policies: Improper Access Control
CVE-2026-82861 is a high-severity improper access control vulnerability in policies from Hulumi, with a CVSS 3.1 base score of 7.5 out of 10. It can be exploited remotely over the network by an unauthenticated attacker, without any action from a user. The record lists version 1.3.2 as the first without the flaw, so updating policies to that release or later removes the exposure. There is no confirmed exploitation so far. EPSS estimates a 0.43% 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
- Update policies to 1.3.2 or a later version.
- Read the advisory on github.com for workarounds and exact fixed builds.
- Until you can update, restrict network access to the affected service so it is not reachable from untrusted networks.
Affected products and versions
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.
- Privileges required
- NoneNo account or login is needed.
- User interaction
- NoneNo action by a victim is required.
- Scope
- UnchangedImpact stays within the vulnerable component.
- Confidentiality
- HighAll data handled by the component can be read.
- Integrity
- NoneNothing can be modified.
- Availability
- NoneAvailability is not affected.
Vector: CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N. Scored by CNA (vulncheck.com).
| Scoring system | Score | Severity | Scored by |
|---|---|---|---|
| CVSS 4.0 | 8.7 | High | CNA (vulncheck.com) |
| CVSS 3.1 | 7.5 | High | CNA (vulncheck.com) |
Official description
@hulumi/policies versions before 1.3.2 contain a parent spoof bypass vulnerability that allows attackers to submit spoofed SecureBucket parent evidence during policy evaluation. Attackers can bypass security policy checks by providing falsified evidence, causing the validator to miss unsafe bucket configurations.
Source: the CVE record as published by its numbering authority, via NVD and CVE.org.
The underlying weakness: Improper Access Control
The product does not restrict or incorrectly restricts access to a resource from an unauthorized actor.
How developers prevent this class of flaw
- Very carefully manage the setting, management, and handling of privileges. Explicitly manage trust zones in the software.
- Compartmentalize the system to have safe areas where trust boundaries can be unambiguously drawn. Do not allow sensitive data to go outside of the trust boundary and always be careful when interfacing with a compartment outside of the safe area. Ensure that appropriate compartmentalization is built into the system design, and the compartmentalization allows for and reinforces privilege separation functionality. Architects and designers should rely on the principle of least privilege to decide the appropriate time to use privileges and the time to drop privileges.
Timeline
- CVE record published.
- CISA published its SSVC assessment (exploitation: none, automatable: yes, technical impact: partial).
- Record last changed materially (score, affected products, status or references).
References
Other references
Other vulnerabilities in policies
- 9.8 Critical severity
- 9.8 Critical severity
- 9.8 Critical severity
Recent Improper Access Control vulnerabilities
- 7.3 High severity
- 8.8 High severity
- 9.8 Critical severity
- 7.6 High severity
- 7.3 High severity
- 7.5 High severity
Spotted an error? Tell us.