Raw vector
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:L/VI:H/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:X/CR:X/IR:X/AR:X/MAV:X/MAC:X/MAT:X/MPR:X/MUI:X/MVC:X/MVI:X/MVA:X/MSC:X/MSI:X/MSA:X/S:X/AU:X/R:X/V:X/RE:X/U:XCVSS and EPSS are reproduced from their sources (NVD, FIRST EPSS). Risk Priority is our own derived reading, not an NVD score.
Summary
CVE-2026-107279 is a high-severity Incorrect Implementation of Authentication Algorithm (CWE-303) vulnerability. Its CVSS base score is 8.8 (High).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique External Remote Services (T1133); ranked at the 28th percentile by exploit likelihood (below the median); it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog.
The strongest mitigations our analysis identified map to SA-11 (Developer Testing and Evaluation) and SA-15 (Development Process, Standards, and Tools) — see the control section below for these in your framework.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2026-94638
Vulnerability Data
The AsyncHttpClient (AHC) library allows Java applications to easily execute HTTP requests and asynchronously process HTTP responses. In 3.0.12, a peer offering only Digest qop=auth-int causes mutual-authentication verification to be skipped. AuthenticatorUtils.computeExpectedRspAuth returns no expected value for auth-int, and Interceptors…
more
treats that result as unverifiable but nonfatal, so a response with an invalid rspauth value is accepted. A peer that does not know the shared secret can therefore be accepted as the authenticated server. This issue is fixed in version 3.0.13.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
- 5 hardening rules · 3 OS baselines
V12.1.1V12.2.1V12.3.3V17.2.2
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Developer testing and evaluation at post-design stages directly uncovers incorrect implementations of required authentication algorithms.
Requiring documented development processes, standards, and tools reduces the chance that an established authentication algorithm is coded incorrectly.
Specifying and implementing required cryptography types directly precludes negotiation or acceptance of weaker algorithms.
Requiring protection of transmitted confidentiality and integrity forces selection of sufficiently strong negotiated algorithms rather than weaker ones.
Mitigating Controls (NIST CSF 2.0) AI
Derived directly from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry via our AI-authored CWE→CSF cross-walk (authority under review) — links open the control.
Secure SDLC practices directly require correct implementation of authentication algorithms.
PR.AA-04 addresses protection/verification of identity assertions in SSO/federation contexts while CWE-757 concerns protocol-level crypto algorithm negotiation, so the control neither prevents nor meaningfully mitigates the weakness.
Mitigating Controls (ISO/IEC 27001:2022 Annex A) AI
Derived directly from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry via our AI-authored CWE→ISO cross-walk (authority under review) — links open the control.
Cryptography control addresses proper use of authentication algorithms but is broader than authentication alone.
A.8.25 mandates security requirements, secure coding, checkpoints, testing and developer capability in the SDLC which reaches incorrect algorithm implementation for auth (via secure coding, testing and vuln prevention/fixing), but this is only a minority slice of the weakness class as most instances arise from flawed design/requirements rather than implementation errors caught in dev.
Application security requirements can specify correct authentication algorithm use but do not guarantee correct implementation.
A.8.27 mandates security-by-design principles (including least functionality, assume-breach, distrust-external-input, and selection of strong cryptography) plus design reviews against known attack patterns; this reaches the subset of algorithm-downgrade flaws that arise from missing or misapplied protocol-level choices, but leaves the dominant implementation-time and negotiation-logic cases (e.g. library defaults, missing minimum-strength enforcement) untouched.
Secure coding practices reduce the likelihood of incorrect authentication algorithm implementation.
Hardening callouts derived
Configuration rules from DISA STIG baselines that bear on weaknesses of the type cited by this CVE. Each rule is shown with the relationship its mapping actually records, against the CWE it was authored against. Derived via CVE→CWE over `controls_xwalks` (higher-evidence rows only; rows rated `none` are excluded).
Windows 10 (1 rule)
- V-220938 The LanMan authentication level must be set to send NTLMv2 response only, and to refuse LM and NTLM. blocks CWE-757
Windows Server 2016 (1 rule)
- V-225054 The LAN Manager authentication level must be set to send NTLMv2 response only and to refuse LM and NTLM. blocks CWE-757
Windows Server 2019 (1 rule)
- V-205919 Windows Server 2019 LAN Manager authentication level must be configured to send NTLMv2 response only and to refuse LM and NTLM. blocks CWE-757