Raw vector
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:N/UI:A/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-2026-86688 is a high-severity Session Fixation (CWE-384) vulnerability in Erlef (inferred from references). Its CVSS base score is 7.4 (High).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Steal Web Session Cookie (T1539); ranked at the 35th percentile by exploit likelihood (below the median); it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2026-82579
Vulnerability Data
Session Fixation vulnerability in team-alembic ash_authentication allows an attacker who can plant a session identifier in a victim's browser to hold an authenticated session once that victim signs in. AshAuthentication.Plug.Helpers.store_in_session/2 writes the authenticated subject into the existing session with Plug.Conn.put_session/3…
more
and never calls Plug.Conn.configure_session(renew: true), so the identifier the visitor arrived with carries into their authenticated session. Every authentication event reaches this one function: the default success/4 injected by AshAuthentication.Phoenix.Controller.__using__/1, the AuthController emitted by mix ash_authentication_phoenix.install, and remember-me auto-login. AshAuthentication.Phoenix.Plug.store_in_session/2 is a defdelegate to it. Logout does not close the window either, because clear_session/2 ends with Plug.Conn.clear_session/1, which clears session contents but leaves the identifier intact, so a planted identifier survives a logout-then-login cycle. This issue affects ash_authentication: from 0.2.0 before 4.15.0 and from 5.0.0-rc.0 before 5.0.0-rc.14.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
—
V4.4.4V7.6.2
Likely Mitigating Controls AI
Per-CVE control mapping for this CVE has not run yet; the list below is derived from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry.
Session termination after a set interval shortens the usable lifetime of a fixed session identifier, making successful exploitation of session fixation more difficult.
Re-authentication typically forces issuance of a new session, limiting the window for exploitation of a previously fixed session identifier.
Enforces proper session ID generation and binding, preventing fixation of a known session token.
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.
Managing identities and credentials includes handling session identifiers as temporary credentials that must be invalidated on re-authentication.
Proper authentication processes must invalidate prior session identifiers to prevent fixation attacks.
Protecting and verifying identity assertions encompasses secure handling and regeneration of session tokens.
Configuration baselines can enforce session regeneration and timeout settings that block fixation.
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.
Access-control policy can mandate session invalidation on re-authentication, but does not prescribe the technical mechanism.
Identity-management procedures can require new session tokens after login, yet the control is broader than session handling.
Authentication-information rules can include session-token lifecycle requirements, but the control focuses on credential management.
Secure-SDLC requirement can embed session-fixation checks, but eliminating the weakness does not satisfy the full SDLC control.
Application-security requirements can specify session handling, yet the weakness fix alone does not meet the broader requirement.
Secure-coding standards can forbid session fixation, but removing the flaw does not achieve the entire coding standard.