VulnerabilityPublished 10 Sep 2026Updated 30 Sep 2026

CVE-2026-88861: Cap-go capgo.app · Authentication Bypass Using an Alternate Path or Channel

Affects Cap-go capgo.appSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 8.7 High.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 17:16 UTC

CVSS 4.0 base score

8.7High

How severe the flaw is on the 0–10 CVSS scale.

EPSS: 0.5% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 44% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/VI:N/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Attack Requirements: None
Privileges Required: None
User Interaction: None
Vulnerable system confidentiality: High
Vulnerable system integrity: None
Vulnerable system availability: None
Subsequent system confidentiality: None
Subsequent system integrity: None
Subsequent system availability: None

Bold values are the worst case: easiest to exploit or largest impact.

Attack Vector: Network: The vulnerable system is bound to the network stack and the set of possible attackers extends beyond the other options listed below, up to and including the entire Internet. Such a vulnerability is often termed “remotely exploitable” and can be thought of as an attack being exploitable at the protocol level one or more network hops away (e.g., across one or more routers).
Attack Complexity: Low: The attacker must take no measurable action to exploit the vulnerability. The attack requires no target-specific circumvention to exploit the vulnerability. An attacker can expect repeatable success against the vulnerable system.
Attack Requirements: None: The successful attack does not depend on the deployment and execution conditions of the vulnerable system. The attacker can expect to be able to reach the vulnerability and execute the exploit under all or most instances of the vulnerability.
Privileges Required: None: The attacker is unauthorized prior to attack, and therefore does not require any access to settings or files of the vulnerable system to carry out an attack.
User Interaction: None: The vulnerable system can be exploited without interaction from any human user, other than the attacker.
Vulnerable system confidentiality: High: There is a total loss of confidentiality, resulting in all information within the Vulnerable System being divulged to the attacker. Alternatively, access to only some restricted information is obtained, but the disclosed information presents a direct, serious impact. For example, an attacker steals the administrator's password, or private encryption keys of a web server.
Vulnerable system integrity: None: There is no loss of integrity within the Vulnerable System.
Vulnerable system availability: None: There is no impact to availability within the Vulnerable System.
Subsequent system confidentiality: None: There is no loss of confidentiality within the Subsequent System or all confidentiality impact is constrained to the Vulnerable System.
Subsequent system integrity: None: There is no loss of integrity within the Subsequent System or all integrity impact is constrained to the Vulnerable System.
Subsequent system availability: None: There is no impact to availability within the Subsequent System or all availability impact is constrained to the Vulnerable System.

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v4.0 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 10 Sep 2026
Detectable: no evidence on record.
No public nuclei template indexed
Weaponised: no evidence on record.
No public exploit code indexed in Metasploit or Exploit-DB
Exploited in the wildExploited: no evidence on record.
Not in CISA KEV and no source reports exploitation
Observed by OffSeq MirageSeen by Mirage: no evidence on record.
No attack traffic recorded by OffSeq Mirage sensors

A missing step is not evidence of safety. Sources: cve.org (opens in a new tab), the Metasploit, Exploit-DB and nuclei-templates index as of 26 Oct 2026.

Disclosed: The CVE record is public on cve.org. Its publication is t = 0.
Detectable: A public nuclei template can find exposed instances, for defenders and attackers alike.
Weaponised: Public exploit code exists in Metasploit or Exploit-DB, or CISA SSVC or the CVSS exploit maturity reports a public proof of concept.
Exploited in the wild: CISA KEV lists it, CISA SSVC rates exploitation active, or a source reports attacks.
Observed by OffSeq Mirage: OffSeq Mirage honeypot sensors recorded attack traffic for this CVE, or found exposed hosts without attack traffic.

Moments are spaced evenly, not to scale; a dashed line marks a gap of six months or more. Deltas count from t = 0. Sources that give only a date (CISA KEV, Exploit-DB, or a time of exactly 00:00Z) read “same day” rather than hours. Metasploit modules carry the flaw’s disclosure date, not their release date, and nuclei templates carry no date, so both appear above but not on the timeline.

What to do

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
Cap-gocapgo.app	Affected All versions	Fixed in–

AI-suggested

Users should monitor the vendor advisory for updates and apply any forthcoming patches promptly. Until a fix is released, consider restricting password-only authentication methods and enhancing monitoring of privileged API key creation and usage to detect potential abuse.

Description

Capgo (Cap-go/capgo.app) contains an authentication bypass affecting all versions (no patched version available at time of publication). The Edge authorization path allows a password-only Supabase aal1 session to exercise privileged RBAC permissions even when the account has a verified MFA factor that has not been used for the session: the Edge JWT middleware (foundJWT() in supabase/functions/_backend/utils/hono_middleware.ts) accepts the JWT without validating its assurance level, and the direct RBAC path (checkPermission()/checkPermissionPg() in supabase/functions/_backend/utils/rbac.ts calling public.rbac_check_permission_direct()) authorizes by user ID without passing or checking the session aal, unlike the public.verify_mfa() control which correctly requires aal2. An attacker who knows only the victim's password can therefore authenticate, mint a persistent app-scoped app_admin API key that remains valid after the aal1 session is logged out, and perform privileged operations such as modifying production OTA channel configurations (validated by changing a public production channel from bundle 1.0.0 to 1.0.1), defeating the protection provided by MFA.

Impact

An attacker who knows only the victim's password can bypass MFA protections and gain privileged access to the application. They can mint persistent admin API keys that remain valid even after the initial session is logged out, enabling unauthorized privileged operations such as modifying production OTA channel configurations. This compromises the integrity and security of the production environment.

Summary

Cap-go's capgo.app contains an authentication bypass vulnerability due to improper validation of session assurance levels in the Edge JWT middleware and RBAC authorization paths. The middleware accepts JWT tokens without verifying MFA assurance levels, and the RBAC permission checks authorize users by ID without enforcing session assurance level requirements. Consequently, an attacker with only the victim's password can authenticate with a password-only Supabase aal1 session, mint a persistent app-scoped admin API key, and execute privileged actions despite the victim having a verified MFA factor that was not used for the session. This bypass defeats MFA protections and allows unauthorized modification of production OTA channel configurations.

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 1 Oct 2026, 15:43 UTC

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats