BlackTreeIndependent security intelligence
← Back to the CVE catalogue
Full vulnerability report · 2026
CVE-2026-85538High confidence

MISP Attribute Deletion Authorization Bypass Allows Users Without Modify Permissions to Delete Attributes

misp · misp

8.3HighCVSS 4.0
Recommended action
Within 7 days

High technical severity; prioritise exposed affected systems while verifying vendor guidance.

Fix not verified
Optional official sources

National CERT insights
?CERT means Computer Emergency Response Team; CSIRT is the closely related term Computer Security Incident Response Team.

Select the national-authority views to include. The exact source language is shown on each matched advisory. Your choice is remembered on this device and encoded in the shareable URL.

Official European source

ENISA European Vulnerability Database

Official EUVD identifiers, advisory evidence and known-exploited context. Missing fields are not treated as evidence of low risk.

1 current
ENISA EUVD identifier

EUVD-2026-70958

No EUVD known-exploited evidence

An incorrect authorization vulnerability in MISP allowed authenticated users to delete attributes from events despite lacking the required perm_modify or perm_modify_org permissions. The affected attribute deletion paths relied on organization membership checks performed by MispAttribute::deleteAttribute() but did not consistently enforce MISP's event modification authorization rules. Consequently, a user belonging to the organization associated with an event could potentially delete individual attributes or perform bulk attribute deletion even when their assigned role was not authorized to modify the event. This created an inconsistency between attribute editing and deletion: editing an attribute correctly used MISP's ACL::canModifyEvent() authorization logic, whereas the affected deletion operations could bypass these permission checks. An authenticated attacker with access to an affected MISP instance and membership in the organization owning an event could exploit this flaw to remove attributes from that event, potentially causing unauthorized modification or loss of threat intelligence data. The patch introduces a common authorization check for all affected deletion paths. Before deletion, MISP now resolves the associated events and verifies that the current user is authorized to modify each event using the same authorization mechanism used by normal event and attribute modification operations.

EUVD state
Present in the current official mapping
Known exploitation
Not present in the current ENISA EUVD known-exploited dataset. This is not proof of no exploitation.
ENISA score
8.3 · CVSS 4.0
Advisory evidence
No linked advisory details stored yet
Recommended actionWithin 7 days

High technical severity; prioritise exposed affected systems while verifying vendor guidance.

Fix not verified
01

What, why and how

An incorrect authorization vulnerability in MISP allowed authenticated users to delete attributes from events despite lacking the required perm_modify or perm_modify_org permissions. The affected attribute deletion paths relied on organization membership checks performed by MispAttribute::deleteAttribute() but did not consistently enforce MISP's event modification authorization rules. Consequently, a user belonging to the organization associated with an event could potentially delete individual attributes or perform bulk attribute deletion even when their assigned role was not authorized to modify the event. This created an inconsistency between attribute editing and deletion: editing an attribute correctly used MISP's ACL::canModifyEvent() authorization logic, whereas the affected deletion operations could bypass these permission checks. An authenticated attacker with access to an affected MISP instance and membership in the organization owning an event could exploit this flaw to remove attributes from that event, potentially causing unauthorized modification or loss of threat intelligence data. The patch introduces a common authorization check for all affected deletion paths. Before deletion, MISP now resolves the associated events and verifies that the current user is authorized to modify each event using the same authorization mechanism used by normal event and attribute modification operations.

What

An incorrect authorization vulnerability in MISP allowed authenticated users to delete attributes from events despite lacking the required perm_modify or perm_modify_org permissions. The affected attribute deletion paths relied on organization membership checks performed by MispAttribute::deleteAttribute() but did not consistently enforce MISP's event modification authorization rules. Consequently, a user belonging to the organization associated with an event could potentially delete individual attributes or perform bulk attribute deletion even when their assigned role was not authorized to modify the event. This created an inconsistency between attribute editing and deletion: editing an attribute correctly used MISP's ACL::canModifyEvent() authorization logic, whereas the affected deletion operations could bypass these permission checks. An authenticated attacker with access to an affected MISP instance and membership in the organization owning an event could exploit this flaw to remove attributes from that event, potentially causing unauthorized modification or loss of threat intelligence data. The patch introduces a common authorization check for all affected deletion paths. Before deletion, MISP now resolves the associated events and verifies that the current user is authorized to modify each event using the same authorization mechanism used by normal event and attribute modification operations.

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 low privileges. If successful, the issue may cause the confidentiality, integrity or availability impact described by the vendor.

What

An incorrect authorization vulnerability in MISP allowed authenticated users to delete attributes from events despite lacking the required perm_modify or perm_modify_org permissions. The affected attribute deletion paths relied on organization membership checks performed by MispAttribute::deleteAttribute() but did not consistently enforce MISP's event modification authorization rules. Consequently, a user belonging to the organization associated with an event could potentially delete individual attributes or perform bulk attribute deletion even when their assigned role was not authorized to modify the event. This created an inconsistency between attribute editing and deletion: editing an attribute correctly used MISP's ACL::canModifyEvent() authorization logic, whereas the affected deletion operations could bypass these permission checks. An authenticated attacker with access to an affected MISP instance and membership in the organization owning an event could exploit this flaw to remove attributes from that event, potentially causing unauthorized modification or loss of threat intelligence data. The patch introduces a common authorization check for all affected deletion paths. Before deletion, MISP now resolves the associated events and verifies that the current user is authorized to modify each event using the same authorization mechanism used by normal event and attribute modification operations.

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 low 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
?Confirmed exploitation and public exploit material are separate signals. Attacks can occur without public proof-of-concept or exploit code.
No confirmed evidence

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
?Confirmed exploitation and public exploit material are separate signals. Attacks can occur without public proof-of-concept or exploit code.
None recorded

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
Low: a basic authenticated account 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:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:N/VI:H/VA:L/SC:N/SI:H/SA:N

Common 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.ATNoneAttack requirements: No additional deployment or execution condition is required.PRLowPrivileges required: The attacker needs basic user-level privileges.UINoneUser interaction: No action by another user is required.VCNoneVulnerable-system confidentiality: No direct loss is represented by this metric.VIHighVulnerable-system integrity: A successful attack can cause a major loss.VALowVulnerable-system availability: A successful attack can cause a limited loss.SCNoneSubsequent-system confidentiality: No direct loss is represented by this metric.SIHighSubsequent-system integrity: A successful attack can cause a major loss.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.
NetworkCWE-863
A

Official authority intelligence

Only matched European and national findings are included. Language selectors and unavailable sources are omitted.

ENISA EUVD · EUVD-2026-70958Official EUVD mapping

An incorrect authorization vulnerability in MISP allowed authenticated users to delete attributes from events despite lacking the required perm_modify or perm_modify_org permissions. The affected attribute deletion paths relied on organization membership checks performed by MispAttribute::deleteAttribute() but did not consistently enforce MISP's event modification authorization rules. Consequently, a user belonging to the organization associated with an event could potentially delete individual attributes or perform bulk attribute deletion even when their assigned role was not authorized to modify the event. This created an inconsistency between attribute editing and deletion: editing an attribute correctly used MISP's ACL::canModifyEvent() authorization logic, whereas the affected deletion operations could bypass these permission checks. An authenticated attacker with access to an affected MISP instance and membership in the organization owning an event could exploit this flaw to remove attributes from that event, potentially causing unauthorized modification or loss of threat intelligence data. The patch introduces a common authorization check for all affected deletion paths. Before deletion, MISP now resolves the associated events and verifies that the current user is authorized to modify each event using the same authorization mechanism used by normal event and attribute modification operations.

Official EUVD record
BSI · German · WID-SEC-W-2026-3173MISP: Mehrere Schwachstellen

Ein Angreifer kann mehrere Schwachstellen in MISP ausnutzen, um Sicherheitsmechanismen zu umgehen, Informationen offenzulegen, Daten oder Sitzungen zu manipulieren und die Verfügbarkeit zu beeinträchtigen.

Official advisory
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
≤ 2.5.45
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 4 Sept 2026 · Last source change 4 Sept 2026, 19:36 UTC · CWE-863 · Incorrect Authorization

CVE recordCVE.org · 5.2
CVSS sourceCNA
EPSS source
?The date BlackTree first stored a score for this CVE from the daily FIRST EPSS feed.
FIRST · tracked since 2026-09-04
European sourceENISA EUVD · EUVD-2026-70958
Product sourceCNA
Remediation sourceCVE/CNA references
CWE sourceCNA
NVD statusNVD received

Core structured fields are present and their contributing authorities are shown above.

Material change intelligence

What changed after publication

View recent updates →
  1. ENISA EUVD mappingEUVD-2026-70958 was added to the official ENISA EUVD mapping for this CVE.
    Before
    not recorded
    After
    {"euvdId":"EUVD-2026-70958"}
    ENISA EUVD
  2. Catalogue recordCVE added to the BlackTree catalogue.
    CNA
Material fields only · duplicate refreshes suppressed · history retained for the configured operational retention period
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.
Free version - for non-commercial use only.CVE-2026-85538 · cve.blacktree.nl