CVE-2026-10611
Official description Straight from the sourceThe vendor's or NVD's own wording, published unedited. Authoritative, but often terse — it says what broke, rarely what to do.
NVD · uneditedAn authentication bypass vulnerability exists in MISP when LDAP mixed authentication is enabled with OTP enforcement. In deployments configured with LdapAuth.mixedAuth=true and Security.require_otp=true, users authenticated through an authentication plugin, such as LDAP, may have their authenticated session established during the application beforeFilter phase before the normal login flow enforces the OTP challenge. As a result, an attacker with valid primary authentication credentials could bypass the required OTP step by authenticating through the plugin-backed login flow and then directly accessing another application URL instead of completing the OTP verification page. This allows access to the application as the affected user without providing a valid TOTP, HOTP, or email OTP code. The issue affects configurations where plugin-based authentication is enabled and OTP is expected to be mandatory. The fix ensures that OTP requirements are checked immediately after plugin authentication and before the user session is established, redirecting users to the appropriate OTP challenge when required.
Technical summary Written by usOur analysis, written from the advisory, the CVSS vector and the affected-version data. It adds context the advisory leaves out, and never invents facts that are not in the source.
dbcve analysis · high confidenceMISP contains an authentication bypass where users authenticating through LDAP (or other plugins) have their session established during the beforeFilter phase before OTP verification occurs. When LdapAuth.mixedAuth=true and Security.require_otp=true are both configured, an attacker with valid primary credentials can skip the OTP challenge by directly accessing application URLs after plugin authentication instead of completing the OTP verification page.
Verify against the referenced sources before acting — the references below are authoritative for this CVE, this summary is not.
Affected products & versions What the vendor confirmedThe version ranges the vendor confirmed as vulnerable. If your version sits inside a range here, treat yourself as exposed until you have upgraded.
NVD · CPE data< 2.5.39CVSS breakdown How the score is builtThe industry scoring standard. It rates how the flaw is reached, what it takes to exploit, and what an attacker gains — the score is derived from those, not the other way round.
From the vector- Attack vector
- Network
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Changed
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H
Am I affected? How to checkSteps we derive from the advisory and the affected-version data, so you can decide whether this CVE reaches your setup. They are a guide, not a scan — your own configuration is the authority.
dbcve checksWork through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.
-
Identify MISP versionLocate the installed MISP version in the web interface (typically in the footer) or in the application configuration files. Compare this version number against the affected range (< 2.5.39).Affected if The installed version is lower than 2.5.39.
-
Verify LDAP authentication is configuredCheck if the LDAP plugin is enabled and configured in the MISP authentication settings. This is typically found in the Server Settings under Authentication or Plugin configuration.Affected if LDAP authentication plugin is enabled and functional.
-
Check if mixedAuth is enabledLocate the mixedAuth setting in the MISP server configuration (Server Settings > Authentication > mixedAuth). Determine whether this setting is turned on.Affected if The mixedAuth setting is enabled in the configuration.
-
Confirm mandatory OTP requirementVerify whether OTP (two-factor authentication) is set as mandatory for users or at the organisation level. This setting is typically found in Server Settings under Authentication or in the Organisation settings.Affected if Mandatory OTP enforcement is configured for the organisation or user base.
A user is affected if they run MISP version < 2.5.39 with LDAP authentication enabled, mixedAuth turned on, and mandatory OTP required, as this combination allows LDAP-authenticated users to establish a session before OTP verification completes.
Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.
Remediation Closing itWhat it takes to close this. Where a vendor fix exists we point at it; where none exists we say so plainly, and can build one. Effort estimates are scoped from the advisory, not from your codebase.
dbcve · scoped2.5.39
Disable LDAP mixed authentication (LdapAuth.mixedAuth=false) or ensure mandatory OTP enforcement is applied before session establishment in the authentication flow. Apply vendor patch when released to enforce OTP checks immediately after plugin authentication.
MISP version 2.5.39 or later
- Confirm your MISP deployment uses LDAP mixed authentication (LdapAuth.mixedAuth=true) with OTP enforcement (Security.require_otp=true)
- Identify your current MISP version by checking the version file or admin interface
- Plan maintenance window for the upgrade
- Upgrade MISP to version 2.5.39 or later release
- After upgrade, verify that OTP challenge is properly enforced after LDAP authentication by: a) Logging in with valid LDAP credentials, b) Confirming you are redirected to OTP verification page before accessing application
- Test both LDAP and local authentication flows to ensure OTP enforcement works correctly
- Review configuration files to confirm settings remain as intended
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing6.0 h
- Review / QA2.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $5,600.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-10611 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.
References Go to the primary sourcePrimary sources — vendor advisories, patches and trackers. Where our summary and a reference disagree, the reference wins.
Primary sourcesPractitioner notes
ContributedPeer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2026-10611 in production — separate from our analysis above.
The advisory tells you what broke. It rarely tells you what actually worked. If you’ve dealt with this one, that detail is what the next engineer is searching for.
- The version that genuinely resolved it — not the one the vendor claimed
- A config change or rule that shut the vector down
- A gotcha in the upgrade path that cost you an afternoon
No notes yet
Be the first to add a field note for this CVE — a mitigation you’ve verified, a version caveat, or a link to a working fix. Sign in above to contribute.
A place for practitioners to share what actually worked: a mitigation you’ve tested, a configuration change, a version- or environment-specific caveat, or a link to a verified patch. The most useful notes rise to the top as peers upvote them, so the signal stays high.
- Verified mitigations, workarounds, and config changes
- Version or environment caveats, and links to real fixes
- No weaponised exploit code, or anything meant to cause harm
- No spam, self-promotion, credentials, or personal data