CVE-2026-31985
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 · uneditedWhen the upstream Guardian or CMC was configured in the Remote Collector via n2os-tui, the generated configuration disabled TLS certificate verification, and no option was provided to enable it. A malicious actor could perform a man-in-the-middle attack and intercept the communication between the Remote Collector and the Guardian or CMC. This could result in theft of the sync token, impersonation of the server, injection of spoofed data (such as false asset information or vulnerabilities) into the Guardian or CMC, or disruption of the data flow between the Remote Collector and the Guardian or CMC.
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 · moderate confidenceThe n2os-tui configuration tool for Remote Collector generates configs that disable TLS certificate verification when setting up upstream Guardian or CMC connections, with no option to enable it. This allows MITM attackers to intercept, tamper with, or impersonate the Guardian/CMC.
Verify against the referenced sources before acting — the references below are authoritative for this CVE, this summary is not.
CVSS 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
- High
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Changed
- Confidentiality
- Low
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- Low
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:L/I:H/A:L
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.
-
Locate n2os-tui Remote Collector installationSearch for n2os-tui binary or Remote Collector configuration directory on the system. Common locations may include /opt, /etc, or application data directories.Affected if n2os-tui or Remote Collector software is present on the system
-
Find Guardian or CMC connection configuration filesIdentify configuration files generated by n2os-tui that contain upstream connection settings for Guardian or CMC. Look for config files with names containing guardian, cmc, connection, or remote collector.Affected if Configuration files for Guardian or CMC connections exist
-
Inspect TLS certificate verification settingsOpen the identified configuration files and search for TLS, SSL, certificate, verify, or validation-related settings. Check if verification is explicitly disabled or missing.Affected if TLS certificate verification is disabled, set to false, or absent in the Guardian/CMC connection configuration
-
Verify no enable option exists in the toolReview n2os-tui menu options or help documentation related to Remote Collector setup. Check if there is any option to enable certificate verification during Guardian/CMC configuration.Affected if The configuration tool provides no option to enable TLS certificate verification
A user is affected if their n2os-tui Remote Collector configuration has TLS certificate verification disabled or unavailable for upstream Guardian or CMC connections, enabling MITM attacks.
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.
From vendor dataEnable TLS certificate verification in the Remote Collector configuration and provide a configurable option for certificate validation.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation12.0 h
- Testing8.0 h
- Review / QA4.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $7,808.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-31985 — 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-2026-31985 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