CVE-2026-42791

OCSP responder certificate validity period not checked in public_key

LOW
3.7
CVSS Score
Published: May 27, 2026 at 12:23 PM UTC
Updated: October 26, 2026 at 11:10 AM UTC
1 product affected across 1 vendorErlang /otp

Using OTP by Erlang?

Get instant alerts when new vulnerabilities affect OTP - before attackers find them.

Real-time alertsTrack your software stackFree plan available
Severity
LOW3.7
Exploit prediction
EPSS 0.3%
SSVC
No known exploit

Description

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 27.3.4.12, 28.5.0.1, and 29.0.1 corresponding to public_key from 1.16 before 1.17.1.3, 1.20.3.1, and 1.21.1.

Affected

Our own answer: ranges merged, affected separated from platform-only, with confidence and review flags.

27.0 ≤ v < 27.3.4.1228.0 ≤ v < 28.5.0.129.0 ≤ v < 29.0.11.1627.02b1a742c651b90f8a7a1fb2ddde73f29915ea376
Affected range stops below 27.3.4.12, so it looks safe — our inference, not a vendor statement
Affected range stops below 28.5.0.1, so it looks safe — our inference, not a vendor statement
Affected range stops below 29.0.1, so it looks safe — our inference, not a vendor statement

SSVC — Action Prioritization

SSVCNo known exploitNot automatablePartial impact

SSVC signals action urgency (what to patch first), separate from CVSS which measures severity.

CVSS

Attack Vector
NETWORK
Complexity
HIGH
Privileges
NONE
User Interaction
NONE
Scope
UNCHANGED
Confidentiality
NONE
Integrity
LOW
Availability
NONE
Vector?

Quick Info

StatusMODIFIED
CWE
CWE-295CWE-672

Get alerted

Stop reading CVE feeds looking for your own stack

Track the products you run and VulnTracker tells you when a new CVE affects them — with what is known about fixing it, and nothing about the rest.

Free plan, no card