CVE-2026-107685

CRITICALPre-NVD 9.19.1
EchelonGraph scoreMEDIUM confidence

“—” beside the score: it is equal to the CVSS score beside it.

This critical-severity CVE scores 9.1 under a secondary CVSS source (NVD's own analysis pending). EPSS exploit probability: 0.3% (19th percentile of EPSS-scored CVEs). No GitHub Security Advisory CVSS is on record for this CVE.

Triggered by: Headline CVSS from a secondary CVSS source
Sources: EPSS, a secondary CVSS source
Trending — 4 sources updated this week

Also known asEUVD-2026-108709 (ENISA EUVD) · GHSA-w53j-6pxf-r2vw (GitHub Security Advisories)Source: ENISA EUVD

9.1EG
EchelonGraph verdictPlan a fixRemediate within your standard update timelines (the SSVC decision on this page).
  • High severity, but no confirmed exploitation yet
CISA-KEV: Not listedEPSS PROB: 0.3%CVSS: 9.1Exploit: None knownExposed services: Not assessed

A fix is available — apply it.

Improper Certificate Validation vulnerability in the WebSocket streaming client in agentjido req_llm allows an on-path attacker to read and modify OpenAI WebSocket sessions, including the authorization bearer token, via a TLS certificate the client does not trust. ReqLLM.Streaming.WebSocketSession.Client.start/3 in lib/req_llm/streaming/web_socket_session/client.ex starts WebSockex without TLS options, and WebSockex defaults to insecure: true, which connects with verify: :verify_none. The option allowlist also drops any caller-supplied cacerts or ssl_options, so an application cannot turn verification on.

The OpenAI Responses, Realtime, and Codex WebSocket paths reach this client and send the API key or OAuth access token in the authorization header. HTTP streaming through Finch and the HTTP/2 duplex session through Mint verify certificates and are not affected.

This issue affects req_llm: from 1.9.0 before 1.29.0.

CVSS v3
9.1
EG Score
9.1CRITICALmedium confidence
EG Risk
41
EG Risk 41/100

EG Risk is EchelonGraph's 0–100 priority score. It fuses impact severity (EG Severity, the CVSS base score, never the KEV-floored or EPSS-lifted EG Score) with real-world exploitation and automatability, under weights EchelonGraph set by hand, so you can rank equal-severity CVEs and fix the most dangerous first. Higher = act sooner.

How it’s computed (value × EchelonGraph’s weight)
Severity91% × 45%
Impact severity (EG Severity): CVSS 9.1 of 10. Never the KEV-floored or EPSS-lifted EG Score.
Exploitation0.3% × 40%
FIRST EPSS: the 30-day exploitation probability when EchelonGraph scored this CVE.
Automatability0% × 15%
CISA's BOD 26-04 default: no one has published Automatable for this CVE, and CISA treats it as “no” for a CVE not in KEV.
SSVC (CISA's decision table, applied by EchelonGraph): Track at low or medium mission impact; Track* at high (mission-essential systems).
Exploitation none (no CISA value, KEV listing or exploit code on record) · Automatable no (CISA's BOD 26-04 default) · Technical impact total (CVSS v4.0 confidentiality and integrity impact both High). EchelonGraph holds no SSVC assessment of this CVE from CISA: none of these inputs is from Vulnrichment. EchelonGraph applied CISA's decision table to them; CISA publishes SSVC inputs and the table, not a decision for each CVE.
Action: A fix is available. Apply it within your standard update timelines.
EPSS PROB
0.3%
EPSS %ILE
19th
KEV
Not listed

What the EG score is made of (scorer v4.0: the three questions the 0–10 score mixes, published apart · methodology)

The EG score (9.1): severity, escalated by confirmed exploitation. This CVE's 9.1 is its impact severity (EG Severity), not escalated.

EG Severity
9.1 CRITICALCVSS-B, impact only: no KEV listing, EPSS or EG-KEV tier raises it.a secondary CVSS source · CVSS v3.0 or v3.1
EG Likelihood
0.3% within 30 daysSource: FIRST EPSS (model v2026.06.15, score date 2026-10-26). FIRST's exploitation probability, not an EchelonGraph model.
Confirmed exploitation
None on record (CISA KEV, EG-KEV Tier 1)Reported apart from the likelihood: an observed fact, not a probability.
EG Priority
SSVC Track at medium mission impactTrack at low or medium mission impact; Track* at high (mission-essential systems).CISA BOD 26-04: 14 days if the affected system is publicly exposed; Fix on system upgrade if it is not.Each input and its source: the SSVC and BOD 26-04 blocks below.

SSVC (CISA's decision table, applied by EchelonGraph)Track at low or medium mission impact; Track* at high (mission-essential systems).

A fix is available. Apply it within your standard update timelines.

Exploitation none (no CISA value, KEV listing or exploit code on record) · Automatable no (CISA's BOD 26-04 default) · Technical impact total (CVSS v4.0 confidentiality and integrity impact both High). EchelonGraph holds no SSVC assessment of this CVE from CISA: none of these inputs is from Vulnrichment. EchelonGraph applied CISA's decision table to them; CISA publishes SSVC inputs and the table, not a decision for each CVE. Mission impact is CISA's Mission & Well-being decision point, and only you can judge it. CISA's table makes it high when Mission Prevalence is Essential — the vulnerable component "directly provides capabilities that constitute at least one MEF for at least one entity" (MEF: mission essential function) — or when Public Well-Being Impact is Irreversible: "multiple fatalities are likely", the cyber-physical system "is likely lost or destroyed", "extreme or serious externalities" are imposed on other parties, or social systems such as elections or the financial grid "are destabilized and potentially collapse". CISA's decision table

BOD 26-04 (CISA's remediation timeline, Table 1)14 days if the affected system is publicly exposed; Fix on system upgrade if it is not.

In CISA KEV no (CISA's KEV catalog) · Automatable no (CISA's BOD 26-04 default) · Technical impact total (CVSS v4.0 confidentiality and integrity impact both High). Where an input reads “CISA's BOD 26-04 default”, no one has published it for this CVE, and CISA's implementation guidance says: “If “Automatable” and “Technical Impact” information items about a CVE ID are not available and the CVE ID is not in the KEV Catalog, CISA will treat its values as “no” and “total,” respectively, until CISA or a third party provides metadata about the CVE ID. CISA will always provide the Vulnrichment data for a CVE ID listed in the KEV Catalog.” Whether your system is publicly exposed is yours to answer. BOD 26-04 binds US Federal Civilian Executive Branch agencies; for anyone else it is CISA's published timeline, a reference rather than an obligation. The directive · how EchelonGraph applies it

Published

October 23, 2026

Last Modified

October 23, 2026

Advisory Details (5)

Auto-updated Oct 23, 2026
Patch available. Sources: github, github_commit.
GitHub commit Patch Available

commit c7264fc0217f (agentjido/req_llm)

Patch available: agentjido/req_llm v1.29.0 (contains commit c7264fc0217f)

https://github.com/agentjido/req_llm/commit/c7264fc0217fbacfb5562234ff790b8e4462de76
GitHub commit Patch Available

commit a389d718640c (agentjido/req_llm)

Patch available: agentjido/req_llm v1.9.0 (contains commit a389d718640c)

https://github.com/agentjido/req_llm/commit/a389d718640ceb2d541a8f540ab954cbf5ef8313
Web page

OSV - Open Source Vulnerabilities

https://osv.dev/vulnerability/EEF-CVE-2026-107685
GitHub advisoryMentions a patch (unverified)

WebSocket sessions do not verify TLS certificates, exposing API keys and OAuth tokens to on-path attackers · Advisory · agentjido/req_llm · GitHub

https://github.com/agentjido/req_llm/security/advisories/GHSA-6vww-5m28-f26v

Vendor Advisories for CVE-2026-107685(1)

These vendors published their own advisory mentioning this CVE — often with vendor-specific remediation steps + affected product lists not in NVD.

Affected Packages

(1 across 1 ecosystem)
Hex(1)
PackageVulnerable rangeFix by version rangeDependents
req_llm1.10.0 ... 1.9.0 (22 versions)1.29.0 (one range)—

Weakness Classification(1)

MITRE Common Weakness Enumeration — the root-cause categories this CVE belongs to.

Data Freshness Timeline

(refreshed 16× in last 7d / 16× in last 30d)

Each row is a time one of our pipelines fetched, updated or re-scored this CVE. For example, "NVD update" means NVD published or revised its analysis for this CVE; "MITRE cvelistV5" means we ingested or refreshed it from the CNA feed. An arrow marks a change the record states ("CVSS v3 → 9.1"); EPSS and GHSA rows show the values recorded at that time, not what changed (EPSS values are rounded; hover one for the exact figures). Most recent first.

  1. 2026-10-27 16:31 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.3% · 19th percentile
  2. 2026-10-27 12:48 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-w53j-6pxf-r2vw · GitHub severity CRITICAL
  3. 2026-10-26 19:13 UTCEG score recompute
  4. 2026-10-26 19:13 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-w53j-6pxf-r2vw · GitHub severity CRITICAL
  5. 2026-10-26 16:30 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.3% · 19th percentile
  6. 2026-10-25 18:22 UTCEG score recompute
  7. 2026-10-25 18:22 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-w53j-6pxf-r2vw · GitHub severity CRITICAL
  8. 2026-10-25 16:32 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.3% · 19th percentile
  9. 2026-10-25 14:54 UTCEG score recompute
  10. 2026-10-24 19:12 UTCEG score recompute
  11. 2026-10-24 19:12 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-w53j-6pxf-r2vw · GitHub severity CRITICAL
  12. 2026-10-24 16:32 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.3% · 26th percentile
  13. 2026-10-23 20:06 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-w53j-6pxf-r2vw · GitHub severity CRITICAL
  14. 2026-10-23 12:25 UTCEG score recompute
  15. 2026-10-23 11:10 UTCEG score recomputeFirst assessed: 9.1 CRITICAL
  16. 2026-10-23 11:09 UTCMITRE cvelistV5first tracked

Frequently asked(5)

What is CVE-2026-107685?
CVE-2026-107685 is a critical-severity vulnerability; its CVE record was published on October 23, 2026. Improper Certificate Validation vulnerability in the WebSocket streaming client in agentjido reqllm allows an on-path attacker to read and modify OpenAI WebSocket sessions, including the authorization bearer token, via a TLS certificate the client does not trust.…
When was CVE-2026-107685 made public?
CVE-2026-107685 was made public on October 22, 2026: that is the date its CVE record's CNA, Erlang Ecosystem Foundation, gives for when the vulnerability was made public. The CVE record itself was published on October 23, 2026. EchelonGraph's copy of the record carries a last-modified date of October 23, 2026; the record at its source may have been updated since.
Is CVE-2026-107685 actively exploited?
CVE-2026-107685 is not currently on CISA's Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog. FIRST EPSS estimates a 0.3% probability of exploitation in the next 30 days (19th percentile of EPSS-scored CVEs).
What is the CVSS score of CVE-2026-107685?
CVE-2026-107685 has a CVSS base score of 9.1 (a secondary CVSS source that NVD displays; NVD's own analysis pending).
How do I remediate CVE-2026-107685?
A fix for CVE-2026-107685 is available: update to the fixed version the vendor names in its advisory. The vendor advisories EchelonGraph has for CVE-2026-107685 are linked in the Vendor Advisories panel on this page.

Dependency Blast Radius

See which npm, PyPI, Go, and Maven packages are affected by CVE-2026-107685

Explore →

Is Your Infrastructure Affected by CVE-2026-107685?

EchelonGraph automatically scans your cloud infrastructure and maps CVE exposure using blast radius analysis.