FKIE_CVE-2026-82115

Vulnerability from fkie_nvd - Published: 2026-11-01 22:17 - Updated: 2026-11-06 15:17
Summary
Missing authorization in Apache Wicket. org.apache.wicket.protocol.ws.api.WebSocketMessageBroadcastHandler, the request handler Wicket's native WebSocket support uses to deliver an incoming frame, resolves the shared resource named by the client's handshake parameter and calls WebSocketResource#onPayload() on it directly, without consulting IAuthorizationStrategy#isResourceAuthorized(). That method has a single enforcement point in the framework, org.apache.wicket.request.handler.resource.ResourceRequestHandler, which the WebSocket transport does not pass through, and WebSocketResource#respond() is final and empty. No route to a WebSocketResource therefore asks the configured authorization strategy whether the caller may use it, and an @AuthorizeResource annotation on such a class has no effect. A caller needs a bound Wicket session and the name of the resource. The name is not a secret: Wicket writes it into the page that opens the connection. No page of the application is otherwise involved, because a request naming a resource is served with a throwaway page. All of the resource's callbacks are reached this way, including onConnect() and both onMessage() overloads, and what a callback pushes back through WebSocketRequestHandler goes to the caller's own connection. An application is affected where it registers a WebSocketResource as a shared resource and relies on the authorization strategy to restrict it. What the caller gains is whatever that resource's callbacks do with a text or binary message of the caller's choosing. The connection is registered under the caller's own session, so it gives no access to another user's connection. As a workaround, reject unauthorized connections with an IWebSocketConnectionFilter registered through WebSocketSettings#setConnectionFilter(), or repeat the authorization check at the start of each callback. This issue affects Apache Wicket: from 8.0.0 through 8.19.0, from 9.0.0 through 9.24.0, from 10.0.0 through 10.11.0. Older, unsupported releases from 7.0.0 onwards are also affected. Users are recommended to upgrade to version 8.20.0, 9.25.0 or 10.12.0, which fix the issue.
Impacted products
Vendor Product Version

{
  "affected": [
    {
      "affectedData": [
        {
          "collectionURL": "https://repo.maven.apache.org/maven2",
          "defaultStatus": "unaffected",
          "packageName": "org.apache.wicket:wicket-native-websocket-core",
          "packageURL": "pkg:maven/org.apache.wicket/wicket-native-websocket-core",
          "product": "Apache Wicket",
          "vendor": "Apache Software Foundation",
          "versions": [
            {
              "lessThanOrEqual": "8.19.0",
              "status": "affected",
              "version": "8.0.0",
              "versionType": "semver"
            },
            {
              "lessThanOrEqual": "9.24.0",
              "status": "affected",
              "version": "9.0.0",
              "versionType": "semver"
            },
            {
              "lessThanOrEqual": "10.11.0",
              "status": "affected",
              "version": "10.0.0",
              "versionType": "semver"
            }
          ]
        }
      ],
      "source": "security@apache.org"
    }
  ],
  "cveTags": [],
  "descriptions": [
    {
      "lang": "en",
      "value": "Missing authorization in Apache Wicket.\n\norg.apache.wicket.protocol.ws.api.WebSocketMessageBroadcastHandler, the request handler Wicket\u0027s native WebSocket support uses to deliver an incoming frame, resolves the shared resource named by the client\u0027s handshake parameter and calls WebSocketResource#onPayload() on it directly, without consulting IAuthorizationStrategy#isResourceAuthorized(). That method has a single enforcement point in the framework, org.apache.wicket.request.handler.resource.ResourceRequestHandler, which the WebSocket transport does not pass through, and WebSocketResource#respond() is final and empty. No route to a WebSocketResource therefore asks the configured authorization strategy whether the caller may use it, and an @AuthorizeResource annotation on such a class has no effect.\n\nA caller needs a bound Wicket session and the name of the resource. The name is not a secret: Wicket writes it into the page that opens the connection. No page of the application is otherwise involved, because a request naming a resource is served with a throwaway page. All of the resource\u0027s callbacks are reached this way, including onConnect() and both onMessage() overloads, and what a callback pushes back through WebSocketRequestHandler goes to the caller\u0027s own connection.\n\nAn application is affected where it registers a WebSocketResource as a shared resource and relies on the authorization strategy to restrict it. What the caller gains is whatever that resource\u0027s callbacks do with a text or binary message of the caller\u0027s choosing. The connection is registered under the caller\u0027s own session, so it gives no access to another user\u0027s connection.\n\nAs a workaround, reject unauthorized connections with an IWebSocketConnectionFilter registered through WebSocketSettings#setConnectionFilter(), or repeat the authorization check at the start of each callback.\n\nThis issue affects Apache Wicket: from 8.0.0 through 8.19.0, from 9.0.0 through 9.24.0, from 10.0.0 through 10.11.0. Older, unsupported releases from 7.0.0 onwards are also affected. Users are recommended to upgrade to version 8.20.0, 9.25.0 or 10.12.0, which fix the issue."
    }
  ],
  "id": "CVE-2026-82115",
  "lastModified": "2026-11-06T15:17:23.480",
  "metrics": {
    "cvssMetricV40": [
      {
        "cvssData": {
          "Automatable": "NOT_DEFINED",
          "Recovery": "NOT_DEFINED",
          "Safety": "NOT_DEFINED",
          "attackComplexity": "LOW",
          "attackRequirements": "PRESENT",
          "attackVector": "NETWORK",
          "availabilityRequirement": "NOT_DEFINED",
          "baseScore": 6.3,
          "baseSeverity": "MEDIUM",
          "confidentialityRequirement": "NOT_DEFINED",
          "exploitMaturity": "NOT_DEFINED",
          "integrityRequirement": "NOT_DEFINED",
          "modifiedAttackComplexity": "NOT_DEFINED",
          "modifiedAttackRequirements": "NOT_DEFINED",
          "modifiedAttackVector": "NOT_DEFINED",
          "modifiedPrivilegesRequired": "NOT_DEFINED",
          "modifiedSubAvailabilityImpact": "NOT_DEFINED",
          "modifiedSubConfidentialityImpact": "NOT_DEFINED",
          "modifiedSubIntegrityImpact": "NOT_DEFINED",
          "modifiedUserInteraction": "NOT_DEFINED",
          "modifiedVulnAvailabilityImpact": "NOT_DEFINED",
          "modifiedVulnConfidentialityImpact": "NOT_DEFINED",
          "modifiedVulnIntegrityImpact": "NOT_DEFINED",
          "privilegesRequired": "NONE",
          "providerUrgency": "NOT_DEFINED",
          "subAvailabilityImpact": "NONE",
          "subConfidentialityImpact": "NONE",
          "subIntegrityImpact": "NONE",
          "userInteraction": "NONE",
          "valueDensity": "NOT_DEFINED",
          "vectorString": "CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/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",
          "version": "4.0",
          "vulnAvailabilityImpact": "NONE",
          "vulnConfidentialityImpact": "LOW",
          "vulnIntegrityImpact": "LOW",
          "vulnerabilityResponseEffort": "NOT_DEFINED"
        },
        "source": "security@apache.org",
        "type": "Secondary"
      }
    ],
    "ssvcV203": [
      {
        "source": "134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0",
        "ssvcData": {
          "id": "CVE-2026-82115",
          "options": [
            {
              "exploitation": "none"
            },
            {
              "automatable": "no"
            },
            {
              "technicalImpact": "partial"
            }
          ],
          "role": "CISA Coordinator",
          "timestamp": "2026-11-06T14:45:21.324001Z",
          "version": "2.0.3"
        }
      }
    ]
  },
  "published": "2026-11-01T22:17:46.777",
  "references": [
    {
      "source": "security@apache.org",
      "url": "https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/0lj9og7vp22ps77nrwdj42f64cfb9g4c"
    }
  ],
  "sourceIdentifier": "security@apache.org",
  "vulnStatus": "Deferred",
  "weaknesses": [
    {
      "description": [
        {
          "lang": "en",
          "value": "CWE-862"
        }
      ],
      "source": "security@apache.org",
      "type": "Secondary"
    }
  ]
}



Log in or create an account to share your comment.




Tags
Taxonomy of the tags.


Loading…

Loading…

Loading…

Drag nodes to arrange them. Double-click a related vulnerability to open it, or a source to visit its link. The Physics button on the left tunes the layout and the simulation; the legend at the bottom left hides or shows nodes by kind and by sighting type.

Forecast uses a logistic model when the trend is rising, or an exponential decay model when the trend is falling. Fitted via linearized least squares.

Sightings

Author Source Type Date Other

Nomenclature

  • Seen: The vulnerability was mentioned, discussed, or observed by the user.
  • Confirmed: The vulnerability has been validated from an analyst's perspective.
  • Published Proof of Concept: A public proof of concept is available for this vulnerability.
  • Exploited: The vulnerability was observed as exploited by the user who reported the sighting.
  • Patched: The vulnerability was observed as successfully patched by the user who reported the sighting.
  • Not exploited: The vulnerability was not observed as exploited by the user who reported the sighting.
  • Not confirmed: The user expressed doubt about the validity of the vulnerability.
  • Not patched: The vulnerability was not observed as successfully patched by the user who reported the sighting.
Vulnerability timeline

Sightings and recorded dates, grouped by day · UTC

JSON
How durations are calculated

Following the VTEM framework (Black Hat USA 2015), time to patch starts when the vendor or a coordinator was informed, total time to patch at discovery, and disclosure to patch at public disclosure; vendor response time runs from the report to its acknowledgement. Time to exploit and time unpatched start at the earliest discovery or report, falling back to public disclosure. Unpatched time ends at the first recorded patch, or the calculation time when no patch is recorded. Exploitation to patch shows the interval between those two events; a published proof of concept is a public exploit, not exploitation.

Each result shows its source dates. A negative interval means the end event came first; when date-only inputs leave the order open, the result says so. Date-only inputs are approximate. The earliest evidence wins: KEV report dates and sightings are labelled as such. Records describing another vulnerability are listed but never calculated from, and a PoC alone does not establish exploitation. Missing patch evidence does not prove that no patch exists. Filters below change the event list only.

Events included in the timeline

Loading timeline…


    Loading…

    Loading…

    Loading…

    Related by attack behaviour

    Vulnerabilities whose description is nearest to this one in the vector space of the CIRCL/vulnerability-attack-technique-biencoder model. This is a similarity search over the bi-encoder space (plain cosine), not a classification, and it has no measured accuracy.