CVE-2026-25602 : 詳細

CVE-2026-25602

2.3
/
低
0.01%V4
2026-05-20
11h16 +00:00
A08-Soft and Data Integrity Fail
Local
2026-09-25
15h17 +00:00
特定のCVEの通知
特定のCVEの変更情報をいち早くお届けします。
通知を管理する

CVE の説明

Insufficient Verification of Data Authenticity in the feedback function of Mesalvo MEONA (MEONA Client and MEONA Server). The MEONA Client transmits the recipient address of a feedback report to the MEONA Server, and the server sends the report to the transmitted address instead of the address configured on the server. The feedback function is available only in the MEONA administration area, which requires one of the administrative roles ADMINISTRATOR, SUPERADMINISTRATOR or TYPIST (catalogue editing), or the PHARMACIST role holding the PHARMACY_ADMINISTRATOR right, assigned explicitly by the operating hospital's administrators. Such a user who modifies the client request can cause the MEONA Server to send a message with content of the user's choosing, from the sender address configured on the server, to a recipient of the user's choosing, within the limits permitted by the operator's mail relay. The message can be used for social engineering because it appears to originate from an internal hospital system. Exploitation requires a MEONA account with one of the administrative roles named above and access to the operating hospital's internal network; MEONA is operated exclusively within closed hospital networks without exposure to the public Internet, and where a hospital permits remote access to that network at all, it is only through the hospital's own remote-access infrastructure (e.g. VPN) under the hospital's control. The message contains only the recipient, subject and text entered by the user; no data of other users or patients is disclosed. Mesalvo is not aware of any exploitation outside the reported security test. This issue affects MEONA Client and MEONA Server in versions 2024.10, 2025.04 (before 2025.04.24) and 2026.03 (before 2026.03.02). MEONA 2025.04.24 and 2026.03.02 (planned Q4 2026) enforce the configured recipient address on the server. Operators can restrict at their mail relay which recipients the MEONA sender address may reach.

CVE の情報

関連する弱点

CWE-ID 弱点名 出典
CWE-345 Insufficient Verification of Data Authenticity
The product does not sufficiently verify the origin or authenticity of data, in a way that causes it to accept invalid data.

メトリクス

メトリクス スコア 深刻度 CVSS ベクター 出典
V3.1 2.3 LOW CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N

Base: Exploitabilty Metrics

The Exploitability metrics reflect the characteristics of the thing that is vulnerable, which we refer to formally as the vulnerable component.

Attack Vector

This metric reflects the context by which vulnerability exploitation is possible.

Local

The vulnerable component is not bound to the network stack and the attacker’s path is via read/write/execute capabilities.

Attack Complexity

This metric describes the conditions beyond the attacker’s control that must exist in order to exploit the vulnerability.

Low

Specialized access conditions or extenuating circumstances do not exist. An attacker can expect repeatable success when attacking the vulnerable component.

Privileges Required

This metric describes the level of privileges an attacker must possess before successfully exploiting the vulnerability.

High

The attacker requires privileges that provide significant (e.g., administrative) control over the vulnerable component allowing access to component-wide settings and files.

User Interaction

This metric captures the requirement for a human user, other than the attacker, to participate in the successful compromise of the vulnerable component.

None

The vulnerable system can be exploited without interaction from any user.

Base: Scope Metrics

The Scope metric captures whether a vulnerability in one vulnerable component impacts resources in components beyond its security scope.

Scope

Formally, a security authority is a mechanism (e.g., an application, an operating system, firmware, a sandbox environment) that defines and enforces access control in terms of how certain subjects/actors (e.g., human users, processes) can access certain restricted objects/resources (e.g., files, CPU, memory) in a controlled manner. All the subjects and objects under the jurisdiction of a single security authority are considered to be under one security scope. If a vulnerability in a vulnerable component can affect a component which is in a different security scope than the vulnerable component, a Scope change occurs. Intuitively, whenever the impact of a vulnerability breaches a security/trust boundary and impacts components outside the security scope in which vulnerable component resides, a Scope change occurs.

Unchanged

An exploited vulnerability can only affect resources managed by the same security authority. In this case, the vulnerable component and the impacted component are either the same, or both are managed by the same security authority.

Base: Impact Metrics

The Impact metrics capture the effects of a successfully exploited vulnerability on the component that suffers the worst outcome that is most directly and predictably associated with the attack. Analysts should constrain impacts to a reasonable, final outcome which they are confident an attacker is able to achieve.

Confidentiality Impact

This metric measures the impact to the confidentiality of the information resources managed by a software component due to a successfully exploited vulnerability.

None

There is no loss of confidentiality within the impacted component.

Integrity Impact

This metric measures the impact to integrity of a successfully exploited vulnerability. Integrity refers to the trustworthiness and veracity of information.

Low

Modification of data is possible, but the attacker does not have control over the consequence of a modification, or the amount of modification is limited. The data modification does not have a direct, serious impact on the impacted component.

Availability Impact

This metric measures the impact to the availability of the impacted component resulting from a successfully exploited vulnerability.

None

There is no impact to availability within the impacted component.

Temporal Metrics

The Temporal metrics measure the current state of exploit techniques or code availability, the existence of any patches or workarounds, or the confidence in the description of a vulnerability.

Environmental Metrics

These metrics enable the analyst to customize the CVSS score depending on the importance of the affected IT asset to a user’s organization, measured in terms of Confidentiality, Integrity, and Availability.

a6d3dc9e-0591-4a13-bce7-0f5b31ff6158

EPSS

EPSSは脆弱性が悪用される可能性を予測するスコアリングモデルです。

EPSSスコア

EPSSモデルは0から1(0〜100%)の確率スコアを算出します。スコアが高いほど、脆弱性が悪用される可能性が高いことを示します。

EPSSパーセンタイル

パーセンタイルはCVEをEPSSスコアで順位付けするために使用されます。例えば、EPSSスコアで95パーセンタイルにあるCVEは、他の95%のCVEよりも悪用される可能性が高いことを意味します。パーセンタイルはCVEのEPSSスコアを他のCVEと比較するために使用されます。

参考資料