CVE-2026-114472 (GCVE-0-2026-114472)

Vulnerability from cvelistv5 – Published: 2026-10-21 15:11 – Updated: 2026-10-21 15:11
VLAI
Title
Insufficient Resource Pool in hMailServer
Summary
Insufficient resource pool in the ACME HTTP-01 challenge responder of Progressive Robot hMailServer 6.0.0 through 6.3.6 allows a remote unauthenticated attacker to cause a certificate issuance or renewal to fail. When the server obtains or renews a TLS certificate over ACME it runs an HTTP-01 challenge responder on port 80 for the certificate authority to read the challenge token; the responder served one connection at a time, accepting a socket, waiting up to five seconds to receive a request, answering it, and only then accepting the next. A client that connected and sent nothing held the single worker for the whole timeout, so enough idle connections during a validation keep the certificate authority's own request from being answered in time and the validation fails. Sustained across a certificate's renewals this leads to the certificate expiring, after which clients refuse the server's TLS; the mail service itself continues on its current certificate until then. No authentication is required to connect to the responder. Version 6.3.7 serves up to 64 connections at once and closes a connection past that, so that where a handful of idle connections, one after another, sufficed before, a client must keep 64 idle connections open at once throughout a validation to have the certificate authority's connection closed.
Severity
3.7 (Low)
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:L
CWE
  • CWE-410 - Insufficient Resource Pool
Assigner
GitLab CNA under the mitre root
CNA scorecard C 75/100 over 339 records in the last 180 days details
References
Impacted products
Vendor Product Version CPE status
Progressive Robot Ltd hMailServer Affected: 6.0.0 , ≤ 6.3.6 (semver)
guessed Create a notification for this product.
Credits
Found in the hMailServer project's own security review (Progressive Robot Ltd)
Show details on NVD website
To clipboard 

{
  "containers": {
    "cna": {
      "affected": [
        {
          "defaultStatus": "unaffected",
          "product": "hMailServer",
          "repo": "https://gitlab.com/hmailserver/hmailserver",
          "vendor": "Progressive Robot Ltd",
          "versions": [
            {
              "lessThanOrEqual": "6.3.6",
              "status": "affected",
              "version": "6.0.0",
              "versionType": "semver"
            }
          ]
        }
      ],
      "credits": [
        {
          "lang": "en",
          "type": "finder",
          "value": "Found in the hMailServer project\u0027s own security review (Progressive Robot Ltd)"
        }
      ],
      "descriptions": [
        {
          "lang": "en",
          "value": "Insufficient resource pool in the ACME HTTP-01 challenge responder of Progressive Robot hMailServer 6.0.0 through 6.3.6 allows a remote unauthenticated attacker to cause a certificate issuance or renewal to fail. When the server obtains or renews a TLS certificate over ACME it runs an HTTP-01 challenge responder on port 80 for the certificate authority to read the challenge token; the responder served one connection at a time, accepting a socket, waiting up to five seconds to receive a request, answering it, and only then accepting the next. A client that connected and sent nothing held the single worker for the whole timeout, so enough idle connections during a validation keep the certificate authority\u0027s own request from being answered in time and the validation fails. Sustained across a certificate\u0027s renewals this leads to the certificate expiring, after which clients refuse the server\u0027s TLS; the mail service itself continues on its current certificate until then. No authentication is required to connect to the responder. Version 6.3.7 serves up to 64 connections at once and closes a connection past that, so that where a handful of idle connections, one after another, sufficed before, a client must keep 64 idle connections open at once throughout a validation to have the certificate authority\u0027s connection closed."
        }
      ],
      "metrics": [
        {
          "cvssV3_1": {
            "attackComplexity": "HIGH",
            "attackVector": "NETWORK",
            "availabilityImpact": "LOW",
            "baseScore": 3.7,
            "baseSeverity": "LOW",
            "confidentialityImpact": "NONE",
            "integrityImpact": "NONE",
            "privilegesRequired": "NONE",
            "scope": "UNCHANGED",
            "userInteraction": "NONE",
            "vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:L",
            "version": "3.1"
          },
          "format": "CVSS",
          "scenarios": [
            {
              "lang": "en",
              "value": "GENERAL"
            }
          ]
        }
      ],
      "problemTypes": [
        {
          "descriptions": [
            {
              "cweId": "CWE-410",
              "description": "CWE-410: Insufficient Resource Pool",
              "lang": "en",
              "type": "CWE"
            }
          ]
        }
      ],
      "providerMetadata": {
        "dateUpdated": "2026-10-21T15:11:55.846Z",
        "orgId": "ceab7361-8a18-47b1-92ba-4d7d25f6715a",
        "shortName": "GitLab"
      },
      "references": [
        {
          "url": "https://gitlab.com/hmailserver/hmailserver/-/work_items/97"
        },
        {
          "url": "https://gitlab.com/hmailserver/hmailserver/-/releases/v6.3.7"
        }
      ],
      "solutions": [
        {
          "lang": "en",
          "value": "Upgrade to hMailServer 6.3.7, whose ACME challenge responder serves each accepted connection on its own short-lived handler, up to 64 at once, instead of one at a time, so that one idle connection no longer holds up the others; it closes a connection past those 64, so that a client that keeps 64 idle connections open throughout a validation still has the certificate authority\u0027s connection closed. Until then, and with 6.3.7 where that remaining case matters, where ACME is in use, restrict who may reach the challenge port during a renewal if the surrounding network allows it, or obtain certificates with an external ACME client (for example a DNS-01 client) so that this responder does not run, and monitor certificate expiry so that a starved renewal is noticed before the certificate lapses."
        }
      ],
      "title": "Insufficient Resource Pool in hMailServer"
    }
  },
  "cveMetadata": {
    "assignerOrgId": "ceab7361-8a18-47b1-92ba-4d7d25f6715a",
    "assignerShortName": "GitLab",
    "cveId": "CVE-2026-114472",
    "datePublished": "2026-10-21T15:11:55.846Z",
    "dateReserved": "2026-10-21T15:11:10.851Z",
    "dateUpdated": "2026-10-21T15:11:55.846Z",
    "state": "PUBLISHED"
  },
  "dataType": "CVE_RECORD",
  "dataVersion": "5.2",
  "vulnerability-lookup:meta": {
    "epss": {
      "cve": "CVE-2026-114472",
      "date": "2026-10-25",
      "epss": "0.00208",
      "percentile": "0.10835"
    },
    "nvd": {
      "cve": {
        "affected": [
          {
            "affectedData": [
              {
                "defaultStatus": "unaffected",
                "product": "hMailServer",
                "repo": "https://gitlab.com/hmailserver/hmailserver",
                "vendor": "Progressive Robot Ltd",
                "versions": [
                  {
                    "lessThanOrEqual": "6.3.6",
                    "status": "affected",
                    "version": "6.0.0",
                    "versionType": "semver"
                  }
                ]
              }
            ],
            "source": "cve@gitlab.com"
          }
        ],
        "cveTags": [],
        "descriptions": [
          {
            "lang": "en",
            "value": "Insufficient resource pool in the ACME HTTP-01 challenge responder of Progressive Robot hMailServer 6.0.0 through 6.3.6 allows a remote unauthenticated attacker to cause a certificate issuance or renewal to fail. When the server obtains or renews a TLS certificate over ACME it runs an HTTP-01 challenge responder on port 80 for the certificate authority to read the challenge token; the responder served one connection at a time, accepting a socket, waiting up to five seconds to receive a request, answering it, and only then accepting the next. A client that connected and sent nothing held the single worker for the whole timeout, so enough idle connections during a validation keep the certificate authority\u0027s own request from being answered in time and the validation fails. Sustained across a certificate\u0027s renewals this leads to the certificate expiring, after which clients refuse the server\u0027s TLS; the mail service itself continues on its current certificate until then. No authentication is required to connect to the responder. Version 6.3.7 serves up to 64 connections at once and closes a connection past that, so that where a handful of idle connections, one after another, sufficed before, a client must keep 64 idle connections open at once throughout a validation to have the certificate authority\u0027s connection closed."
          }
        ],
        "id": "CVE-2026-114472",
        "lastModified": "2026-10-22T16:18:19.040",
        "metrics": {
          "cvssMetricV31": [
            {
              "cvssData": {
                "attackComplexity": "HIGH",
                "attackVector": "NETWORK",
                "availabilityImpact": "LOW",
                "baseScore": 3.7,
                "baseSeverity": "LOW",
                "confidentialityImpact": "NONE",
                "integrityImpact": "NONE",
                "privilegesRequired": "NONE",
                "scope": "UNCHANGED",
                "userInteraction": "NONE",
                "vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:L",
                "version": "3.1"
              },
              "exploitabilityScore": 2.2,
              "impactScore": 1.4,
              "source": "cve@gitlab.com",
              "type": "Secondary"
            }
          ]
        },
        "published": "2026-10-21T16:17:34.463",
        "references": [
          {
            "source": "cve@gitlab.com",
            "url": "https://gitlab.com/hmailserver/hmailserver/-/releases/v6.3.7"
          },
          {
            "source": "cve@gitlab.com",
            "url": "https://gitlab.com/hmailserver/hmailserver/-/work_items/97"
          }
        ],
        "sourceIdentifier": "cve@gitlab.com",
        "vulnStatus": "Awaiting Analysis",
        "weaknesses": [
          {
            "description": [
              {
                "lang": "en",
                "value": "CWE-410"
              }
            ],
            "source": "cve@gitlab.com",
            "type": "Primary"
          }
        ]
      }
    }
  }
}



Log in or create an account to share your comment.




Tags
Taxonomy of the tags.




Drag nodes to arrange them. Double-click a related vulnerability to open it, or a source to visit its link. The Physics button on the left tunes the layout and the simulation; the legend at the bottom left hides or shows nodes by kind and by sighting type.

Forecast uses a logistic model when the trend is rising, or an exponential decay model when the trend is falling. Fitted via linearized least squares.

Sightings

Author Source Type Date Other

Nomenclature

  • Seen: The vulnerability was mentioned, discussed, or observed by the user.
  • Confirmed: The vulnerability has been validated from an analyst's perspective.
  • Published Proof of Concept: A public proof of concept is available for this vulnerability.
  • Exploited: The vulnerability was observed as exploited by the user who reported the sighting.
  • Patched: The vulnerability was observed as successfully patched by the user who reported the sighting.
  • Not exploited: The vulnerability was not observed as exploited by the user who reported the sighting.
  • Not confirmed: The user expressed doubt about the validity of the vulnerability.
  • Not patched: The vulnerability was not observed as successfully patched by the user who reported the sighting.
Vulnerability timeline

Sightings and recorded dates, grouped by day · UTC

JSON

Loading timeline…




    Related by attack behaviour

    Vulnerabilities whose description is nearest to this one in the vector space of the CIRCL/vulnerability-attack-technique-biencoder model. This is a similarity search over the bi-encoder space (plain cosine), not a classification, and it has no measured accuracy.