CVE-2026-41081

Home/CVE/Improper Handling of TLS Client Authentication Failure Leading to Anonymous Principal Assignment in Apache Storm Versio

CVE

Improper Handling of TLS Client Authentication Failure Leading to Anonymous Principal Assignment in Apache Storm Versio

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.

MEDIUM · CVSS 6.5 EPSS 0.0014

Schedule remediation

SSVC automatable: yes - attacks can be scripted at scale

Sigma rules0 YARA rules0

Look this up elsewhere - one-click external pivots

NVD CVE.org CISA Vulners Exploit-DB GitHub PoC VulnCheck KEV GreyNoise

▸ How to read a CVE - triage first, then detect and patch

This page is every public fact about CVE-2026-41081, cross-linked. Its job is to answer one question fast - does this need my attention now? - and then hand you the two things you do about it. Here is how an analyst reads it.

Triage: should I act now? Four signals, and they are not interchangeable:

CVSSseverity - how bad it is IF exploited, 0-10. A high CVSS alone is not urgency; a flaw can be a perfect 10 and never actually be attacked. EPSSprobability - a model’s estimate of the chance it is exploited in the next 30 days, 0-1. This is the “will it actually happen” signal. CISA KEVconfirmed - it is being exploited in the wild right now. The strongest signal on the page; KEV beats any score. Weaponisedavailability - public exploits / PoCs, and especially Metasploit modules rated Excellent / Great. Reliable, packaged exploit code means low-skill attackers can use it today.

How they combine: KEV, or a dependable Metasploit module, means patch now regardless of CVSS. High CVSS + low EPSS + no exploit is real but not an emergency - schedule it. Low CVSS but KEV-listed still gets patched now. The verdict above already weighed these for you; this is how it got there.

Then what - two workflows:

Detectwhen you cannot patch today, follow this CVE to the ATT&CK techniques it enables, then Build a SIEM detection (the green button) - author a rule, test it in Atomic, deploy it. That buys visibility while the patch waits. PatchAffected products / packages tell you if you are exposed; Fixed versions by distribution and Vendor advisories give the exact version that closes it.

Reading order for the panels below: verdict + badges, then Public exploits / Metasploit (is it weaponised), then ATT&CK techniques + Sigma / IDS rules (can I detect it), then Affected products / packages + Fixed versions (am I exposed, what patches it), then Threat actors / IOCs (who uses it), then Scoring & timeline / references (the evidence).

View attack path from CVE-2026-41081

◆

ATT&CK techniques

Techniques this CVE enables - linked via CWECAPECATT&CK. High◆ = named directly in ATT&CK or Nuclei templates.

T1040 · Network Sniffing T1134 · Access Token Manipulation T1185 · Browser Session Hijacking T1505.003 · Web Shell T1548 · Abuse Elevation Control Mechanism T1550.001 · Application Access Token T1557 · Adversary-in-the-Middle T1563 · Remote Service Session Hijacking

▤ Build a SIEM detection for these techniques

▤

CAPEC attack patterns

Attack patterns this CVE enables - the bridge from weakness to ATT&CK technique.

CAPEC-CAPEC-114 · Authentication Abuse CAPEC-CAPEC-115 · Authentication Bypass CAPEC-CAPEC-151 · Identity Spoofing CAPEC-CAPEC-194 · Fake the Source of Data CAPEC-CAPEC-22 · Exploiting Trust in Client CAPEC-CAPEC-57 · Utilizing REST's Trust in the System Resource to Obtain Sensitive Data CAPEC-CAPEC-593 · Session Hijacking CAPEC-CAPEC-633 · Token Impersonation CAPEC-CAPEC-650 · Upload a Web Shell to a Web Server CAPEC-CAPEC-94 · Adversary in the Middle (AiTM)

⬡

Weakness Classification

CWE-287Improper Authentication

▤

Affected Products & Versions

apache storm< 2.8.7

▤

Affected Packages

Language-ecosystem packages (from OSV) tied to this CVE, with the version that fixes it - the dependency-level detail NVD doesn’t carry.

Maven org.apache.storm:storm-client MODERATE fixed in 2.8.7

▣

Scoring & Timeline

6.5

MEDIUM · CVSS v3.1 · [email protected]

View on NVD

Attack Vector

Network Adjacent Local Physical

Attack Complexity

Low High

Privileges Required

None Low High

User Interaction

None Required

Scope

Unchanged Changed

Confidentiality

None Low High

Integrity

None Low High

Availability

None Low High

Published to NVD27 Apr 2026 · 02:16 PM

CVSS VectorCVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:N

SSVC triage · cisa-vulnrichment

Exploitation

none

Automatable

yes

Technical impact

partial

SSVC asks the questions that actually drive patch urgency: is it being exploited, can attacks be automated, and how total is the impact.

🔗

References & Sources

Source URLs (vendor pages, mailing lists, write-ups). Exploit/PoC links are in their own section above to avoid duplication.

https://lists.apache.org/thread/plxx5l29dvplk5rwzdcq53rdfl6v4gs8Mailing ListVendor Advisory

http://www.openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2026/04/25/3Mailing ListThird Party Advisory