MISP Guard, a proxy-based security filter for MISP feed distribution, contains a…
CVE-2026-116469 is a high-severity improper input validation vulnerability in misp-guard from MISP, with a CVSS 4.0 base score of 7.1 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. Affected misp-guard versions: 1.3 and earlier. The record does not name a fixed version, so check the vendor advisory. There is no confirmed exploitation so far. EPSS estimates a 0.37% chance of exploitation within 30 days, which is low compared with other CVEs.
High severity with no evidence of exploitation so far.
What to do
- Check which version of misp-guard you run against the affected versions below, and install the vendor's latest release.
Affected products and versions
| Vendor | Product | Affected versions | Fixed in |
|---|---|---|---|
| MISP | misp-guard | 1.3 and earlier | Not stated |
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)
- HighSerious loss of confidentiality on the vulnerable system.
- Integrity (vulnerable system)
- NoneNo 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)
- NoneNo 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:H/VI:N/VA:N/SC:N/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. Scored by CNA.
Official description
MISP Guard, a proxy-based security filter for MISP feed distribution, contains a case-sensitivity flaw in multiple policy enforcement checks. The functions check_required_taxonomy_exists, check_required_taxonomy_tags_allowed, check_blocked_attribute_categories, and check_blocked_analyst_data_sharing_groups_uuids performed case-sensitive string comparisons when matching event tags, attribute categories, and sharing-group UUIDs against configured allow/block lists. An attacker with the ability to create or modify events in a MISP instance (or a connected instance that pushes events through the guard) could craft events using different letter case in taxonomy tag names, attribute categories, or sharing-group UUIDs to bypass the configured security policies. For example, if the policy requires the 'tlp' taxonomy with only 'tlp:clear' allowed, an event tagged 'TLP:AMBER' would not be recognized as belonging to the 'tlp' taxonomy and would therefore not be checked against the allowed-tags list, resulting in the event being forwarded to feed consumers. Similarly, a blocked attribute category such as 'Person' would not match a configured block entry of 'person', allowing the attribute to pass through the filter. The security impact is unauthorized disclosure of threat-intelligence data that the operator intended to restrict. Events carrying non-allowed TLP (Traffic Light Protocol) markings, blocked attribute categories, or blocked sharing-group associations are forwarded to downstream feed consumers in violation of the configured distribution policy. This undermines the confidentiality controls that MISP Guard is designed to enforce. The vulnerability is trivially exploitable: the attacker only needs to alter the letter case of a tag, category, or UUID string. No authentication beyond normal MISP event-creation privileges is required, and no user interaction is needed.
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.
Timeline
- CVE record published.
- CISA published its SSVC assessment (exploitation: none, automatable: no, technical impact: partial).
- Record last changed materially (score, affected products, status or references).
References
Patches and release notes
Other vulnerabilities in misp-guard
- 7.7 High severity
Recent Improper Input Validation vulnerabilities
- 7.5 High severity
- 7.5 High severity
- 8.2 High severity
- 9.8 Critical severity
- 10.0 Critical severity
- 7.8 High severity
Spotted an error? Tell us.