CVE Intelligence
Skip to main content
critical

CVE-2026-67276

CVE-2026-67276 — SSH user impersonation possible in Mikrotik RouterOS

RouterOS does not compare the complete RSA public key when matching an SSH authentication request to an authorized user key, checking the key type and modulus but omitting the exponent. Because signature verification uses the client-supplied key, an attacker knowing an authorized RSA modulus can supply a key with exponent one, forge a valid signature, and open an SSH command channel as the target user without the private key.This issue was fixed in versions: 6.49.21 (Long-term), 7.23.4 (Long-term) and 7.24.2 (Stable)

Published Updated Sources: NVD, Mikrotik (CNA), GitHub, SOCRadar CTI

Triage

Is it exploited, how likely is exploitation, what does it touch, and how severe do the scoring sources call it.

Exploitation

Unreported

no source claims exploitation

EPSS

0%

ahead of 0% of scored CVEs

Affects

Mikrotik

3 products listed

CVSS base

9.2

critical

Remediation

The vendor's own words where we have them.

Upgrade RouterOS to a fixed release. Apply vendor patches per advisory and restrict external exposure of the affected component until patched.

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.

VendorProductVersionsStatus
MikrotikRouterOS7.24 to < 7.24.2Vulnerable
MikrotikRouterOS7.0.0 to < 7.23.4Vulnerable
MikrotikRouterOS6.0.0 to < 6.49.21Vulnerable

Attack characteristics

The CVSS vector, decoded. It describes the attack, not your exposure to it.

Attack Complexity

High

Attack Vector

Network

Privileges Req

None

User Interaction

None

Every base score collected

Sources score independently and disagree; each row says who scored it and under which version.

ScoreVersionSeverityExpl.ImpactSource
9.2CVSS 4.0criticalMikrotik (CNA)

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

Weakness & attack patterns

  • CWE-347

Detection

Read off the CVSS vector and the weakness class. Starting points, not rules we have tested.

  • Prioritize edge telemetry for network-reachable RouterOS.
web/proxy/WAF logsapplication logsnetwork IDS/IPS

Timeline

What happened to this CVE, newest first — with the readings a source repeats on a schedule counted underneath rather than listed.

  1. 2026
  2. Added · CVSS 3.1 9.2 (AV:N)

    Sep 5, 2026 · NVD

  3. Initial · CVE published

    Sep 5, 2026 · NVD

References

7 on the record

Elsewhere on this site

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-2026-67276 is SSH user impersonation possible in Mikrotik RouterOS, a critical vulnerability affecting RouterOS from Mikrotik. 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-2026-67276. Public exploit evidence is: A public PoC is not confirmed from current sources for CVE-2026-67276. 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 9.2 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.