CVE Intelligence
High Authentication

CVE-2026-33757 — OpenBao lacks user confirmation for OIDC direct callback mode

OpenBao is an open source identity-based secrets management system. Prior to version 2.5.2, OpenBao does not prompt for user confirmation when logging in via JWT/OIDC and a role with `callback_mode` set to `direct`. This allows an attacker to start an authentication request and perform "remote phishing" by having the victim visit the URL and automatically log-in to the session of the attacker. Despite being based on the authorization code flow, the `direct` mode calls back directly to the API and allows an attacker to poll for an OpenBao token until it is issued. Version 2.5.2 includes an additional confirmation screen for `direct` type logins that requires manual user interaction in order to finish the authentication. This issue can be worked around either by removing any roles with `callback_mode=direct` or enforcing confirmation for every session on the token issuer side for the Client ID used by OpenBao.

Published Mar 27, 2026 · Updated Oct 13, 2026 · Sources: NIST National Vulnerability Database, CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP · CNA: GitHub_M

Who exploits it and how urgent it is

A 0–100 score combining confirmed exploitation, ransomware and APT use, public exploits, EPSS and severity.

No exploitation signal in the sources consulted so far.
How the score was calculated
  • EPSS 0.6% (30-day exploitation probability)+7
  • Technical severity (high)+6

The score orders the patch queue; it does not replace your asset context (internet exposure, criticality, compensating controls).

Triage

Is it exploited, how likely is exploitation, what does it touch, and how severe do the sources call it.

Exploitation
Not confirmed
Not in CISA KEV — an absence of record, not proof it is unexploited.
EPSS FIRST
0.61%
ahead of 48% of scored CVEs · Oct 14, 2026
Affects
Openbao
Openbao
CVSS base
8.3
High · 4 source(s)
Prioritization reference: 9.6 provisional

CISA SSVC assessment CISA

Three decision points CISA publishes for the CVEs it assesses (SSVC 2.0.3). A stakeholder decision, not a severity score.

Exploitation
None
none · proof-of-concept · active
Automatable
No
can an attacker script the kill-chain steps
Technical impact
Total
partial · total control of the vulnerable component

Remediation

Fixes and mitigations documented by the sources — linked to the original advisory.

  • Documented patch — github.com (NIST National Vulnerability Database)

First 24 hours

Ordered from the record’s own fields — exposure first, because you cannot patch what you have not found. A rule-generated starting point.

  1. Identify exposed assets running the affected vendor/product/version combinations (Openbao Openbao).
  2. The attack is network-based and needs no privileges: restrict exposure (ACLs, VPN, WAF) until patched.
  3. Apply the fixed version or the patch documented under Remediation.
  4. Exploitation requires user interaction: tighten email/web filtering and warn affected users.
  5. Search available logs for exploit probes matching the vulnerability class (authentication), errors and authentication anomalies.

Affected scope

Vendor, product and versions as the sources word them.

VendorProductVersionsStatusSource
Openbao Openbao < 2.5.2 Vulnerable NIST National Vulnerability Database
Openbao Openbao version < 2.5.2 Vulnerable CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP

Attack characteristics

The CVSS vector, decoded. It describes the attack, not your exposure to it.

Attack vector
Network
Attack complexity
Low
Privileges required
None
User interaction
Required
Scope
Unchanged
Confidentiality
High
Integrity
High
Availability
Low

Every base score collected

Sources score independently and may disagree; each row says who scored it and under which version.

ScoreVersionSeverityExpl.ImpactScored by
9.6 CVSS 3.1 Critical 2.8 6.0 security-advisories@github.com via NIST National Vulnerability Database
9.6 CVSS 3.1 Critical 2.8 6.0 0b0ca135-0b70-47e7-9f44-1890c2a1c46c via NIST National Vulnerability Database
9.6 CVSS 3.1 Critical — — GitHub_M via CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP
8.3 CVSS 3.1 High 2.8 5.5 nvd@nist.gov via NIST National Vulnerability Database
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:L (score shown at the top: nvd@nist.gov)
Scoring entities (NIST, CNA, ADP) score independently; each score is shown with its origin. For prioritization we use 9.6 (security-advisories@github.com via NIST National Vulnerability Database) as a conservative provisional reference — not a definitive official score.

Weakness MITRE

Weakness class according to MITRE’s CWE catalog.

CWE-384 · Session Fixation

Other CVEs with this weakness →

EPSS over time FIRST

Oct 13, 2026 → Oct 14, 2026 · 2 reading(s) · max 0.61%

Detection

Read off the CVSS vector and the weakness class. Starting points, not tested rules.

  • Prioritize edge telemetry for the network-reachable component (proxy, WAF, IDS/IPS).
  • Review authentication logs: logins without MFA, anomalous sessions and recently created accounts.
web/proxy/WAF logsnetwork IDS/IPSauthentication logs

Timeline

What happened to this CVE, newest first.

  • 2026
  • Affected products added · openbao/openbao
    Oct 13, 2026 · CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP
  • SSVC assessment updated
    Oct 13, 2026 · CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP
  • Record published
    Oct 13, 2026
  • Fix documented
    Oct 13, 2026 · NIST National Vulnerability Database
  • CVSS changed · 8.3
    Oct 13, 2026 · NIST National Vulnerability Database
  • Source status changed · → Modified
    Oct 13, 2026 · NIST National Vulnerability Database
  • Record created in this database
    Oct 13, 2026 · NIST National Vulnerability Database
  • CVE published
    Mar 27, 2026 · GitHub_M

Source activity

Repeated readings are counted rather than listed.

  • 1× Official description updated · Oct 13, 2026 – Oct 13, 2026

References

6 on the record

Elsewhere on this site

Openbao
every CVE for this vendor
Authentication
same class
CWE-384
other pages naming this weakness

Related CVEs (same products)

  • CVE-2026-42186 OpenBao's Namespace Deletion May Not Delete Data Properly May 14, 2026
  • CVE-2026-39388 OpenBao's Certificate Authentication Allows Token Renewal With Different Certificate Apr 20, 2026
  • CVE-2026-39396 OpenBao has Decompression Bomb via Unbounded Copy in OCI Plugin Extraction (DoS) Apr 20, 2026
  • CVE-2026-39946 OpenBao allows SQL Injection in PostgreSQL database secrets engine Apr 20, 2026
  • CVE-2026-40264 OpenBao's Token Store Allows Cross-Namespace Renewal, Revocation Apr 20, 2026
  • CVE-2026-33758 OpenBao has Reflected XSS in its OIDC authentication error message Mar 27, 2026

Not in any source we poll

Listed rather than left blank: an empty field and an unmeasured one look identical on screen, and only one is a reason to look elsewhere.

  • No confirmed IOCs, IP addresses, domains, file hashes, or malware artifacts supplied.
  • No organization-specific asset inventory, compensating-control status, or patch deployment evidence supplied.
  • No exploit packet captures, log samples, or incident case IDs supplied.

Answered from this record

Text assembled only from the fields above — no additional claims.

What should defenders know first?

CVE-2026-33757 is "OpenBao lacks user confirmation for OIDC direct callback mode", rated High. It affects Openbao (Openbao); versions are in the scope table. It is not in CISA KEV, which does not rule out exploitation. CVSS 8.3 describes technical severity. EPSS 0.61% estimates the probability of exploitation in 30 days; neither replaces your asset context. First verify whether exposed or business-critical assets run the affected versions, apply vendor fixes or mitigations, and preserve logs for review.

Comments

Moderated technical discussion. Read the community guidelines.

No comments yet.

Sign in or create an account to comment and suggest corrections.