GCVE-1-2026-20040 (CVE-2026-54359)

Vulnerability from gna-1 – Published: 2026-06-12 19:44 – Updated: 2026-06-12 19:44
VLAI
Title
MISP automation endpoints may be exposed to CSRF when Sec-Fetch-Site protection is disabled by default
Summary
MISP contains an insecure default configuration in which the Security.check_sec_fetch_site_header control is disabled. When this setting is disabled, state-changing requests such as POST, PUT, or AJAX requests are not restricted based on the browser-provided Sec-Fetch-Site header. A remote unauthenticated attacker could craft a malicious web page that causes an authenticated MISP user’s browser to issue cross-site requests to MISP automation endpoints. If successful, the forged requests may be processed with the privileges of the victim user, potentially allowing unauthorized modification of MISP data or configuration. Enabling Security.check_sec_fetch_site_header mitigates this issue, although operators of multi-homed MISP deployments should validate the setting before enforcing it.
Severity
7.1 (High)
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:P/VC:N/VI:H/VA:N/SC:N/SI:L/SA:N
CWE
  • CWE-352 - Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF)
  • CWE-1188 - Insecure Default Initialization of Resource
Assigner
CIRCL GNA GNA-1
GNA scorecard B 90/100 over 244 records in the last 180 days details
References
Impacted products
Vendor Product Version CPE status
misp misp Affected: 0 , < 2.5.40 (semver)
guessed Create a notification for this product.
Credits
José Pedro Moço Andras Iklody (the Insomniac MISP lead dev)
To clipboard 

{
  "containers": {
    "cna": {
      "affected": [
        {
          "defaultStatus": "unaffected",
          "product": "misp",
          "repo": "https://github.com/misp/misp",
          "vendor": "misp",
          "versions": [
            {
              "lessThan": "2.5.40",
              "status": "affected",
              "version": "0",
              "versionType": "semver"
            }
          ]
        }
      ],
      "credits": [
        {
          "lang": "en",
          "type": "finder",
          "value": "Jos\u00e9 Pedro Mo\u00e7o"
        },
        {
          "lang": "en",
          "type": "remediation developer",
          "value": "Andras Iklody"
        }
      ],
      "descriptions": [
        {
          "lang": "en",
          "supportingMedia": [
            {
              "base64": false,
              "type": "text/html",
              "value": "MISP contains an insecure default configuration in which the \u003ccode\u003eSecurity.check_sec_fetch_site_header\u003c/code\u003e control is disabled. When this setting is disabled, state-changing requests such as POST, PUT, or AJAX requests are not restricted based on the browser-provided \u003ccode\u003eSec-Fetch-Site\u003c/code\u003e header. A remote unauthenticated attacker could craft a malicious web page that causes an authenticated MISP user\u2019s browser to issue cross-site requests to MISP automation endpoints. If successful, the forged requests may be processed with the privileges of the victim user, potentially allowing unauthorized modification of MISP data or configuration. Enabling \u003ccode\u003eSecurity.check_sec_fetch_site_header\u003c/code\u003e mitigates this issue, although operators of multi-homed MISP deployments should validate the setting before enforcing it."
            }
          ],
          "value": "MISP contains an insecure default configuration in which the Security.check_sec_fetch_site_header control is disabled. When this setting is disabled, state-changing requests such as POST, PUT, or AJAX requests are not restricted based on the browser-provided Sec-Fetch-Site header. A remote unauthenticated attacker could craft a malicious web page that causes an authenticated MISP user\u2019s browser to issue cross-site requests to MISP automation endpoints. If successful, the forged requests may be processed with the privileges of the victim user, potentially allowing unauthorized modification of MISP data or configuration. Enabling Security.check_sec_fetch_site_header mitigates this issue, although operators of multi-homed MISP deployments should validate the setting before enforcing it."
        }
      ],
      "impacts": [
        {
          "capecId": "CAPEC-62",
          "descriptions": [
            {
              "lang": "en",
              "value": "CAPEC-62 Cross Site Request Forgery"
            }
          ]
        }
      ],
      "metrics": [
        {
          "cvssV4_0": {
            "Automatable": "NOT_DEFINED",
            "Recovery": "NOT_DEFINED",
            "Safety": "NOT_DEFINED",
            "attackComplexity": "LOW",
            "attackRequirements": "NONE",
            "attackVector": "NETWORK",
            "baseScore": 7.1,
            "baseSeverity": "HIGH",
            "privilegesRequired": "NONE",
            "providerUrgency": "NOT_DEFINED",
            "subAvailabilityImpact": "NONE",
            "subConfidentialityImpact": "NONE",
            "subIntegrityImpact": "LOW",
            "userInteraction": "PASSIVE",
            "valueDensity": "NOT_DEFINED",
            "vectorString": "CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:P/VC:N/VI:H/VA:N/SC:N/SI:L/SA:N",
            "version": "4.0",
            "vulnAvailabilityImpact": "NONE",
            "vulnConfidentialityImpact": "NONE",
            "vulnIntegrityImpact": "HIGH",
            "vulnerabilityResponseEffort": "NOT_DEFINED"
          },
          "format": "CVSS",
          "scenarios": [
            {
              "lang": "en",
              "value": "GENERAL"
            }
          ]
        }
      ],
      "problemTypes": [
        {
          "descriptions": [
            {
              "cweId": "CWE-352",
              "description": "CWE-352 Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF)",
              "lang": "en",
              "type": "CWE"
            }
          ]
        },
        {
          "descriptions": [
            {
              "cweId": "CWE-1188",
              "description": "CWE-1188 Insecure Default Initialization of Resource",
              "lang": "en",
              "type": "CWE"
            }
          ]
        }
      ],
      "providerMetadata": {
        "orgId": "00000000-0000-4000-9000-000000000000"
      },
      "references": [
        {
          "tags": [
            "patch"
          ],
          "url": "https://github.com/MISP/MISP/commit/b82db1bcaa550689c05e1ed175e81f25a8d97b91"
        }
      ],
      "source": {
        "discovery": "UNKNOWN"
      },
      "title": "MISP automation endpoints may be exposed to CSRF when Sec-Fetch-Site protection is disabled by default",
      "x_gcve": [
        {
          "recordType": "advisory",
          "vulnId": "gcve-1-2026-20040"
        }
      ],
      "x_generator": {
        "engine": "Vulnogram 0.2.0"
      }
    }
  },
  "cveMetadata": {
    "assignerOrgId": "00000000-0000-4000-9000-000000000000",
    "cveId": "CVE-2026-54359",
    "datePublished": "2026-06-12T19:44:03.403919Z",
    "dateReserved": "2026-06-12T19:44:13.149Z",
    "dateUpdated": "2026-06-12T19:44:13.229452Z",
    "requesterUserId": "00000000-0000-4000-9000-000000000000",
    "serial": 1,
    "state": "PUBLISHED",
    "vulnId": "gcve-1-2026-20040"
  },
  "dataType": "CVE_RECORD",
  "dataVersion": "5.1"
}



Log in or create an account to share your comment.




Tags
Taxonomy of the tags.




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

Loading timeline…




    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.