NVD / CVE Program· CNA CIRCL

CVE-2026-56424: Broken access control in MISP core allows cross-organization unauthorized modification or deletion of analyst data, event reports, collections, templates, and d

Noroxi assessment

Priority: Monitor (action score 28/100)

The sources we track (CISA KEV, Exploit-DB, Metasploit, Nuclei, GitHub) show no public exploit code or exploitation in the wild.
Probability of exploitation in the next 30 days: 0.52% (FIRST EPSS).
Anyone who can reach it over the internet can trigger it. A low-privileged account is enough. No user action is required. No special conditions are required; it is repeatable.
No fixed version is recorded, but the references include a patch (commit or PR) link.

Low priority for now. See the fix and affected versions sections below.

Generated automatically from the record's data: CVSS (NVD and CNA), CISA KEV and SSVC, FIRST EPSS, exploit sources, fixed versions. How we calculate it

Primary sources: NVD · CVE.org · FIRST EPSS

MISP core contained multiple broken access-control flaws where authorization checks were performed against the wrong entity, or where ownership/editability checks were missing on write paths. In affected subsystems, a lower-privileged authenticated user with the relevant feature permission could cause the application to authorize one object but mutate another, or could modify objects that were merely visible rather than editable by the user’s organization. The affected paths included: * Event Reports tag removal: the route-authorized report could differ from the report ID used for tag detachment, enabling cross-organization tag removal from another event report * Collection Elements bulk deletion: bulk deletion authorized against a collection whose ID matched the collection-element row ID, rather than the element’s actual parent collection, enabling deletion of elements from collections the user did not own. * Analyst Data capture/update: nested analyst data updates could overwrite an existing record without applying the normal canEditAnalystData ownership check, enabling cross-organization overwrite of analyst data records. * Template Elements editing: editing authorized against a template whose ID matched the template-element ID, rather than the element’s actual parent template, enabling unauthorized edits to another organization’s template elements. * Decaying Model editing and mappings: write paths loaded models using view-scope access but did not verify edit ownership, enabling users to edit or remap visible models owned by another organization. Successful exploitation could allow an authenticated user with subsystem-specific permissions to perform unauthorized cross-organization modifications or deletions of MISP data, resulting in integrity loss, unauthorized tampering with shared intelligence, and disruption of analyst workflows.

HighCVSS 7.1 · v4.0—No exploit No fix recorded

Broken access control (IDOR)

Published: Jun 22, 2026
Updated: Jun 23, 2026
EPSS: 0.5% · 44th percentile
CWE: CWE-639

Report tools

JSON

Action score

Monitor

Low priority for now.

CVSS: 28 / 40 · 7.1 / 10
CISA KEV: 0 / 30 · Not listed
EPSS: 0 / 30 · 0.5%

CISA SSVC decision

Exploitation: none
Automatable: no
Technical impact: partial

Vulnrichment: CISA's decision-tree inputs.

CNA vs NVD score

NVD: —
CNA · CIRCL: 7.1; NVD has not scored this yet; the score shown is the CNA’s.

CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:H/VI:L/VA:N/SC:L/SI:N/SA:N

The score given by the assigning authority versus NVD’s independent score. A gap means the severity is contested.

Get told when this record changes

Not in KEV: no record of exploitation in the wild
No public exploit code on record
No fixed version yet

If any of these changes, we'll tell you in the daily email digest.

Running WordPress? Scan your site free with WP Lens

Is your version affected? Check it

Noroxi analysis

What does it mean in your environment?

The assessment above is generated automatically from the record's data; it doesn't know your environment. Our team verifies on your systems whether this vulnerability is actually exploitable and which mitigation is enough.

We use this product, ask for help

Affected systems

Is your version affected?

Pick the product and type the version you run. It's compared with this record's version ranges in your browser; the version isn't sent anywhere.

Vendor	Product	CPE
misp-project	misp	cpe:2.3:a:misp-project:misp

Affected versions

NVD version ranges (for catalog products). Add the product to your stack with a version and matching uses these.

misp-project mispbefore 2.5.42

Versions reported by the vendor

Affected version ranges reported by the assigning authority (CIRCL). Independent of NVD's CPE analysis and usually ahead of it.

misp misp
- up to and including 2.5.41affected · semver

Same product

misp-project: all records

Other highest-scoring records for the same primary product.

CVE-2022-29528An issue was discovered in MISP before 2.4.158.
40Plan
CVE-2021-41326In MISP before 2.4.148, app/Lib/Export/OpendataExport.php mishandles parameter data that is used in a shell_exec call.
40Plan
CVE-2018-19908An issue was discovered in MISP 2.4.9x before 2.4.99.
40Plan

Published before and after this one in the same product

← EarlierCVE-2026-10864Jun 4, 2026 · MISP Dashboard widget field selection may expose restricted user and organisation data
21Monitor
← EarlierCVE-2026-56423Jun 22, 2026 · MISP Core: Broken access control allows instance-wide unauthorized deletion of event reports and sharing groups via bulk deletion endpoints
37Monitor
Later →CVE-2026-56425Jun 22, 2026 · MISP AAD authentication plugin - Improper OAuth State Handling, Missing Session Rotation, Insecure Redirect URI Validation, and Log Injection
37Monitor

Remediation

Which version to upgrade to

Fix versions compiled from the vendor, package registries and Microsoft. Verify the vendor's note before upgrading.

No fix version is recorded for this entry. Check the references for vendor advisories.

Exploit status

No known public exploit

No public exploit has been observed yet. That doesn't mean you're safe, only that the bar is a little higher.

Research context

For pentesters and researchers: attack profile, score disagreement, timeline, patch commits, credits, variant and chain candidates, bug bounty scope. All derived from existing data; no exploit code.

Timeline

From publication to today: proof of concept, Metasploit module, CISA KEV and fix record. Dates are as reported by the sources.

No dated events beyond publication.

No history yet (it accumulates with the daily EPSS job).

Patch and commit links

Commit, PR and diff links among the references. A starting point for patch-diffing and variant hunting; fixes, not exploits.

Credits

All researchers

Finders, reporters and analysts named in the CNA record. Click a name for that researcher’s other records.

Claude (the international export version)tool
Andras Iklodyremediation developer
Jeroen Pinoyanalyst

Variant candidates

Same product, same weakness class, within 18 months. If the patch missed the root cause, the sibling bug is here.

CVE-2026-913633 days apartUnauthorized ShadowAttribute modification in MISP via client-supplied identifier
33Monitor
CVE-2026-8640877 days apartMISP Missing Authorization in Cryptographic Key View Exposes Signing Keys from Protected Events
28Monitor
CVE-2026-8645177 days apartMISP Event Graph Object Reference Lookup Exposes References from Unauthorized Objects
21Monitor

Chain candidates

An authentication bypass and a privilege-requiring bug in the same product, published close together: combined they may become an unauthenticated path.

—

Bug bounty scope

No known public program.

Source: bounty-targets-data (public HackerOne, Bugcrowd, Intigriti, YesWeHack listings).

Technical details

Attack conditions

Anyone who can reach it over the internet can trigger it.
A low-privileged account is enough.
No user action is required.
No special conditions are required; it is repeatable.

If successful

Confidentiality
Integrity
Availability

Attack vector: Network
Attack complexity: Low
Privileges required: Low
User interaction: None
Scope: X

Weakness class (CWE)

CWE-639 · Authorization Bypass Through User-Controlled Key

CVSS vector

CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:H/VI:L/VA:N/SC:L/SI:N/SA:N/E:X/CR:X/IR:X/AR:X/MAV:X/MAC:X/MAT:X/MPR:X/MUI:X/MVC:X/MVI:X/MVA:X/MSC:X/MSI:X/MSA:X/S:X/AU:X/R:X/V:X/RE:X/U:X

nvd-secondary

Root cause

The endpoint fetches the record by the ID sent in the request, but never checks whether the record belongs to the requesting user.

The bug in code

The whole CWE-639 class

A representative example of this vulnerability class. Not the vendor's source code; it shows the faulty pattern and its fix.

Vulnerable

1const invoice = await Invoice.findById(req.params.id);
2res.json(invoice);

Fixed

1const invoice = await Invoice.findOne({
2  id: req.params.id,
3  ownerId: req.user.id,
4});
5if (!invoice) return res.sendStatus(404);
6res.json(invoice);

Attack context

MITRE CAPEC attack patterns and ATT&CK techniques for this weakness class (CWE). A starting point for detection rules and threat hunting.

MITRE has no CAPEC/ATT&CK mapping for this CWE.

Change log

No changes recorded on tracked fields yet. Score, KEV, exploit maturity and fix status changes appear here.

References

github.com/MISP/MISP/commit/24d7e91339a3ef043652dd5799c36e5065b2bb4a

Show all references (4 more)

Vendor advisories and official records. Exploit/PoC links are deliberately left out.

All records