Medium Authentication

CVE-2026-41081 — Apache Storm Client: Anonymous principal assigned on TLS client certificate verification failure

Improper Handling of TLS Client Authentication Failure Leading to Anonymous Principal Assignment in Apache Storm Versions Affected: up to 2.8.7 Description: When TLS transport is enabled in Apache Storm without requiring client certificate authentication (the default configuration), the TlsTransportPlugin assigns a fallback principal (CN=ANONYMOUS) if no client certificate is presented or if certificate verification fails. The underlying SSLPeerUnverifiedException is caught and suppressed rather than rejecting the connection. This fail-open behavior means an unauthenticated client can establish a TLS connection and receive a valid principal identity. If the configured authorizer (e.g., SimpleACLAuthorizer) does not explicitly deny access to CN=ANONYMOUS, this may result in unauthorized access to Storm services. The condition is logged at debug level only, reducing visibility in production. Impact: Unauthenticated clients may be assigned a principal identity, potentially bypassing authorization in permissive or misconfigured environments. Mitigation: Users should upgrade to 2.8.7 in which TLS authentication failures are handled in a fail-closed manner. Users who cannot upgrade immediately should: - Enable mandatory client certificate authentication (nimbus.thrift.tls.client.auth.required: true) - Ensure authorization rules explicitly deny access to CN=ANONYMOUS - Review all ACL configurations for implicit default-allow behavior

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

Low

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 0.4% (30-day exploitation probability)+6
Technical severity (medium)+3
Automatable exploitation (SSVC)+3

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

0.45%

ahead of 37% of scored CVEs · Oct 15, 2026

Affects

Apache Software Foundation

Apache Storm Client and 1 more

CVSS base

6.5

Medium · 2 source(s)

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

Yes

can an attacker script the kill-chain steps

Technical impact

Partial

partial · total control of the vulnerable component

Remediation

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

No fix documented by the sources we poll. That does not mean none exists: check the vendor advisory.

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.

Identify exposed assets running the affected vendor/product/version combinations (Apache Software Foundation Apache Storm Client, Apache Software Foundation Storm).
The attack is network-based and needs no privileges: restrict exposure (ACLs, VPN, WAF) until patched.
No fix documented in the sources: reduce exposure and monitor the vendor advisory.
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.

Vendor	Product	Versions	Status	Source
Apache Software Foundation	Apache Storm Client	< 2.8.7	Vulnerable	CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP
Apache Software Foundation	Storm	< 2.8.7	Vulnerable	NIST National Vulnerability Database

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

None

Scope

Unchanged

Confidentiality

Low

Integrity

Low

Availability

None

Every base score collected

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

Score	Version	Severity	Expl.	Impact	Scored by
6.5	CVSS 3.1	Medium	3.9	2.5	134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0 via NIST National Vulnerability Database
6.5	CVSS 3.1	Medium	—	—	CISA-ADP via CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:N (score shown at the top: 134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0)

Weakness MITRE

Weakness class according to MITRE’s CWE catalog.

CWE-287 · Improper Authentication

Other CVEs with this weakness →

EPSS over time FIRST

Oct 13, 2026 → Oct 15, 2026 · 3 reading(s) · max 0.45%

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 · apache software foundation/apache storm client
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
CVSS changed · 6.5
Oct 13, 2026 · NIST National Vulnerability Database
Source status changed · → Analyzed
Oct 13, 2026 · NIST National Vulnerability Database
Record created in this database
Oct 13, 2026 · NIST National Vulnerability Database
CVE published
Apr 27, 2026 · apache

Source activity

Repeated readings are counted rather than listed.

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

References

2 on the record

lists.apache.org/thread/plxx5l29dvplk5rwzdcq53rdfl6v4gs8
Mailing List, Vendor Advisory, vendor-advisory, NIST National Vulnerability Database
www.openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2026/04/25/3
Mailing List, Third Party Advisory, NIST National Vulnerability Database

Elsewhere on this site

Apache Software Foundation
every CVE for this vendor

Authentication
same class

CWE-287
other pages naming this weakness

Related CVEs (same products)

Critical CVE-2026-82431 Apache Storm Client: Authorization Bypass When nimbus.groups Is Configured Without nimbus.users Sep 14, 2026
Medium CVE-2026-82434 Apache Storm Nimbus, Apache Storm Client: Disclosure of the Topology ZooKeeper Credential to Read-Only Users and to Logs Sep 14, 2026
High CVE-2026-82428 Apache Storm Client: Cross-Tenant Dependency Jar Substitution via Predictable Blob Keys Sep 14, 2026
High CVE-2026-35337 Apache Storm Client: RCE through Unsafe Deserialization via Kerberos TGT Credential Handling Apr 13, 2026
Medium CVE-2026-35565 Apache Storm UI: Stored Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) via Unsanitized Topology Metadata in Storm UI Apr 13, 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 fixed version, patch or mitigation documented.
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-2026-41081 is "Apache Storm Client: Anonymous principal assigned on TLS client certificate verification failure", rated Medium. It affects Apache Storm Client (Apache Software Foundation); versions are in the scope table. It is not in CISA KEV, which does not rule out exploitation. CVSS 6.5 describes technical severity. EPSS 0.45% 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.