pubkey_ocsp.erl does not check the validity period (notBefore/notAfter) of the OCSP responder certificate. An attacker who has obtained the private key of an expired CA-designated OCSP responder certificate can forge OCSP responses that Erlang/OTP accepts as valid. This affects TLS clients using OCSP stapling via the ssl application: a malicious or compromised server can present a revoked TLS certificate together with a forged OCSP response signed by an expired responder key, and the client will accept the revoked certificate as valid. It also affects applications calling public_key:pkix_ocsp_validate/5 directly, where the impact depends on the use case — server-side client certificate validation using this API may allow authentication bypass with a revoked client certificate. This issue affects OTP from OTP 27.0 before OTP 27.3.4.12, OTP 28.5.0.1, and OTP 29.0.1, corresponding to public_key from 1.16 before 1.17.1.3, 1.20.3.1, and 1.21.1.

Timeline

  1. ID reserved

    By EEF

  2. · 28 days later

    Published

  3. · 6 months later

    Record updated

Changes after publication (a new score, a public exploit, EPSS crossing 1, 10 or 50 %, leaving KEV) are kept since November 2026; earlier ones are not known.

Scores

CVSS scores of CVE-2026-42791, by who scored it
Scored byCVSSScoreVector
EEFCNA (assigner)4.0Medium6.3CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:H/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:L/VA:N/SC:L/SI:L/SA:N
NVDNVD · Modified4.0Medium6.3CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:H/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:L/VA:N/SC:L/SI:L/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
EPSS (exploitation in 30 days)
0.33% · top 74% of all CVEs (13 Nov 2026)
CISA SSVC
Exploitation: none · Automatable: no · Technical impact: partial
Loading the EPSS history…

The list uses the assigner's score when there is one, then CISA's, then NVD's: Medium 6.3.

Affected products

  • Erlang · OTP

    • affected 27.0 – < *
  • Erlang · OTP

    • affected 1.16 – < *
  • Erlang · OTP

    • affected 2b1a742c651b90f8a7a1fb2ddde73f29915ea376 – < *

What to do

Workaround: * For TLS clients using the ssl application, disable OCSP stapling by setting {stapling, no_staple} in the client options, or switch to CRL-based revocation checking with {crl_check, true}. * For applications calling public_key:pkix_ocsp_validate/5 directly, validate the responder certificate's validity period in application code before calling the function.

References

References7

Sources

The same CVE in the primary databases and aggregators, to check against.

Badge for a README or a ticket

CVE-2026-42791 badge
[![CVE-2026-42791](https://cveledger.app/badge/CVE-2026-42791.svg)](https://cveledger.app/cve/CVE-2026-42791)

Record last updated .