Evidence-led vulnerability intelligence · 2026-10-28 00:47 IST

CVE-2026-118173

MISP Guard, a proxy that enforces security policies on MISP feed data, contained an incomplete validation check for required taxonomy tags. When a feed event or its attributes carried tags belonging to a required taxonomy (for example, TLP), the guard only verified that at least one tag of that taxonomy matched the configured allowed list. It did not verify that every tag of the required taxonomy present on the event or attribute was in the allowed list. As a result, an event or attribute could simultaneously carry an allowed tag (e.g., tlp:clear) and a non-allowed tag (e.g., tlp:red or tlp:amber) and still pass the guard's policy check. This allowed data marked with a higher classification or sensitivity level to be distributed through feeds configured to only distribute lower-classification data, effectively bypassing the intended data-handling restrictions. The vulnerability affected both event-level and attribute-level tag validation, including attributes nested within objects and shadow attributes. An attacker with the ability to author or modify MISP events in a feed source could include non-allowed taxonomy tags alongside allowed ones to exfiltrate more sensitive data to feed consumers than the guard policy intended to permit.

MEDIUM · 6.1

Executive briefing

The source record describes: MISP Guard, a proxy that enforces security policies on MISP feed data, contained an incomplete validation check for required taxonomy tags. When a feed event or its attributes carried tags belonging to a required taxonomy (for example, TLP), the guard only verified that at least one tag of that taxonomy matched the configured allowed list. It did not verify that every tag of the required taxonomy present on the event or attribute was in the allowed list. As a result, an event or attribute could simultaneously carry an allowed tag (e.g., tlp:clear) and a non-allowed tag (e.g., tlp:red or tlp:amber) and still pass the guard's policy check. This allowed data marked with a higher classification or sensitivity level to be distributed through feeds configured to only distribute lower-classification data, effectively bypassing the intended data-handling restrictions. The vulnerability affected both event-level and attribute-level tag validation, including attributes nested within objects and shadow attributes. An attacker with the ability to author or modify MISP events in a feed source could include non-allowed taxonomy tags alongside allowed ones to exfiltrate more sensitive data to feed consumers than the guard policy intended to permit. The practical risk depends on whether an affected product/version is present, reachable and configured in an exploitable way. Review the affected-product evidence and linked vendor advisories before assigning exposure status.

Assessment: Potential exposure only — validate the installed product, exact version, configuration and vendor applicability before treating an asset as confirmed vulnerable.

Evidence confidence: Limited Evidence-derived, not an exploitability verdict

Severity & attack characteristics

6.1 / 10 · 4.0

CVSS vector:
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:H/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/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

Attack vectorN
Attack complexityL
Attack requirementsN
Privileges requiredH
User interactionN
ScopeX

Technical explanation & impact

The technical mechanism is not expanded beyond the source description unless a referenced advisory supplies additional evidence. Read the linked vendor/CERT advisories for root-cause detail.

Potential impact must be interpreted from the published CVSS impact metrics and the affected component. A CVSS impact score is not proof that a particular asset is exploitable.

Weakness classification

CWE-20CWE-285

Affected products and versions

NVD has not supplied machine-readable vulnerable CPE product/version entries for this CVE. This is an information gap, not proof that no products are affected. Check the vendor advisory references below.

Remediation & validation

  1. Identify exposure by comparing the affected product and version ranges with your asset inventory, SBOM and externally exposed services.
  2. Review the linked vendor security advisory or patch notes. Upgrade to a vendor-confirmed fixed release; do not infer a fixed version from the CVE description.
  3. Until patched, consider restricting network access or disabling the affected feature where operationally safe. These are temporary controls, not a substitute for a vendor fix.
  4. Validate the remediation with a version check and vulnerability rescan, then retain change evidence.

No fixed version is displayed unless it is explicitly established by a vendor advisory. Follow the vendor's release notes for exact product and branch applicability.

Vendor advisories, patches & exploit references

Information gaps & confidence notes

These gaps indicate missing source data. CVE Watch does not fill them with guessed product, exploit or patch details.

Last enrichment: 2026-11-05T12:19:11+00:00 · Source last modified: 2026-11-04T17:17:33.197

Open NVD record ← Back to CVE Watch

Threat intelligence, made actionable · CVE data sourced from the NVD