CVE-2026-40946
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 · uneditedOxia is a metadata store and coordination system. Prior to 0.16.2, the OIDC authentication provider unconditionally sets SkipClientIDCheck: true in the go-oidc verifier configuration, disabling the standard audience (aud) claim validation at the library level. This allows tokens issued for unrelated services by the same OIDC issuer to be accepted by Oxia. This vulnerability is fixed in 0.16.2.
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 confidenceThe OIDC authentication provider in Oxia versions prior to 0.16.2 unconditionally sets SkipClientIDCheck: true in the go-oidc verifier configuration, which disables standard audience (aud) claim validation. This allows tokens issued for unrelated services by the same OIDC issuer to be accepted, enabling authentication bypass.
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
- Authentication
- X
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- X
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:H/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/SC:N/SI:N/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
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.
-
Determine Oxia versionRun 'oxia version' or check the version metadata of your Oxia installation packageAffected if The installed version is prior to 0.16.2 (e.g., 0.16.1, 0.16.0, or earlier)
-
Locate OIDC configurationSearch Oxia configuration files for 'oidc', 'openid', or 'authentication' sections; common paths include config.yaml, auth-config.yaml, or similar in the Oxia data/config directoryAffected if OIDC authentication is configured and enabled in your Oxia deployment
-
Inspect go-oidc verifier configurationExamine the OIDC authentication provider configuration for the 'SkipClientIDCheck' setting; this is typically defined in the OIDC client/verifier initialization code or configurationAffected if SkipClientIDCheck is explicitly set to true, which disables audience (aud) claim validation
You are affected if running Oxia versions prior to 0.16.2 with OIDC authentication enabled and the SkipClientIDCheck setting configured to true in your verifier configuration.
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 · scopedUpgrade Oxia to version 0.16.2 or later, which removes the SkipClientIDCheck: true setting to enforce proper audience validation.
Oxia version 0.16.2
- 1. Identify the currently running Oxia version (e.g., check container image tag or binary version)
- 2. Stop the Oxia service gracefully
- 3. Backup the existing Oxia data directory and configuration files
- 4. Upgrade Oxia to version 0.16.2 or later
- 5. Verify the OIDC authentication configuration still points to the correct issuer and client ID
- 6. Restart the Oxia service
- 7. Test OIDC authentication to confirm tokens are now properly validated with audience (aud) claim checks enabled
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation2.0 h
- Testing8.0 h
- Review / QA3.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $4,640.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-40946 — 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-2026-40946 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