Evidence used
- No CISA KEV confirmation is currently recorded.
- EPSS is 0.21% for the current model date.
BlackTreeCVE IntelligenceFull vulnerability report · 2026
CVE-2026-40205High confidence
Open-Xchange GmbH OX Dovecot Pro: Improper Authentication
Open-Xchange GmbH · OX Dovecot Pro
5.9MediumCVSS 3.1
Patch only the product branches with a verified fix
Fix availability varies by productMedium technical severity with no CISA KEV confirmation; remediate through the normal risk-based patch cycle unless local exposure raises the priority. Verified remediation exists for at least one product or source, but 31 structured product or package states remain unresolved. Apply remediation only to the exact product branch confirmed by its source.
R
Open reassessment dashboard →Operational reassessment
Published severity in operational context
Published severityMedium→Operational priority:Medium, unchanged from published severity.unchanged
Compensating controls
- Apply the linked authoritative mitigation while planning the permanent fix.
- Restrict the affected network interface to trusted sources where business-safe.
- Monitor vendor guidance and exploitation sources for a material change.
Verification
- Confirm that the asset runs Open-Xchange GmbH OX Dovecot Pro and falls inside the recorded affected range.
- Recheck the vendor advisory before scheduling a change because no verified fixed version is currently retained.
- Validate exposure, authentication requirements and compensating controls in the actual environment.
- Reopen this reassessment when CVSS, KEV, EPSS, exploit evidence or remediation changes.
Remediation availability differs by product scope
Verified remediation exists for at least one product or source, but 31 structured product or package states remain unresolved. Apply remediation only to the exact product branch confirmed by its source.
- Red Hat Product Security: 30 affected or under-investigation product states without a fixed product state in the same current advisory
- Debian Security Tracker: 1 affected package state with no published fix
Distribution package intelligence
6 package statesRelease-specific package status
Alpine, Debian, ubuntu findings are scoped to the named distribution, release and source package. An absent finding does not mean a package is unaffected.
Package result overrides the generic status
BlackTree has verified remediation for at least one product or source, but the relevant distribution still reports no fixed package for 1 affected package state shown here. Treat those rows as affected with no fix until that distribution publishes a fixed version.
Repository candidate not checked
A published vendor fix does not prove that a matching update is enabled and installable on a particular asset. Confirm the local package candidate before scheduling remediation.
| Distribution release | Source package | Vendor state | Fixed version | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Alpine v3.23v3.23 · main | dovecot | Vendor fix publishedAlpine records a security fix at this version. An absent entry does not mean the package is unaffected. | 2.4.5-r0 | Alpine Security Database ↗Source updated 3 Oct 2026 |
| Debian trixietrixie · source | dovecot | Vendor fix publishedDebian records a fixed source-package version for this release. | 1:2.4.1+dfsg1-6+deb13u7 | Debian Security Tracker ↗Source updated 6 Oct 2026 |
| Debian bookwormbookworm · source | dovecot | Affected, no fix publishedDebian currently tracks this release as open. | Not published in this feed | Debian Security Tracker ↗Source updated 6 Oct 2026 |
| Debian forkyforky · source | dovecot | Vendor fix publishedDebian records a fixed source-package version for this release. | 1:2.4.5+dfsg1-1 | Debian Security Tracker ↗Source updated 6 Oct 2026 |
| Debian sidsid · source | dovecot | Vendor fix publishedDebian records a fixed source-package version for this release. | 1:2.4.5+dfsg1-1 | Debian Security Tracker ↗Source updated 6 Oct 2026 |
| Ubuntu 24.04 LTSnoble · standard archive | dovecot | Under evaluationCanonical reports that the package might be affected and still needs evaluation or fixing. | Not published in this feed | Canonical Ubuntu Security ↗Source updated 5 Oct 2026 |
Direct vendor intelligence
1 currentAuthoritative 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.
CVE-2026-40205 · CSAF 2.0 · revision 3 · finalRed Hat Product Securitydovecot: Dovecot: Authorization bypass via partially valid OAuth2 token
The vendor explicitly identifies these products as affected by this CVE.
- dovecot as a component of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 10
- dovecot-devel as a component of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 10
- dovecot-mysql as a component of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 10
- dovecot-pgsql as a component of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 10
- dovecot-pigeonhole as a component of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 10
- dovecot.src as a component of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 10
- dovecot as a component of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6
- dovecot-devel as a component of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6
- dovecot-mysql as a component of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6
- dovecot-pgsql as a component of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6
- dovecot-pigeonhole as a component of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6
- dovecot.src as a component of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6
- Summary
- A flaw was found in Dovecot. An attacker with a partially valid OAuth2 token can bypass authorization checks in remote token validation paths. This allows the attacker to authenticate with insufficient permissions, leading to a breach of integrity where the configured authorization policy is not properly enforced.
- Remediation
- To mitigate this issue, configure Dovecot to use local OAuth2 token validation instead of remote validation. This ensures that all required scopes are correctly enforced during authentication, preventing unauthorized access with partially valid tokens. Consult Dovecot documentation for specific configuration steps to enable local token validation. A service restart may be required for the changes to take effect.
Medium technical severity with no CISA KEV confirmation; remediate through the normal risk-based patch cycle unless local exposure raises the priority. Verified remediation exists for at least one product or source, but 31 structured product or package states remain unresolved. Apply remediation only to the exact product branch confirmed by its source.
Fix availability varies by product01
What, why and how
An attacker that holds an OAuth2 token granting only part of the required scopes can authenticate, because when more than one scope is required in the configuration, the remote token validation paths accept a token that carries only one of them, while the local token validation path correctly requires all of them. The configured authorization policy is not enforced, so a token that was granted only part of the required permissions is accepted where it should have been rejected. Use local token validation where tokens can be validated locally. Update to non-vulnerable version. No publicly available exploits are known.
What
An attacker that holds an OAuth2 token granting only part of the required scopes can authenticate, because when more than one scope is required in the configuration, the remote token validation paths accept a token that carries only one of them, while the local token validation path correctly requires all of them. The configured authorization policy is not enforced, so a token that was granted only part of the required permissions is accepted where it should have been rejected. Use local token validation where tokens can be validated locally. Update to non-vulnerable version. No publicly available exploits are known.
Why
The affected component does not establish the requesting party's identity reliably before granting access.
How
An attacker operating through a network path may attempt exploitation with low privileges. If successful, the issue may cause the confidentiality, integrity or availability impact described by the vendor.
What
An attacker that holds an OAuth2 token granting only part of the required scopes can authenticate, because when more than one scope is required in the configuration, the remote token validation paths accept a token that carries only one of them, while the local token validation path correctly requires all of them. The configured authorization policy is not enforced, so a token that was granted only part of the required permissions is accepted where it should have been rejected. Use local token validation where tokens can be validated locally. Update to non-vulnerable version. No publicly available exploits are known.
Why
The affected component does not establish the requesting party's identity reliably before granting access.
How
An attacker operating through a network path may attempt exploitation with low privileges. 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 No confirmed evidence
?
Confirmed exploitation and public exploit material are separate signals. Attacks can occur without public proof-of-concept or exploit code.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 None recorded
?
Confirmed exploitation and public exploit material are separate signals. Attacks can occur without public proof-of-concept or exploit code.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 Authentication → cause the confidentiality, integrity or availability impact described by the vendor
- Attack surface
- Network
- Privileges required
- Low: a basic authenticated account is required
- 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-287 ↗
CWE-287: Improper Authentication. When an actor claims to have a given identity, the product does not prove or insufficiently proves that the claim is correct.
- 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:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:H/A:NCommon 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.PRLowPrivileges required: The attacker needs basic user-level privileges.UINoneUser interaction: No action by another user is required.SUnchangedScope: The security impact remains within the vulnerable component's authority.CLowConfidentiality impact: A successful attack can cause a limited 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.
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
- dovecot as a component of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 10
- dovecot-devel as a component of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 10
- dovecot-mysql as a component of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 10
- dovecot-pgsql as a component of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 10
- dovecot-pigeonhole as a component of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 10
- dovecot.src as a component of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 10
- dovecot as a component of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6
- dovecot-devel as a component of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6
- dovecot-mysql as a component of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6
- dovecot-pgsql as a component of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6
- dovecot-pigeonhole as a component of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6
- dovecot.src as a component of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6
- dovecot as a component of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 7
- dovecot-devel as a component of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 7
- dovecot-mysql as a component of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 7
- dovecot-pgsql as a component of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 7
- dovecot-pigeonhole as a component of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 7
- dovecot.src as a component of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 7
- dovecot as a component of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8
- dovecot-devel as a component of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8
- dovecot-mysql as a component of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8
- dovecot-pgsql as a component of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8
- dovecot-pigeonhole as a component of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8
- dovecot.src as a component of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8
- dovecot as a component of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 9
- dovecot-devel as a component of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 9
- dovecot-mysql as a component of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 9
- dovecot-pgsql as a component of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 9
- dovecot-pigeonhole as a component of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 9
- dovecot.src as a component of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 9
- 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
- To mitigate this issue, configure Dovecot to use local OAuth2 token validation instead of remote validation. This ensures that all required scopes are correctly enforced during authentication, preventing unauthorized access with partially valid tokens. Consult Dovecot documentation for specific configuration steps to enable local token validation. A service restart may be required for the changes to take effect.
04
Evidence and provenance
Published 28 Aug 2026 · Last source change 28 Aug 2026, 14:56 UTC · CWE-287 · Improper Authentication
CVE recordCVE.org · 5.2
CVSS sourceCNA
EPSS source FIRST · tracked since 2026-08-29
?
The date BlackTree first stored a score for this CVE from the daily FIRST EPSS feed.European sourceENISA EUVD · EUVD-2026-67671
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
View recent updates ↗What changed after publication
- ENISA EUVD mappingEUVD-2026-67671 was added to the official ENISA EUVD mapping for this CVE.ENISA EUVD ↗
- Before
- not recorded
- After
- {"euvdId":"EUVD-2026-67671"}
- Catalogue recordCVE added to the BlackTree catalogue.CNA ↗
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.