CyberSecBulletin
CVE-2026-103237NVD status: Deferred

MISP contains an improper input validation vulnerability in its ORM save path.

CVE-2026-103237 is a high-severity improper input validation vulnerability in MISP, with a CVSS 4.0 base score of 8.3 out of 10. It can be exploited remotely over the network by an attacker with a low-privileged account, without any action from a user. The record lists version 2.5.48 as the first without the flaw, so updating MISP to that release or later removes the exposure. There is no confirmed exploitation so far. EPSS estimates a 0.23% chance of exploitation within 30 days, which is low compared with other CVEs.

Next patch cycle

High severity with no evidence of exploitation so far.

What to do

  1. Update MISP to 2.5.48 or a later version.

Affected products and versions

VendorProductAffected versionsFixed in
MISPMISPbefore 2.5.482.5.48

Version data comes from the organisation that assigned the CVE. Confirm against the vendor advisory before deciding you are unaffected.

How the severity score breaks down

Attack vector
NetworkCan be exploited remotely over a network, including the internet.
Attack complexity
LowNo special conditions are needed; the attack works reliably.
Attack requirements
NoneThe attack does not depend on a particular deployment or configuration.
Privileges required
LowA basic user account is enough.
User interaction
NoneNo action by a victim is required.
Confidentiality (vulnerable system)
NoneNo loss of confidentiality on the vulnerable system.
Integrity (vulnerable system)
HighSerious loss of integrity on the vulnerable system.
Availability (vulnerable system)
NoneNo loss of availability on the vulnerable system.
Confidentiality (other systems)
NoneNo loss of confidentiality on systems beyond the vulnerable one.
Integrity (other systems)
HighSerious loss of integrity on systems beyond the vulnerable one.
Availability (other systems)
NoneNo loss of availability on systems beyond the vulnerable one.

Vector: CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:N/VI:H/VA:N/SC:N/SI:H/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. Scored by CNA.

Official description

MISP contains an improper input validation vulnerability in its ORM save path. When a user submits data through various endpoints (attribute add/edit, event edit, free-text import, sighting capture, shadow attribute proposal, event report creation, object reference add, user admin edit), the application sanitizes the flat record by stripping the primary key and pinning the event_id or object_id to the caller's context. However, the underlying ORM's set() method gives priority to a nested key whose name matches the model alias and discards the outer scalar fields. An authenticated user with basic write permissions can exploit this by embedding a nested block under the model alias key inside their request. The sanitization logic (id removal, event_id pinning) is applied to the outer record, but the ORM binds to the inner record instead, which carries an attacker-chosen id and event_id. This allows the attacker to overwrite, re-parent, or soft-delete rows belonging to other organizations or events they have no read access to. Impact: - Cross-tenant data integrity compromise (attribute values rewritten, objects re-parented to attacker events, rows soft-deleted) - Affects multiple entity types: Attribute, Object, EventReport, Sighting, AttributeTag, ShadowAttribute - Requires only a low-privilege authenticated account with perm_add Affected versions: <2.5.48

Source: the CVE record as published by its numbering authority, via NVD and CVE.org.

The underlying weakness: Improper Input Validation

The product receives input or data, but it does not validate or incorrectly validates that the input has the properties that are required to process the data safely and correctly.

How developers prevent this class of flaw

  • Consider using language-theoretic security (LangSec) techniques that characterize inputs using a formal language and build recognizers for that language. This effectively requires parsing to be a distinct layer that effectively enforces a boundary between raw input and internal data representations, instead of allowing parser code to be scattered throughout the program, where it could be subject to errors or inconsistencies that create weaknesses.
  • Use an input validation framework such as Struts or the OWASP ESAPI Validation API. Note that using a framework does not automatically address all input validation problems; be mindful of weaknesses that could arise from misusing the framework itself (CWE-1173).
  • Understand all the potential areas where untrusted inputs can enter the product, including but not limited to: parameters or arguments, cookies, anything read from the network, environment variables, reverse DNS lookups, query results, request headers, URL components, e-mail, files, filenames, databases, and any external systems that provide data to the application. Remember that such inputs may be obtained indirectly through API calls.

More Improper Input Validation vulnerabilities (CWE-20)

Timeline

  1. CVE record published.
  2. CISA published its SSVC assessment (exploitation: none, automatable: no, technical impact: partial).

References

Patches and release notes

Other vulnerabilities in MISP

All MISP vulnerabilities

Recent Improper Input Validation vulnerabilities

Spotted an error? Tell us.