BlackTreeCVE Intelligence
← Back to the CVE catalogue
Full vulnerability report · 2026
CVE-2026-101916High confidence

@grpc/grpc-js: In certain configurations, getAuthContext can return unauthorized certificates as though they were authorized

grpc · grpc-node

Official source article: GitHub GHSA-M9GG-HP2V-232J ↗. Check the applicable product and release in the original source.

7.4HighCVSS 3.1
Recommended action
Patch only the product branches with a verified fix

High technical severity; prioritise exposed affected systems while verifying vendor guidance. Verified remediation exists for at least one product or source, but 9 structured product or package states remain unresolved. Apply remediation only to the exact product branch confirmed by its source.

Fix availability varies by product
R
Operational reassessment

Published severity in operational context

Open reassessment dashboard →
Published severityHighOperational priority:High, unchanged from published severity.unchanged

Evidence used

  • No CISA KEV confirmation is currently recorded.
  • The selected CVSS metric records a network-reachable, unauthenticated path with no user interaction.
  • EPSS is 0.21% for the current model date.

Compensating controls

  • Validate the affected product branch and deploy the verified fixed release.
  • Restrict the affected network interface to trusted sources where business-safe.
  • Monitor vendor guidance and exploitation sources for a material change.

Verification

  1. Confirm that the asset runs grpc grpc-node and falls inside the recorded affected range.
  2. Verify the installed build against the product-specific fixed version after deployment.
  3. Validate exposure, authentication requirements and compensating controls in the actual environment.
  4. Reopen this reassessment when CVSS, KEV, EPSS, exploit evidence or remediation changes.
Mitigation target: Within 30 daysRemediation target: Within 180 days

This automated reassessment organises public evidence. It does not know asset exposure, business impact or control effectiveness and does not replace CVSS or a human risk decision.

Cross-source reconciliation

Remediation availability differs by product scope

Verified remediation exists for at least one product or source, but 9 structured product or package states remain unresolved. Apply remediation only to the exact product branch confirmed by its source.

Open-source package ranges4 source-attributed ranges

These OSV and GitHub advisory ranges apply only to the named package and ecosystem. A listed fixed version is not a universal product patch or proof that an update is installed.

Ecosystem and packageAffected rangeFirst fixed versionEvidence
npm@grpc/grpc-js< 1.13.61.13.6GitHub advisory ↗upstream repository advisory · 30 Sep 2026
npm@grpc/grpc-js>= 1.14.0, < 1.14.51.14.5GitHub advisory ↗upstream repository advisory · 30 Sep 2026
npm@grpc/grpc-jsSEMVER: introduced 0; fixed 1.13.61.13.6OSV record ↗aggregator derived · 30 Sep 2026
npm@grpc/grpc-jsSEMVER: introduced 1.14.0; fixed 1.14.51.14.5OSV record ↗aggregator derived · 30 Sep 2026
Direct vendor intelligence

Authoritative vendor CSAF and VEX advisories

Structured product status and remediation from the issuing vendor. Product-state explanations are always visible; large lists can be searched or downloaded.

1 current
CVE-2026-101916 · CSAF 2.0 · revision 3 · finalRed Hat Product Securitygrpc-js: grpc-js: Authentication bypass via improper peer certificate validation
9 known affected

The vendor explicitly identifies these products as affected by this CVE.

  • rh-podman-desktop as a component of Red Hat Build of Podman Desktop
  • rhdh/rhdh-hub-rhel9 as a component of Red Hat Developer Hub
  • rhelai3/bootc-cuda-rhel9 as a component of Red Hat Enterprise Linux AI (RHEL AI) 3
  • rhelai3/bootc-gaudi-rhel9 as a component of Red Hat Enterprise Linux AI (RHEL AI) 3
  • rhelai3/bootc-rocm-rhel9 as a component of Red Hat Enterprise Linux AI (RHEL AI) 3
  • rhelai3/disk-image-cuda-rhel9 as a component of Red Hat Enterprise Linux AI (RHEL AI) 3
  • devspaces/code-rhel9 as a component of Red Hat OpenShift Dev Spaces
  • ansible-automation-platform/automation-portal as a component of Self-service automation portal 2
  • ansible-automation-platform/bootc-automation-portal-rhel9 as a component of Self-service automation portal 2
Summary
A flaw was found in grpc-js. In configurations where client certificates are optional, the authentication context lookup fails to distinguish between authorized and unauthorized peer certificates. A remote attacker can exploit this vulnerability by presenting an untrusted certificate, allowing them to bypass authentication mechanisms and access protected services.
Remediation
Affected
Optional official sources

National CERT insights
?CERT means Computer Emergency Response Team; CSIRT is the closely related term Computer Security Incident Response Team.

Choose official national sources for this report. Each advisory shows its original language. Your selection is remembered on this device and included in shared links.

Official European source

ENISA European Vulnerability Database

Official EUVD identifiers, advisory evidence and known-exploited context. Missing fields are not treated as evidence of low risk.

1 current
ENISA EUVD identifier

EUVD-2026-88476

No EUVD known-exploited evidence

@grpc/grpc-js implements the core functionality of gRPC purely in JavaScript, without a C++ addon. Prior to 1.13.6 and 1.14.5, getAuthContext does not distinguish authorized from unauthorized peer certificates when server credentials set requireClientCertificate to false. When applications use the returned authentication context, they can treat an unauthorized certificate as authorized, causing improper authentication. @grpc/grpc-js-xds can reach this condition when RBAC authentication is enabled in affected configurations. This issue is fixed in version 1.14.5 and 1.13.6.

EUVD state
Present in the current official mapping
Known exploitation
Not present in the current ENISA EUVD known-exploited dataset. This is not proof of no exploitation.
ENISA score
7.4 · CVSS 3.1
Advisory evidence
No linked advisory details stored yet
Recommended actionPatch only the product branches with a verified fix

High technical severity; prioritise exposed affected systems while verifying vendor guidance. Verified remediation exists for at least one product or source, but 9 structured product or package states remain unresolved. Apply remediation only to the exact product branch confirmed by its source.

Fix availability varies by product
01

What, why and how

@grpc/grpc-js implements the core functionality of gRPC purely in JavaScript, without a C++ addon. Prior to 1.13.6 and 1.14.5, getAuthContext does not distinguish authorized from unauthorized peer certificates when server credentials set requireClientCertificate to false. When applications use the returned authentication context, they can treat an unauthorized certificate as authorized, causing improper authentication. @grpc/grpc-js-xds can reach this condition when RBAC authentication is enabled in affected configurations. This issue is fixed in version 1.14.5 and 1.13.6.

What

@grpc/grpc-js implements the core functionality of gRPC purely in JavaScript, without a C++ addon. Prior to 1.13.6 and 1.14.5, getAuthContext does not distinguish authorized from unauthorized peer certificates when server credentials set requireClientCertificate to false. When applications use the returned authentication context, they can treat an unauthorized certificate as authorized, causing improper authentication. @grpc/grpc-js-xds can reach this condition when RBAC authentication is enabled in affected configurations. This issue is fixed in version 1.14.5 and 1.13.6.

Why

The product does not validate, or incorrectly validates, a certificate.

How

An attacker operating through a network path may attempt exploitation without authentication or user interaction. If successful, the issue may cause the confidentiality, integrity or availability impact described by the vendor.

What

@grpc/grpc-js implements the core functionality of gRPC purely in JavaScript, without a C++ addon. Prior to 1.13.6 and 1.14.5, getAuthContext does not distinguish authorized from unauthorized peer certificates when server credentials set requireClientCertificate to false. When applications use the returned authentication context, they can treat an unauthorized certificate as authorized, causing improper authentication. @grpc/grpc-js-xds can reach this condition when RBAC authentication is enabled in affected configurations. This issue is fixed in version 1.14.5 and 1.13.6.

Why

The product does not validate, or incorrectly validates, a certificate.

How

An attacker operating through a network path may attempt exploitation without authentication or user interaction. If successful, the issue may cause the confidentiality, integrity or availability impact described by the vendor.

02

Exploit reality and attack path

CVSS severity, EPSS forecast probability, public exploit material and CISA-confirmed exploitation are separate signals.

Observed exploitation
?Confirmed exploitation and public exploit material are separate signals. Attacks can occur without public proof-of-concept or exploit code.
No confirmed evidence

No CISA KEV match was present at the last successful refresh. This means no confirmation from that source, not proof of no exploitation.

Public PoC / exploit material
?Confirmed exploitation and public exploit material are separate signals. Attacks can occur without public proof-of-concept or exploit code.
None recorded

No exploit-tagged reference or CISA SSVC proof-of-concept state is currently recorded. Research may still exist outside the structured feeds.

Likely attack path
a network path → Improper Certificate Validation → cause the confidentiality, integrity or availability impact described by the vendor
Attack surface
Network
Privileges required
None: unauthenticated exploitation is possible
User interaction
None
Attack complexity
High: exploitation depends on specific conditions
Security boundary
Unchanged: impact remains within the vulnerable component's security authority
Weakness
?CWE means Common Weakness Enumeration: a standard category for the underlying weakness.
CWE-295 ↗

CWE-295: Improper Certificate Validation. The product does not validate, or incorrectly validates, a certificate.

CVSS vector
?CVSS means Common Vulnerability Scoring System. The vector records the metric values used to calculate technical severity.
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N

Common Vulnerability Scoring System 3.1: the compact vector below is decoded into plain language.

AVNetworkAttack vector: The vulnerable component can be reached over a network.ACHighAttack complexity: Successful exploitation depends on specific conditions outside the attacker's direct control.PRNonePrivileges required: The attacker does not need an account or existing privileges.UINoneUser interaction: No action by another user is required.SUnchangedScope: The security impact remains within the vulnerable component's authority.CHighConfidentiality impact: A successful attack can cause a major loss.IHighIntegrity impact: A successful attack can cause a major loss.ANoneAvailability impact: No direct loss is represented by this metric.
Post-exploitation / living off the land
Stolen credentials, tokens and legitimate administration functions may provide continued access without deploying a large custom toolset.
NetworkUnauthenticatedCWE-295
A

Official authority intelligence

Only matched European and national findings are included. Language selectors and unavailable sources are omitted.

ENISA EUVD · EUVD-2026-88476Official EUVD mapping

@grpc/grpc-js implements the core functionality of gRPC purely in JavaScript, without a C++ addon. Prior to 1.13.6 and 1.14.5, getAuthContext does not distinguish authorized from unauthorized peer certificates when server credentials set requireClientCertificate to false. When applications use the returned authentication context, they can treat an unauthorized certificate as authorized, causing improper authentication. @grpc/grpc-js-xds can reach this condition when RBAC authentication is enabled in affected configurations. This issue is fixed in version 1.14.5 and 1.13.6.

Official EUVD record ↗
03

Patch and workaround

Operational remediation based on structured source evidence.

Status
?Patch availability is based on structured fixed-version fields and authoritative update references. If no fix is verified, check the vendor advisory before making a change.
Fix availability varies by product
Affected
Fixed
1.14.5
Action
Use the product-specific evidence above. Patch only products with a verified fixed release, and keep every affected or under-investigation state without a matching fix in the remediation queue.
Workaround
No verified workaround is recorded. If business-safe, reduce exposure to the affected interface and allow only trusted sources until authoritative guidance is available.
04

Evidence and provenance

Published 28 Sept 2026 · Last source change 1 Oct 2026, 14:54 UTC · CWE-295 · Improper Certificate Validation

CVE recordCVE.org · 5.2
CVSS sourceCNA
EPSS source
?The date BlackTree first stored a score for this CVE from the daily FIRST EPSS feed.
FIRST · tracked since 2026-09-29
European sourceENISA EUVD · EUVD-2026-88476
Product sourceVendor CSAF · Red Hat Product Security
Remediation sourceVendor CSAF · Red Hat Product Security
CWE sourceCNA
NVD statusNVD not scheduled

Core structured fields are present and their contributing authorities are shown above.

Material change intelligence

What changed after publication

View recent updates ↗
  1. ENISA EUVD mappingEUVD-2026-88476 was added to the official ENISA EUVD mapping for this CVE.
    Before
    not recorded
    After
    {"euvdId":"EUVD-2026-88476"}
    ENISA EUVD ↗
  2. Catalogue recordCVE added to the BlackTree catalogue.
    CNA ↗
Material fields only · duplicate refreshes suppressed · history retained for the configured operational retention period
CVE published
Fixed release or patch reference recorded
ENISA EUVD · EUVD-2026-88476↗Vendor CSAF · Red Hat Product Security↗CVE authority or vendor reference · GitHub GHSA-M9GG-HP2V-232J↗Official CVE record (CNA and ADP data)↗NVD record↗
Technical terms and abbreviations used in this report
CVE
Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures: the public identifier for one disclosed vulnerability.
CVSS
Common Vulnerability Scoring System: a technical severity framework; it is not patching priority by itself.
EPSS
Exploit Prediction Scoring System: FIRST's estimate of the probability that exploitation activity will be observed in the next 30 days; it is a forecast, not confirmation.
CWE
Common Weakness Enumeration: the standard category describing the underlying software or hardware weakness.
CNA
CVE Numbering Authority: an organisation authorised to assign and publish CVE records.
CISA ADP
Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency Authorized Data Publisher: structured enrichment added to a CVE record.
NVD
National Vulnerability Database: NIST's enrichment service for CVE records.
CERT / CSIRT
A computer security incident response team that publishes warnings or coordinates incident response.
PoC
Proof of concept: public material that demonstrates or helps reproduce exploitation.
CSAF
Common Security Advisory Framework: a machine-readable format for security advisories.
LoTL
Living off the land: abuse of legitimate tools or system functions during an attack.
Free version - for non-commercial use only.CVE-2026-101916 · cve.blacktree.nl