CVE-2026-92598VulnerabilityPublished 17 Sep 2026

Nodemailer before 9.1.0 fails to apply UTS-46 normalization when encoding international domain names, causing the domain resolver to compute a different Punycode A-label than standards-compliant parsers

Affects nodemailerSource GCVE Database

Compare

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 6.5 Medium : upgrade to 9.1.0 when convenient.

Data as of 31 Oct 2026, 20:20 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

6.5Medium

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

EPSS: 0.3% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 33% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.
Patch: Available – fixed in 9.1.0

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

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: High
Privileges Required: None
User Interaction: None
Scope: Unchanged
Confidentiality: High
Integrity: Low
Availability: None

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

Attack Vector: Network: The vulnerable component is bound to the network stack and the set of possible attackers extends beyond the other options listed, 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: High: A successful attack depends on conditions beyond the attacker's control. That is, a successful attack cannot be accomplished at will, but requires the attacker to invest in some measurable amount of effort in preparation or execution against the vulnerable component before a successful attack can be expected. For example, a successful attack may require an attacker to: gather knowledge about the environment in which the vulnerable target/component exists; prepare the target environment to improve exploit reliability; or inject themselves into the logical network path between the target and the resource requested by the victim in order to read and/or modify network communications (e.g., a man in the middle attack).
Privileges Required: None: The attacker is unauthorized prior to attack, and therefore does not require any access to settings or files to carry out an attack.
User Interaction: None: The vulnerable system can be exploited without any interaction from any user.
Scope: Unchanged: An exploited vulnerability can only affect resources managed by the same security authority. In this case, the vulnerable component and the impacted component are either the same, or both are managed by the same security authority.
Confidentiality: High: There is total loss of confidentiality, resulting in all resources within the impacted component being divulged to the attacker. Alternatively, access to only some restricted information is obtained, but the disclosed information presents a direct, serious impact.
Integrity: Low: Modification of data is possible, but the attacker does not have control over the consequence of a modification, or the amount of modification is limited. The data modification does not have a direct, serious impact on the impacted component.
Availability: None: There is no impact to availability within the impacted component.

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v3.1 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 17 Sep 2026
Detectable: no evidence on record.
No public nuclei template indexed
Weaponized: 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 31 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.
Weaponized: A Metasploit exploit module or Exploit-DB entry exists (Metasploit scanner modules do not count), 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.

ghsa-r7q5-h7cx-p54x

What to do

Upgrade nodemailer to 9.1.0.

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
npmnodemailer`pkg:npm/nodemailer`Other threats	Affected <9.1.0	Fixed in 9.1.0

Check your own hosts for these packages with threat-finder (opens in a new tab), our free open-source scanner.

AI-suggested

A fix is available in Nodemailer version 9.1.0 and later, which correctly applies UTS-46 normalization for international domain names. Users should upgrade to version 9.1.0 or newer to remediate this issue. Since this is a software library, patching the dependency in affected applications is necessary.

Description

Nodemailer before 9.1.0 fails to apply UTS-46 normalization when encoding international domain names, causing the domain resolver to compute a different Punycode A-label than standards-compliant parsers. Attackers can craft recipient addresses with invisible characters or compatibility mappings that pass domain allow-list checks but are delivered to attacker-controlled domains via SMTP.

Impact

This vulnerability can lead to bypassing domain allow-list checks in email sending workflows, potentially causing emails intended for trusted domains to be redirected to attacker-controlled domains. The impact includes confidentiality risks due to misdirected emails. The CVSS score of 6.5 (high severity) reflects a network attack vector with high confidentiality impact but low integrity and no availability impact. Exploitation requires high attack complexity and no privileges or user interaction.

Summary

The vulnerability in Nodemailer prior to version 9.1.0 involves improper handling of internationalized domain names (IDNs). Specifically, the software fails to apply UTS-46 normalization during encoding, leading to discrepancies in the computed Punycode A-label compared to standards-compliant parsers. This inconsistency allows attackers to create recipient addresses with invisible or compatibility-mapped characters that evade domain allow-list filters but ultimately route emails to attacker-controlled domains. This can undermine domain-based security controls relying on allow-lists.

CWE-436Interpretation Conflict (opens in a new tab)
Class weaknessOWASP Top 10 A06:2025: Insecure Design (opens in a new tab)
Product A handles inputs or steps differently than Product B, which causes A to perform incorrect actions based on its perception of B's state.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
REST Assessment (opens in a new tab)
REST Security (opens in a new tab)
Cross-Site Request Forgery Prevention (opens in a new tab)
Secure Design Principles (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V13.2.5 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
HTTP Request Splitting (opens in a new tab)
HTTP Response Smuggling (opens in a new tab)
HTTP Response Splitting (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 17 Sep 2026, 02:01 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-436

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats