EEF-CVE-2026-89186 CVE-2026-89186 GHSA-82qh-vrvm-gqvc
mpp writes Payment-Receipt and Cache-Control before the wrapped application runs, letting a consumer's own Cache-Control expose paid responses to shared caches
- Severity
- 0.0 / 10
- Unknown · CVSS 4.0
- Exploit chance (EPSS)
- 0.52%
- Chance of exploitation in the next 30 days. Higher than 44.45% of scored vulnerabilities.
- Known exploited
- No
- Not in CISA's catalog
- Weakness
- CWE-524 Use of Cache Containing Sensitive Information
- Fix
0.16.2- Upgrade mpp to this version or later
Description
Summary
Use of Cache Containing Sensitive Information in ZenHive mpp allows a shared HTTP cache to store a paid response and serve it to clients that never paid.
MPP.Plug.verify_credential in lib/mpp/plug.ex sets payment-receipt and cache-control: private on the connection before the wrapped application runs, and registers no register_before_send/2 callback. Plug.Conn.put_resp_header/3 replaces an existing header, so a mounting application that sets its own cache-control on the paid resource (for example public, max-age=3600) silently overrides the private the library relies on, and a CDN or reverse proxy can then store the paid 200 together with its Payment-Receipt and serve both to unpaid clients. The library-level guarantee is therefore defeatable by the application it protects. For the same reason a downstream non-2xx response still carried Payment-Receipt, issuing a receipt for a response that delivered no resource.
This issue affects mpp: from 0.1.0 before 0.16.2.
Impact
An unpaid client requesting the same URL through the shared cache receives the cached paid response, including the Payment-Receipt header issued to the paying client. Operators lose the revenue for every cache hit, and the receipt identifying a paid transaction is disclosed to third parties.
Workarounds
In the application mounted behind MPP.Plug, stop setting Cache-Control on paid routes so the library's private survives to the response, or set a directive that is itself safe for a shared cache (private, or no-store). Where the application must set its own caching policy, configure the CDN or reverse proxy not to cache responses carrying a Payment-Receipt header.
Configurations
Reachable only where the application mounted behind MPP.Plug sets its own Cache-Control on the paid resource, overriding the private the library wrote, and a shared HTTP cache (CDN or reverse proxy) sits in front of that route. An application that sets no Cache-Control of its own keeps the library's private and is not affected.
Affected versions
Hex
| Package | Vulnerable | Fixed in |
|---|---|---|
| mpp | >= 0.1.0, < 0.16.2 |
0.16.2 |
How to fix
Move to the fixed version or later with your package manager, update the lockfile, and run your tests. If the package only arrives through another dependency, upgrade that dependency first. If none of its releases pulls a fixed version yet, force the version with your package manager's override.
mpp Hex → 0.16.2
- mix
{:mpp, "~> 0.16.2"} # then: mix deps.update mpp
Severity breakdown
CVSS 4.0 0.0
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:L/VI:N/VA:N/SC:L/SI:N/SA:N
- Attack vector
- Network
- Attack complexity
- Low
- Attack requirements
- Present
- Privileges required
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Confidentiality (vulnerable system)
- Low
- Integrity (vulnerable system)
- None
- Availability (vulnerable system)
- None
- Confidentiality (subsequent systems)
- Low
- Integrity (subsequent systems)
- None
- Availability (subsequent systems)
- None
Weakness
CWE-524: Use of Cache Containing Sensitive Information
The code uses a cache that contains sensitive information, but the cache can be read by an actor outside of the intended control sphere.
How to prevent it
- Architecture and Design: Protect information stored in cache.
- Architecture and Design: Do not store unnecessarily sensitive information in the cache.
- Architecture and Design: Consider using encryption in the cache.
References
Advisories
Fixes and patches
Packages
Other links
Timeline
- Published
- Last updated by the source
- Latest EPSS score
Related advisories
| Advisory | Severity | Why it's related |
|---|---|---|
| EEF-CVE-2026-87119 mpp Tempo subscription key authorization is not bound to the issuing challenge, allowing a captured activation credential to be replayed | Not rated yet | Also affects mpp |
| EEF-CVE-2026-89420 Session voucher adding no new funds is accepted without a charge in mpp, serving paid resources for free | Not rated yet | Also affects mpp |
| EEF-CVE-2026-88255 mpp Tempo keys its pre-broadcast dedup reserve on the caller-supplied transaction encoding, so a re-encoded signed transaction reserves a second slot | Not rated yet | Also affects mpp |
| EEF-CVE-2026-82750 Unbounded EIP-7702 authorization list in mpp Tempo fee-payer sponsorship inflates gas cost and sponsors account delegation | Not rated yet | Also affects mpp |
| EEF-CVE-2026-82751 Unbounded key authorization in mpp Tempo fee-payer sponsorship inflates gas cost and sponsors access-key provisioning | Not rated yet | Also affects mpp |
| EEF-CVE-2026-67581 On-chain transfer proof is not single-use in mpp EVM payment method, enabling cross-challenge replay | High | Also affects mpp |
| EEF-CVE-2026-73541 Tempo fee sponsorship in mpp bounds each transaction but not aggregate exposure, allowing concurrent sponsor-wallet drain | High | Also affects mpp |
| EEF-CVE-2026-73136 Static memo configuration in mpp Tempo disables per-challenge attribution binding, enabling third-party replay | High | Also affects mpp |
Credits: E.FU, Jonatan Männchen / EEF
MergeHarbor checks every repository's dependencies against this database, ranks what matters by exploitability and reachability, routes it to the owning team and opens the fix pull request.
Check your repos with MergeHarbor