Evidence used
- No CISA KEV confirmation is currently recorded.
- EPSS is 0.27% for the current model date.
BlackTreeCVE IntelligenceFull vulnerability report · 2026
CVE-2026-44428High confidence
MCP Registry: GitHub OIDC tokens replayable across registry deployments due to shared audience
modelcontextprotocol · registry
Official source article: GitHub GHSA-95C3-6VVW-4MRQ ↗. Check the applicable product and release in the original source.
2.1LowCVSS 4.0
Scheduled
Mitigation availableLow technical severity with no CISA KEV confirmation; remediate through the normal risk-based patch cycle unless local exposure raises the priority.
R
Open reassessment dashboard →Operational reassessment
Published severity in operational context
Published severityLow→Operational priority:Low, 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 modelcontextprotocol registry 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.
Open-source package ranges2 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 package | Affected range | First fixed version | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| Gogithub.com/modelcontextprotocol/registry | SEMVER: introduced 0; fixed 1.7.6 | 1.7.6 | OSV record ↗aggregator derived · 10 Sep 2026 |
| gogithub.com/modelcontextprotocol/registry | < 1.7.6 | 1.7.6 | GitHub advisory ↗upstream repository advisory · 1 Jun 2026 |
Low technical severity with no CISA KEV confirmation; remediate through the normal risk-based patch cycle unless local exposure raises the priority.
Mitigation available01
What, why and how
The MCP Registry provides MCP clients with a list of MCP servers, like an app store for MCP servers. Prior to 1.7.6, the client-side and server-side GitHub OIDC flow is bound only to a global audience string, not to the specific registry instance being targeted. On the client side, the publisher always appends audience=mcp-registry when requesting the GitHub Actions ID token, regardless of the selected --registry URL. On the server side, the exchange endpoint validates only that same fixed audience and then derives publish permissions directly from repository_owner. As a result, a token legitimately obtained while interacting with one registry deployment remains acceptable to any other deployment that shares the same code and audience string. This vulnerability is fixed in 1.7.6.
What
The MCP Registry provides MCP clients with a list of MCP servers, like an app store for MCP servers. Prior to 1.7.6, the client-side and server-side GitHub OIDC flow is bound only to a global audience string, not to the specific registry instance being targeted. On the client side, the publisher always appends audience=mcp-registry when requesting the GitHub Actions ID token, regardless of the selected --registry URL. On the server side, the exchange endpoint validates only that same fixed audience and then derives publish permissions directly from repository_owner. As a result, a token legitimately obtained while interacting with one registry deployment remains acceptable to any other deployment that shares the same code and audience string. This vulnerability is fixed in 1.7.6.
Why
The server follows an attacker-influenced destination, allowing requests to systems or services the attacker cannot reach directly.
How
An attacker operating through a network path may attempt exploitation when the stated preconditions are met. If successful, the issue may cause the confidentiality, integrity or availability impact described by the vendor.
What
The MCP Registry provides MCP clients with a list of MCP servers, like an app store for MCP servers. Prior to 1.7.6, the client-side and server-side GitHub OIDC flow is bound only to a global audience string, not to the specific registry instance being targeted. On the client side, the publisher always appends audience=mcp-registry when requesting the GitHub Actions ID token, regardless of the selected --registry URL. On the server side, the exchange endpoint validates only that same fixed audience and then derives publish permissions directly from repository_owner. As a result, a token legitimately obtained while interacting with one registry deployment remains acceptable to any other deployment that shares the same code and audience string. This vulnerability is fixed in 1.7.6.
Why
The server follows an attacker-influenced destination, allowing requests to systems or services the attacker cannot reach directly.
How
An attacker operating through a network path may attempt exploitation when the stated preconditions are met. 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 → Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) → cause the confidentiality, integrity or availability impact described by the vendor
- Attack surface
- Network
- Privileges required
- None: unauthenticated exploitation is possible
- User interaction
- Active interaction required
- Attack complexity
- Low: no specialised conditions are recorded
- Security boundary
- Not a CVSS 4.0 base metric
- Weakness
?
CWE means Common Weakness Enumeration: a standard category for the underlying weakness. - CWE-918 ↗
CWE-918: Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF). The web server receives a URL or similar request from an upstream component and retrieves the contents of this URL, but it does not sufficiently ensure that the request is being sent to the expected destination.
- CVSS vector
?
CVSS means Common Vulnerability Scoring System. The vector records the metric values used to calculate technical severity. CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:N/UI:A/VC:N/VI:L/VA:N/SC:N/SI:L/SA:NCommon Vulnerability Scoring System 4.0: the compact vector below is decoded into plain language.
AVNetworkAttack vector: The vulnerable component can be reached over a network.ACLowAttack complexity: No specialised conditions are required beyond attacker-controlled input.ATPresentAttack requirements: A particular deployment or execution condition must be present.PRNonePrivileges required: The attacker does not need an account or existing privileges.UIActiveUser interaction: A user must take a deliberate action for exploitation to succeed.VCNoneVulnerable-system confidentiality: No direct loss is represented by this metric.VILowVulnerable-system integrity: A successful attack can cause a limited loss.VANoneVulnerable-system availability: No direct loss is represented by this metric.SCNoneSubsequent-system confidentiality: No direct loss is represented by this metric.SILowSubsequent-system integrity: A successful attack can cause a limited loss.SANoneSubsequent-system availability: 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. - Mitigation available
- Affected
- registry: < 1.7.6
- Action
- Apply the mitigation in the linked authoritative guidance while planning the vendor's permanent fix.
- Workaround
- A mitigation or workaround reference is available from the source linked below; validate it against the affected product and version.
04
Evidence and provenance
Published 14 May 2026 · Last source change 15 May 2026, 14:22 UTC · CWE-918 · Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF)
CVE recordCVE.org · 5.2
CVSS sourceCNA
EPSS source FIRST · tracked since 2026-08-14
?
The date BlackTree first stored a score for this CVE from the daily FIRST EPSS feed.European sourceENISA EUVD · EUVD-2026-30493
Product sourceCNA
Remediation sourceCVE/CNA references
CWE sourceCNA
NVD statusNVD enriched
Core structured fields are present and their contributing authorities are shown above.
Material change intelligence
View recent updates ↗What changed after publication
No material field changes have been recorded since change tracking began. Routine source refreshes and cosmetic edits are intentionally excluded.
CVE published
Mitigation reference recorded
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.