CVE-2026-42791
Improper Certificate Validation: Is CVE-2026-42791 real, exploitable, or a false positive? Here's the community verdict.
signals
public sources
Moderate signals. Triage by your actual exposure and reachability.
baseline read
auto · not a community verdict
Low signal — verdict needed
Few public signals point to active risk. Whether a scanner hit here is a true or false positive depends on your version and config — community verdicts decide.
Based on CVSS · FIRST EPSS
Confirm or dispute →CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N
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 29.0.1, OTP 28.5.0.1 and OTP 27.3.4.12, corresponding to public_key from 1.16 before 1.21.1, 1.20.3.1 and 1.17.1.3.
References
Published
Embed this verdict
[](https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-42791)<a href="https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-42791"><img src="https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-42791/badge.svg" alt="TruePositive verdict for CVE-2026-42791"></a>Live badge that updates automatically as the community verdict changes.
Community ground truth
Be the first practitioner to weigh in
So far this is only TruePositive's editorial baseline from public sources. Add your real-world verdict below — it becomes the signal the next person triaging this relies on.
🥇 The first 50 practitioners to contribute earn a Founding Contributor badge.
In your experience, is this finding real and exploitable?
awaiting field verdictsCurated baseline: A curated baseline from public sources, shown separately from community verdicts.
No account needed. Anonymous verdicts post as an unverified signal. Log in to make yours verified and earn reputation.
Field notes & remediation
Verdicts are the quick signal. Notes are the evidence and fixes behind them.
- 0
No confirmed in-the-wild exploitation or public exploit was found for this yet.
Add a field note or remediationoptional
Related CVEs
Same weakness: CWE-295 · Improper Certificate Validation.
- CVE-2020-0601HIGH 8.1KEVEPSS 89%
A spoofing vulnerability exists in the way Windows CryptoAPI (Crypt32.dll) validates Elliptic Curve Cryptography (ECC) certificates.An attacker could exploit the vulnerability by using a spoofed code-signing certificate to sign a malicious executable, making it appear the file was from a trusted, legitimate source, aka 'Windows CryptoAPI Spoofing Vulnerability'.
- CVE-2022-26923HIGH 8.8KEVEPSS 83%
Active Directory Domain Services Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability
- CVE-2026-16107MED 5.9
IBM TS4500 CLI tool Versions: 0.1.31 through 1.12.0.0 does not validate or improperly validates TLS certificate validation, which could allow an attacker to obtain sensitive information using man in the middle techniques.
- CVE-2026-50302MED 4.2
Improper certificate validation in Windows Cryptographic Services allows an unauthorized attacker to bypass a security feature over a network.
- CVE-2026-50752HIGH 7.4Real · low riskEPSS 5%
A weakness in the certificate validation logic of the deprecated IKEv1 key exchange may allow an unauthenticated attacker positioned as a man-in-the-middle to bypass certificate validation in VPN site-to-site connections that use certificate-based authentication. Successful exploitation could allow interception or modification of traffic traversing the VPN tunnel.
- CVE-2022-47758CRIT 9.8Real · low riskEPSS 1%
Nanoleaf firmware v7.1.1 and below is missing TLS verification, allowing attackers to execute arbitrary code via a DNS hijacking attack.