Home/CVE/MISP core contained multiple broken access-control flaws where authorization checks were performed against the wrong ent
CVE
↯ PDF report

CVE-2026-56424

MISP core contained multiple broken access-control flaws where authorization checks were performed against the wrong ent

MISP core contained multiple broken access-control flaws where authorization checks were performed against the wrong entity, or where ownership/editability checks were missing on write paths. In affected subsystems, a lower-privileged authenticated user with the relevant feature permission could cause the application to authorize one object but mutate another, or could modify objects that were merely visible rather than editable by the user’s organization. The affected paths included: Event Reports tag removal: the route-authorized report could differ from the report ID used for tag detachment, enabling cross-organization tag removal from another event report Collection Elements bulk deletion: bulk deletion authorized against a collection whose ID matched the collection-element row ID, rather than the element’s actual parent collection, enabling deletion of elements from collections the user did not own. Analyst Data capture/update: nested analyst data updates could overwrite an existing record without applying the normal canEditAnalystData ownership check, enabling cross-organization overwrite of analyst data records. Template Elements editing: editing authorized against a template whose ID matched the template-element ID, rather than the element’s actual parent template, enabling unauthorized edits to another organization’s template elements. * Decaying Model editing and mappings: write paths loaded models using view-scope access but did not verify edit ownership, enabling users to edit or remap visible models owned by another organization. Successful exploitation could allow an authenticated user with subsystem-specific permissions to perform unauthorized cross-organization modifications or deletions of MISP data, resulting in integrity loss, unauthorized tampering with shared intelligence, and disruption of analyst workflows.

Monitor
  • ⚠ NVD has not scored this CVE yet - manual triage required (common for recent CVEs)
Look this up elsewhere - one-click external pivots
How to read a CVE - triage first, then detect and patch
This page is every public fact about CVE-2026-56424, cross-linked. Its job is to answer one question fast - does this need my attention now? - and then hand you the two things you do about it. Here is how an analyst reads it.
Triage: should I act now? Four signals, and they are not interchangeable:
CVSSseverity - how bad it is IF exploited, 0-10. A high CVSS alone is not urgency; a flaw can be a perfect 10 and never actually be attacked. EPSSprobability - a model’s estimate of the chance it is exploited in the next 30 days, 0-1. This is the “will it actually happen” signal. CISA KEVconfirmed - it is being exploited in the wild right now. The strongest signal on the page; KEV beats any score. Weaponisedavailability - public exploits / PoCs, and especially Metasploit modules rated Excellent / Great. Reliable, packaged exploit code means low-skill attackers can use it today.
How they combine: KEV, or a dependable Metasploit module, means patch now regardless of CVSS. High CVSS + low EPSS + no exploit is real but not an emergency - schedule it. Low CVSS but KEV-listed still gets patched now. The verdict above already weighed these for you; this is how it got there.
Then what - two workflows:
Detectwhen you cannot patch today, follow this CVE to the ATT&CK techniques it enables, then Build a SIEM detection (the green button) - author a rule, test it in Atomic, deploy it. That buys visibility while the patch waits. PatchAffected products / packages tell you if you are exposed; Fixed versions by distribution and Vendor advisories give the exact version that closes it.
Reading order for the panels below: verdict + badges, then Public exploits / Metasploit (is it weaponised), then ATT&CK techniques + Sigma / IDS rules (can I detect it), then Affected products / packages + Fixed versions (am I exposed, what patches it), then Threat actors / IOCs (who uses it), then Scoring & timeline / references (the evidence).

ATT&CK techniques

3

Techniques this CVE enables. Pills with a solid outline are high confidence - named directly in ATT&CK or Nuclei, or human-curated by CTID; the rest are inferred from the weakness type using MITRE's CVE Mapping Methodology and the CWE → CAPEC chain. Broad, generic-weakness guesses are filtered out. A small marks a technique that N independent sources agree on.

▤ Build a SIEM detection for these techniques

CAPEC attack patterns

1

Attack patterns this CVE enables - the bridge from weakness to ATT&CK technique.