CVE-2026-103235 : Szczegóły

CVE-2026-103235

8.7
/
Wysoki
Authorization problems
A08-Soft and Data Integrity FailA01-Broken Access Control
Network
2026-09-30
09h09 +00:00
2026-09-30
09h12 +00:00
Powiadomienia dla konkretnego CVE
Bądź na bieżąco z wszelkimi zmianami dotyczącymi konkretnego CVE.
Zarządzaj powiadomieniami

Opisy CVE

MISP Event Delegation Mass Assignment Allows Retargeting Delegation to Arbitrary Events

MISP contains a mass assignment vulnerability in the event delegation feature. When a user with delegation permission submits a delegation request, the application authorized the user against the event identified in the URL but then persisted the entire submitted record, including caller-supplied fields such as the primary key and event_id. An authenticated attacker could inject a primary key or event_id into the delegation payload to retarget an existing delegation record to any event on the instance. Because a delegation row grants the requesting organisation read access to the event it references, this effectively granted read access to arbitrary events belonging to other organisations. If the target organisation subsequently accepted the delegation, ownership of the event was transferred and the original record was deleted. Preconditions: - An authenticated user with the delegation permission (perm_delegate) - The MISP.delegation server setting must be enabled Impact: - Confidentiality: read access to any event on the instance - Integrity: overwriting existing delegation records and transferring event ownership Affected versions: MISP < 2.5.48

Rozwiązania CVE

The delegation record is now constructed from a strict allow-list of fields rather than persisting the raw user-submitted payload. The event_id is always derived from the authorized event in the URL, the requester_org_id is always taken from the authenticated session, and the primary key is never included in the saved data. Only message, distribution, and sharing_group_id are accepted from user input, eliminating the ability to retarget or overwrite existing delegation records.

Informacje CVE

Powiązane słabości

CWE-ID Nazwa słabości Source
CWE-915 Improperly Controlled Modification of Dynamically-Determined Object Attributes
The product receives input from an upstream component that specifies multiple attributes, properties, or fields that are to be initialized or updated in an object, but it does not properly control which attributes can be modified.
CWE-639 Authorization Bypass Through User-Controlled Key
The system's authorization functionality does not prevent one user from gaining access to another user's data or record by modifying the key value identifying the data.

Metryki

Metryki Wynik Stopień zagrożenia CVSS Wektor Source
V4.0 8.7 HIGH CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:L/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N

Base: Exploitabilty Metrics

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

Attack Vector

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

Network

The vulnerable system is bound to the network stack and the set of possible attackers extends beyond the other options listed below, up to and including the entire Internet. Such a vulnerability is often termed “remotely exploitable” and can be thought of as an attack being exploitable at the protocol level one or more network hops away (e.g., across one or more routers).

Attack Complexity

This metric captures measurable actions that must be taken by the attacker to actively evade or circumvent existing built-in security-enhancing conditions in order to obtain a working exploit.

Low

The attacker must take no measurable action to exploit the vulnerability. The attack requires no target-specific circumvention to exploit the vulnerability. An attacker can expect repeatable success against the vulnerable system.

Attack Requirements

This metric captures the prerequisite deployment and execution conditions or variables of the vulnerable system that enable the attack.

None

The successful attack does not depend on the deployment and execution conditions of the vulnerable system. The attacker can expect to be able to reach the vulnerability and execute the exploit under all or most instances of the vulnerability.

Privileges Required

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

Low

The attacker requires privileges that provide basic capabilities that are typically limited to settings and resources owned by a single low-privileged user. Alternatively, an attacker with Low privileges has the ability to access only non-sensitive resources.

User Interaction

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

None

The vulnerable system can be exploited without interaction from any human user, other than the attacker. Examples include: a remote attacker is able to send packets to a target system a locally authenticated attacker executes code to elevate privileges

Base: Impact Metrics

The Impact metrics capture the effects of a successfully exploited vulnerability. 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 managed by the system due to a successfully exploited vulnerability.

High

There is a total loss of confidentiality, resulting in all information within the Vulnerable System being divulged to the attacker. Alternatively, access to only some restricted information is obtained, but the disclosed information presents a direct, serious impact. For example, an attacker steals the administrator's password, or private encryption keys of a web server.

Integrity Impact

This metric measures the impact to integrity of a successfully exploited vulnerability.

High

There is a total loss of integrity, or a complete loss of protection. For example, the attacker is able to modify any/all files protected by the Vulnerable System. Alternatively, only some files can be modified, but malicious modification would present a direct, serious consequence to the Vulnerable System.

Availability Impact

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

Low

Performance is reduced or there are interruptions in resource availability. Even if repeated exploitation of the vulnerability is possible, the attacker does not have the ability to completely deny service to legitimate users. The resources in the Vulnerable System are either partially available all of the time, or fully available only some of the time, but overall there is no direct, serious consequence to the Vulnerable System.

Sub Confidentiality Impact

Negligible

There is no loss of confidentiality within the Subsequent System or all confidentiality impact is constrained to the Vulnerable System.

Sub Integrity Impact

None

There is no loss of integrity within the Subsequent System or all integrity impact is constrained to the Vulnerable System.

Sub Availability Impact

None

There is no impact to availability within the Subsequent System or all availability impact is constrained to the Vulnerable System.

Threat Metrics

The Threat metrics measure the current state of exploit techniques or code availability for a vulnerability.

Environmental Metrics

These metrics enable the consumer analyst to customize the resulting score depending on the importance of the affected IT asset to a user’s organization, measured in terms of complementary/alternative security controls in place, Confidentiality, Integrity, and Availability. The metrics are the modified equivalent of Base metrics and are assigned values based on the system placement within organizational infrastructure.

Supplemental Metrics

Supplemental metric group provides new metrics that describe and measure additional extrinsic attributes of a vulnerability. While the assessment of Supplemental metrics is provisioned by the provider, the usage and response plan of each metric within the Supplemental metric group is determined by the consumer.

Odniesienia