Raw vector
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/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-2026-53431 is a critical-severity Authentication Bypass by Capture-replay (CWE-294) vulnerability in Erlef (inferred from references). Its CVSS base score is 9.1 (Critical).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Pass the Ticket (T1550.003); ranked at the 35th 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 SC-23 (Session Authenticity) and SC-8 (Transmission Confidentiality and Integrity) — see the control section below for these in your framework.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2026-51145
Vulnerability Data
Authentication Bypass by Capture-replay vulnerability in malach-it Boruta allows an attacker who has obtained a previously valid JWT client assertion to authenticate as the issuing OAuth client after the assertion has expired. Boruta accepts JWT-based client authentication (client_secret_jwt and private_key_jwt…
more
token endpoint authentication methods) but never enforces that the assertion's exp claim is in the future. The pre-check helper Boruta.Oauth.Request.Base.check_expiration/1 in lib/boruta/oauth/request/base.ex only verifies that an exp claim is present (it pattern-matches on the existence of the key and returns success), and the Joken token configuration used for signature verification, Boruta.Oauth.Authorization.Client.Token.token_config/0 in lib/boruta/oauth/authorization/client.ex, returns an empty map, so Joken's default exp claim validator is not engaged either. Any attacker who obtains a validly-signed client assertion (for example through logs, reverse proxies, browser tooling, or other observability surfaces) can replay it indefinitely to authenticate as the client and obtain access tokens with that client's privileges. This issue affects boruta: from 2.3.0 before 2.3.7.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
—
V10.4.16V10.5.1
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Session authenticity mechanisms directly stop replay of captured authentication traffic by enforcing freshness or cryptographic binding.
Transmission integrity (with anti-replay) stops captured messages from being accepted as valid later.
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.
Network monitoring may detect anomalous replays after the fact but does not prevent the design flaw.
Strong authentication methods can reduce replay risk but do not inherently address captured messages.
Protecting and verifying identity assertions prevents replay of captured authentication material.
Encryption and integrity protections for data-in-transit directly block capture-replay of credentials or tokens.
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.
Network security controls such as encryption and integrity protection reduce the feasibility of capturing and replaying authentication traffic.
Cryptographic protections (e.g., nonces, timestamps, message authentication codes) make captured authentication messages unusable for replay.
Application security requirements can mandate replay-resistant authentication designs, but the control itself does not prescribe the technical measures.
Secure authentication mechanisms directly prevent replay attacks by requiring fresh, non-replayable credentials or tokens.