CVE-2026-32144
OCSP designated-responder authorization bypass via missing signature verification
No known exploitation. EPSS puts it in the 22nd percentile. A vendor fix is available.
What to do
The vendor has published a fix. Version details are below where the sources state them.
What it is
From the CVE record
Improper Certificate Validation vulnerability in Erlang OTP public_key (pubkey_ocsp module) allows OCSP designated-responder authorization bypass via missing signature verification. The OCSP response validation in public_key:pkix_ocsp_validate/5 does not verify that a CA-designated responder certificate was cryptographically signed by the issuing CA. Instead, it only checks that the responder certificate's issuer name matches the CA's subject name and that the certificate has the OCSPSigning extended key usage. An attacker who can intercept or control OCSP responses can create a self-signed certificate with a matching issuer name and the OCSPSigning EKU, and use it to forge OCSP responses that mark revoked certificates as valid. This affects SSL/TLS clients using OCSP stapling, which may accept connections to servers with revoked certificates, potentially transmitting sensitive data to compromised servers. Applications using the public_key:pkix_ocsp_validate/5 API directly are also affected, with impact depending on usage context. This vulnerability is associated with program files lib/public_key/src/pubkey_ocsp.erl and program routines pubkey_ocsp:is_authorized_responder/3. This issue affects OTP from OTP 27.0 before OTP 28.4.2 and OTP 27.3.4.10, corresponding to public_key from 1.16 before 1.20.3 and 1.17.1.2, and ssl from 11.2 before 11.5.4 and 11.2.12.7.
In plain language
No plain-language summary for this CVE yet.
Exploitation
Where each signal puts this CVE on the scale from published to confirmed exploited.
- CISA KEV
Not in the catalog. CISA has not confirmed exploitation.
- Public exploits
No public exploit or proof of concept found in the sources we track.
- EPSS
0.3% chance of exploitation activity in the next 30 days, which ranks it in the 22nd percentile of scored CVEs.
Exploit Prediction Scoring System, FIRST.org. A probability, not a confirmation.
Lifecycle
13 events over 108 days, from the signal feeds we watch.
- Patch availableworkaround available, record updated
- Patch availableworkaround available, record updated
- Patch availableworkaround available, record updated
- OpenVAS check added
- Publishedweakness classified, att&ck mapped
Affected products
Technical detail
CVSS 3.1 vector
Open in the CVSS calculatorCVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N
Scored 7.4 by NVD.
How it is reached
- Attack Vector NetworkExploitable remotely over the network without any special conditions
- Attack Complexity HighRequires specific conditions like a race condition or non-default configuration
- Privileges Required NoneNo authentication required — anyone can exploit this
- User Interaction NoneNo user interaction needed — fully automated exploitation
Scope
- Scope UnchangedImpact is limited to the vulnerable component itself
Impact if exploited
- Confidentiality HighTotal information disclosure — all data in the component is compromised
- Integrity HighTotal loss of integrity — attacker can modify any data in the component
- Availability NoneNo availability impact
Weaknesses
ATT&CK techniques
Mapped from the weaknesses above (CWE to ATT&CK), not observed in attacks.
Sources
Watch the software you run.
My Stack ranks new CVEs for your products by real-world exploitation, so the next serious one reaches you without reading every advisory.
We'll flag the next CVE, public exploit or patch for Erlang\/otp, not every advisory.
A free account adds
- The full version matrix and every affected product
- Exploit links, proofs of concept and Metasploit modules
- Email alerts for the products you watch
- The same data over REST API, MCP and CLI