CVE-2026-103503
CVE-2026-103503 — Hex trusts its bundled CA certificates when cacerts_path is set
Improper Certificate Validation vulnerability in hexpm hex allows an attacker who can intercept HTTPS connections, and holds a certificate for a Hex host issued by a CA in Hex's bundled CA store, to impersonate that host to users who set cacerts_path to a CA store that leaves that CA out. cacerts_path (HEX_CACERTS_PATH) is documented as the path to the CA certificate store, used instead of the CA bundle that ships with Hex. Hex.HTTP.SSL.ssl_opts/1 passes the configured store as the cacerts option, but builds the partial_chain callback from the bundled store whether cacerts_path is set or not. Hex.HTTP.SSL.partial_chain/2 accepts a server chain when any certificate in it has the same public key as a bundled CA certificate, so a chain that leads to a bundled CA passes verification although the configured store doesn't contain that CA. Hostname verification still applies. This issue affects hex: from 0.20.2 before 2.5.2.
Published Updated Sources: NVD, hexpm (CNA), GitHub, Red Hat (VEX), SOCRadar CTI
Triage
Is it exploited, how likely is exploitation, what does it touch, and how severe do the scoring sources call it.
Exploitation
Exploit code
public exploit, none observed
EPSS
0%
ahead of 0% of scored CVEs
CVSS base
5.9
medium · 2 sources
Remediation
The vendor's own words where we have them.
Upgrade Hex to 2.5.2 or later, for example with mix local.hex. With cacerts_path (HEX_CACERTS_PATH) set, Hex then only accepts server certificates that chain to a CA in that file, and it doesn't trust copies of CA certificates sent by the server.
Red Hat VEX · CVE-2026-103503
First 24 hours
Ordered from the record's own fields — exposure first, because you cannot patch what you have not found.
- Identify exposed assets running affected vendor/product/version combinations.
- Prioritize based on EPSS, PoC availability, and external exposure.
- Search available logs for exploit probes, errors, authentication anomalies, or suspicious child processes matching the vulnerability class.
Affected scope
Vendor, product and version as the advisories word them.
| Vendor | Product | Versions | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| hexpm | hex | 0.20.2 to < 2.5.2 | Vulnerable |
| hexpm | hex | c9b26a46928bfcd546773571e09c1d05f4cd9fb7 | Vulnerable |
Attack characteristics
The CVSS vector, decoded. It describes the attack, not your exposure to it.
Scope
X
Attack Complexity
High
Attack Vector
Network
Privileges Req
None
User Interaction
A
Every base score collected
Sources score independently and disagree; each row says who scored it and under which version.
| Score | Version | Severity | Expl. | Impact | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 5.9 | CVSS 4.0 | medium | — | — | hexpm (CNA) |
| 6.8 | CVSS 3.1 | medium | — | — | Red Hat (VEX) |
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:H/AT:P/PR:N/UI:A/VC:H/VI:L/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N
What this weakness leads to
MITRE's own consequences and mitigations for the weakness class — the authority's wording, not guidance derived from the CVSS vector.
CWE-295 · Improper Certificate Validation
- Bypass Protection Mechanism
- Gain Privileges or Assume Identity::
Mitigation: Certificates should be carefully managed and checked to assure that data are encrypted with the intended owner's public key.
Weakness & attack patterns
- CWE-295
Attack patterns reported against this CVE. The ATT&CK techniques below are inferred from its weakness class.
Public exploit
Capability, not use: code existing is a different claim from anyone running it.
Repositories
1
Detection
Read off the CVSS vector and the weakness class. Starting points, not rules we have tested.
- Search application, proxy, and WAF logs for requests touching /1, /2.
- Prioritize edge telemetry for network-reachable hex.
- Monitor for scanner or exploit-pattern traffic after 1 public PoC repositories were reported.
Timeline
What happened to this CVE, newest first — with the readings a source repeats on a schedule counted underneath rather than listed.
- 2026
Added · CVSS 3.1 5.9 (AV:N)
Oct 12, 2026 · NVD
Initial · CVE published
Oct 12, 2026 · NVD
CVE published by MITRE.
Oct 12, 2026 · SOCRadar CTI
References
8 on the record
- cna.erlef.org/cves/CVE-2026-103503.html
Vendor Advisory, Mitre, NIST
- github.com/hexpm/hex/commit/5f5a2136c7cf5991b6e8a30d645ca9f8e74b0785
Exploit, Third Party Advisory, Mitre, NIST
- github.com/hexpm/hex/commit/6232a6498015e559743bec4f4fbec9138837cec8
Exploit, Third Party Advisory, Mitre, NIST
- github.com/hexpm/hex/commit/c9b26a46928bfcd546773571e09c1d05f4cd9fb7
Exploit, Third Party Advisory, Mitre, NIST
- github.com/hexpm/hex/security/advisories/GHSA-rw8q-hg7m-cxgr
Exploit, Third Party Advisory, Mitre, NIST
- osv.dev/vulnerability/EEF-CVE-2026-103503
Vendor Advisory, Mitre, NIST
- access.redhat.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-103503
Vendor Advisory
- www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-103503
Vendor Advisory
Elsewhere on this site
- hexpmevery CVE for this vendor
- Cryptographysame class
- CWE-295other pages naming this weakness
Not in any source we poll
Listed rather than left blank: an empty field and an unmeasured one look identical on screen, and only one is a reason to look elsewhere.
- No confirmed IOCs, IP addresses, domains, file hashes, or malware artifacts supplied.
- No organization-specific asset inventory, compensating-control status, or patch deployment evidence supplied.
- No exploit packet captures, log samples, or incident case IDs supplied.
Answered from this record1
What should defenders know first?
CVE-2026-103503 is Hex trusts its bundled CA certificates when cacerts_path is set, a medium vulnerability affecting hex from hexpm. The current evidence does not list it in CISA KEV, and the exploit status is: Active exploitation is not confirmed from current sources for CVE-2026-103503. Public exploit evidence is: 1 public PoC repositories reported; 0 marked weaponized in current dataset. The affected-version evidence is listed in the key facts and affected products tables. Defenders should first verify whether exposed or business-critical assets run those versions, then apply vendor patches or mitigations, restrict reachable attack surface, and preserve logs for detection review. CVSS 5.9 describes technical severity, while EPSS 0% helps estimate near-term exploit likelihood; neither replaces asset context. Unknown fields should remain explicit in tickets, and threat actor, IOC, victimology, or payload claims should not be added unless a cited source supports them. Monitor CISA KEV, vendor advisories, NVD changes, public PoC repositories, and internal telemetry for update triggers.