Evidence used
- No CISA KEV confirmation is currently recorded.
- EPSS is 0.32% for the current model date.
BlackTreeCVE IntelligenceFull vulnerability report · 2026
CVE-2026-1524High confidence
Auth misconfiguration when multiple providers enabled
neo4j · Enterprise Edition
2.1LowCVSS 4.0
Scheduled
Fix not verifiedLow technical severity with no CISA KEV confirmation; remediate through the normal risk-based patch cycle unless local exposure raises the priority.
R
Open reassessment dashboard →Operational reassessment
Published severity in operational context
Published severityLow→Operational priority:Low, unchanged from published severity.unchanged
Compensating controls
- Restrict the affected network interface to trusted sources where business-safe.
- Monitor vendor guidance and exploitation sources for a material change.
Verification
- Confirm that the asset runs neo4j Enterprise Edition and falls inside the recorded affected range.
- Recheck the vendor advisory before scheduling a change because no verified fixed version is currently retained.
- Validate exposure, authentication requirements and compensating controls in the actual environment.
- Reopen this reassessment when CVSS, KEV, EPSS, exploit evidence or remediation changes.
Low technical severity with no CISA KEV confirmation; remediate through the normal risk-based patch cycle unless local exposure raises the priority.
Fix not verified01
What, why and how
An edgecase in SSO implementation in Neo4j Enterprise edition versions prior to version 2026.02 can lead to unauthorised access under the following conditions: If a neo4j admin configures two or more OIDC providers AND configures one or more of them to be an authorization provider AND configures one or more of them to be authentication-only, then those that are authentication-only will also provide authorization. This edgecase becomes a security problem only if the authentication-only provider contains groups which have higher privileges than provided by the intended (configured) authorization provider. When using multiple plugins for authentication and authorisation, prior to the fix the issue could lead to a plugin configured to provide only authentication or authorisation capabilities erroneously providing both capabilities. We recommend upgrading to versions 2026.02 (or 5.26.22) where the issue is fixed.
What
An edgecase in SSO implementation in Neo4j Enterprise edition versions prior to version 2026.02 can lead to unauthorised access under the following conditions: If a neo4j admin configures two or more OIDC providers AND configures one or more of them to be an authorization provider AND configures one or more of them to be authentication-only, then those that are authentication-only will also provide authorization. This edgecase becomes a security problem only if the authentication-only provider contains groups which have higher privileges than provided by the intended (configured) authorization provider. When using multiple plugins for authentication and authorisation, prior to the fix the issue could lead to a plugin configured to provide only authentication or authorisation capabilities erroneously providing both capabilities. We recommend upgrading to versions 2026.02 (or 5.26.22) where the issue is fixed.
Why
The application performs an authorisation check, but it does not correctly enforce the required permission boundary.
How
An attacker operating through a network path may attempt exploitation with elevated privileges. If successful, the issue may cause the confidentiality, integrity or availability impact described by the vendor.
What
An edgecase in SSO implementation in Neo4j Enterprise edition versions prior to version 2026.02 can lead to unauthorised access under the following conditions: If a neo4j admin configures two or more OIDC providers AND configures one or more of them to be an authorization provider AND configures one or more of them to be authentication-only, then those that are authentication-only will also provide authorization. This edgecase becomes a security problem only if the authentication-only provider contains groups which have higher privileges than provided by the intended (configured) authorization provider. When using multiple plugins for authentication and authorisation, prior to the fix the issue could lead to a plugin configured to provide only authentication or authorisation capabilities erroneously providing both capabilities. We recommend upgrading to versions 2026.02 (or 5.26.22) where the issue is fixed.
Why
The application performs an authorisation check, but it does not correctly enforce the required permission boundary.
How
An attacker operating through a network path may attempt exploitation with elevated privileges. If successful, the issue may cause the confidentiality, integrity or availability impact described by the vendor.
02
Exploit reality and attack path
CVSS severity, EPSS forecast probability, public exploit material and CISA-confirmed exploitation are separate signals.
Observed exploitation No confirmed evidence
?
Confirmed exploitation and public exploit material are separate signals. Attacks can occur without public proof-of-concept or exploit code.No CISA KEV match was present at the last successful refresh. This means no confirmation from that source, not proof of no exploitation.
Public PoC / exploit material None recorded
?
Confirmed exploitation and public exploit material are separate signals. Attacks can occur without public proof-of-concept or exploit code.No exploit-tagged reference or CISA SSVC proof-of-concept state is currently recorded. Research may still exist outside the structured feeds.
- Likely attack path
- a network path → Incorrect Authorization → cause the confidentiality, integrity or availability impact described by the vendor
- Attack surface
- Network
- Privileges required
- High: elevated access is required
- User interaction
- None
- Attack complexity
- Low: no specialised conditions are recorded
- Security boundary
- Not a CVSS 4.0 base metric
- Weakness
?
CWE means Common Weakness Enumeration: a standard category for the underlying weakness. - CWE-863 ↗
CWE-863: Incorrect Authorization. The product performs an authorization check when an actor attempts to access a resource or perform an action, but it does not correctly perform the check.
- CVSS vector
?
CVSS means Common Vulnerability Scoring System. The vector records the metric values used to calculate technical severity. CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:H/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/VA:L/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/AU:N/R:U/V:D/RE:M/U:GreenCommon Vulnerability Scoring System 4.0: the compact vector below is decoded into plain language.
AVNetworkAttack vector: The vulnerable component can be reached over a network.ACLowAttack complexity: No specialised conditions are required beyond attacker-controlled input.ATPresentAttack requirements: A particular deployment or execution condition must be present.PRHighPrivileges required: The attacker needs elevated or administrative privileges.UINoneUser interaction: No action by another user is required.VCLowVulnerable-system confidentiality: A successful attack can cause a limited loss.VILowVulnerable-system integrity: A successful attack can cause a limited loss.VALowVulnerable-system availability: A successful attack can cause a limited loss.SCNoneSubsequent-system confidentiality: No direct loss is represented by this metric.SINoneSubsequent-system integrity: No direct loss is represented by this metric.SANoneSubsequent-system availability: No direct loss is represented by this metric.- Post-exploitation / living off the land
- No specific living-off-the-land technique is confirmed in the structured sources. Monitor normal administration tools for activity inconsistent with the affected service's baseline.
03
Patch and workaround
Operational remediation based on structured source evidence.
- Status
?
Patch availability is based on structured fixed-version fields and authoritative update references. If no fix is verified, check the vendor advisory before making a change. - Fix not verified
- Affected
- Enterprise Edition: 4.4.0 < 5.26.22, 2025.01 < 2026.02
- Fixed
- No fixed version is explicitly recorded in the structured CVE data.
- Action
- No verified patch reference is present in the current structured sources. Check the vendor advisory before making a change.
- Workaround
- No verified workaround is recorded. If business-safe, reduce exposure to the affected interface and allow only trusted sources until authoritative guidance is available.
04
Evidence and provenance
Published 11 Mar 2026 · Last source change 12 Mar 2026, 16:19 UTC · CWE-863 · Incorrect Authorization
CVE recordCVE.org · 5.2
CVSS sourceCNA
EPSS source FIRST · tracked since 2026-08-14
?
The date BlackTree first stored a score for this CVE from the daily FIRST EPSS feed.European sourceENISA EUVD · EUVD-2026-11212
Product sourceCNA
Remediation sourceCVE/CNA references
CWE sourceCNA
NVD statusNVD enriched
Core structured fields are present and their contributing authorities are shown above.
Material change intelligence
View recent updates ↗What changed after publication
No material field changes have been recorded since change tracking began. Routine source refreshes and cosmetic edits are intentionally excluded.
Technical terms and abbreviations used in this report
- CVE
- Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures: the public identifier for one disclosed vulnerability.
- CVSS
- Common Vulnerability Scoring System: a technical severity framework; it is not patching priority by itself.
- EPSS
- Exploit Prediction Scoring System: FIRST's estimate of the probability that exploitation activity will be observed in the next 30 days; it is a forecast, not confirmation.
- CWE
- Common Weakness Enumeration: the standard category describing the underlying software or hardware weakness.
- CNA
- CVE Numbering Authority: an organisation authorised to assign and publish CVE records.
- CISA ADP
- Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency Authorized Data Publisher: structured enrichment added to a CVE record.
- NVD
- National Vulnerability Database: NIST's enrichment service for CVE records.
- CERT / CSIRT
- A computer security incident response team that publishes warnings or coordinates incident response.
- PoC
- Proof of concept: public material that demonstrates or helps reproduce exploitation.
- CSAF
- Common Security Advisory Framework: a machine-readable format for security advisories.
- LoTL
- Living off the land: abuse of legitimate tools or system functions during an attack.