CVE-2026-39388 (GCVE-0-2026-39388)
Vulnerability from cvelistv5
Published
2026-04-21 00:43
Modified
2026-04-21 00:43
Severity ?
VLAI Severity ?
EPSS score ?
CWE
- CWE-295 - Improper Certificate Validation
Summary
OpenBao is an open source identity-based secrets management system. Prior to version 2.5.3, OpenBao's Certificate authentication method, when a token renewal is requested and `disable_binding=true` is set, attempts to verify the current request's presented mTLS certificate matches the original. Token renewals for other authentication methods do not require any supplied login information. Due to incorrect matching, the certificate authentication method would allow renewal of tokens for which the attacker had a sibling certificate+key signed by the same CA, but which did not necessarily match the original role or the originally supplied certificate. This implies an attacker could still authenticate to OpenBao in a similar scope, however, token renewal implies that an attacker may be able to extend the lifetime of dynamic leases held by the original token. This attack requires knowledge of either the original token or its accessor. This vulnerability is original from HashiCorp Vault. This is addressed in v2.5.3. As a workaround, ensure privileged roles are tightly scoped to single certificates.
References
| URL | Tags | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|||||
{
"containers": {
"cna": {
"affected": [
{
"product": "openbao",
"vendor": "openbao",
"versions": [
{
"status": "affected",
"version": "\u003c 2.5.3"
}
]
}
],
"descriptions": [
{
"lang": "en",
"value": "OpenBao is an open source identity-based secrets management system. Prior to version 2.5.3, OpenBao\u0027s Certificate authentication method, when a token renewal is requested and `disable_binding=true` is set, attempts to verify the current request\u0027s presented mTLS certificate matches the original. Token renewals for other authentication methods do not require any supplied login information. Due to incorrect matching, the certificate authentication method would allow renewal of tokens for which the attacker had a sibling certificate+key signed by the same CA, but which did not necessarily match the original role or the originally supplied certificate. This implies an attacker could still authenticate to OpenBao in a similar scope, however, token renewal implies that an attacker may be able to extend the lifetime of dynamic leases held by the original token. This attack requires knowledge of either the original token or its accessor. This vulnerability is original from HashiCorp Vault. This is addressed in v2.5.3. As a workaround, ensure privileged roles are tightly scoped to single certificates."
}
],
"metrics": [
{
"cvssV4_0": {
"attackComplexity": "HIGH",
"attackRequirements": "PRESENT",
"attackVector": "NETWORK",
"baseScore": 2,
"baseSeverity": "LOW",
"privilegesRequired": "HIGH",
"subAvailabilityImpact": "NONE",
"subConfidentialityImpact": "NONE",
"subIntegrityImpact": "NONE",
"userInteraction": "PASSIVE",
"vectorString": "CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:H/AT:P/PR:H/UI:P/VC:L/VI:L/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N",
"version": "4.0",
"vulnAvailabilityImpact": "NONE",
"vulnConfidentialityImpact": "LOW",
"vulnIntegrityImpact": "LOW"
}
}
],
"problemTypes": [
{
"descriptions": [
{
"cweId": "CWE-295",
"description": "CWE-295: Improper Certificate Validation",
"lang": "en",
"type": "CWE"
}
]
}
],
"providerMetadata": {
"dateUpdated": "2026-04-21T00:43:22.920Z",
"orgId": "a0819718-46f1-4df5-94e2-005712e83aaa",
"shortName": "GitHub_M"
},
"references": [
{
"name": "https://github.com/openbao/openbao/security/advisories/GHSA-7ccv-rp6m-rffr",
"tags": [
"x_refsource_CONFIRM"
],
"url": "https://github.com/openbao/openbao/security/advisories/GHSA-7ccv-rp6m-rffr"
}
],
"source": {
"advisory": "GHSA-7ccv-rp6m-rffr",
"discovery": "UNKNOWN"
},
"title": "OpenBao\u0027s Certificate Authentication Allows Token Renewal With Different Certificate"
}
},
"cveMetadata": {
"assignerOrgId": "a0819718-46f1-4df5-94e2-005712e83aaa",
"assignerShortName": "GitHub_M",
"cveId": "CVE-2026-39388",
"datePublished": "2026-04-21T00:43:22.920Z",
"dateReserved": "2026-04-06T22:06:40.515Z",
"dateUpdated": "2026-04-21T00:43:22.920Z",
"state": "PUBLISHED"
},
"dataType": "CVE_RECORD",
"dataVersion": "5.2"
}
Loading…
Loading…
Sightings
| Author | Source | Type | Date |
|---|
Nomenclature
- Seen: The vulnerability was mentioned, discussed, or seen somewhere by the user.
- Confirmed: The vulnerability is confirmed from an analyst perspective.
- Published Proof of Concept: A public proof of concept is available for this vulnerability.
- Exploited: This vulnerability was exploited and seen by the user reporting the sighting.
- Patched: This vulnerability was successfully patched by the user reporting the sighting.
- Not exploited: This vulnerability was not exploited or seen by the user reporting the sighting.
- Not confirmed: The user expresses doubt about the veracity of the vulnerability.
- Not patched: This vulnerability was not successfully patched by the user reporting the sighting.
Loading…
Loading…