What is CVE-2026-104908?

CVE-2026-104908 is MISP Decaying Model Import Mass Assignment Allows Cross-Organization Model Overwrite and Default Flagging. The supplied enrichment data classifies it as Unclassified mapped to CWE-915 CWE-915; CWE-285 CWE-285.

Which versions are affected?

Affected product and version evidence is listed in the product table above. Current public advisories should be checked for exact version scope before patch targeting is finalized.

Is there active exploitation?

Active exploitation is not confirmed from current sources for CVE-2026-104908. If exploitation is not confirmed from current sources, teams should document that status and continue monitoring KEV, vendor, and telemetry updates.

No. CVE-2026-104908 is not listed in CISA KEV in the supplied enrichment data. KEV status should be monitored because it can change after initial disclosure or after exploitation becomes publicly confirmed.

Is there a public exploit?

1 public PoC repositories reported; 0 marked weaponized in current dataset. Public exploit or PoC availability should raise triage priority, especially for exposed or business-critical systems.

How can defenders detect it?

Start with web/proxy/WAF logs, application logs, network IDS/IPS where available. Look for vulnerability-class behavior, product errors, suspicious authentication events, exploit probes, and abnormal process activity based only on evidence that applies to the affected product.

How should teams prioritize it?

Prioritize CVE-2026-104908 using CVSS 7.1, EPSS 0%, KEV status, public PoC status, and asset exposure. Internet-facing, privileged, or business-critical deployments should be handled first.

Are workarounds available?

Workarounds are not confirmed from current sources. Fixed-version evidence is listed in the mitigation section above.

Which threat actors are linked publicly?

No public threat actor linkage is confirmed from current sources. Do not attribute exploitation to a threat actor unless the source evidence explicitly supports that linkage.

What should be done in the next 24 hours?

Identify exposed assets running affected vendor/product/version combinations. Prioritize based on EPSS, PoC availability, and external exposure. Search available logs for exploit probes, errors, authentication anomalies, or suspicious child processes matching the vulnerability class. Open remediation tickets with affected assets, owners, evidence status, and detection coverage so decisions are traceable.

highpublic exploit

CVE-2026-104908

CVE-2026-104908 — MISP Decaying Model Import Mass Assignment Allows Cross-Organization Model Overwrite and Default Flagging

MISP contains an improper input validation vulnerability in the decaying model import functionality. The import endpoint was intended to create a new decaying model belonging exclusively to the importing user's organisation, with the default flag forced to off. However, the application stripped only the top-level id and uuid fields and pinned org_id and default on the outer array before saving the data flat. A user with decaying-model permissions could supply a nested model key carrying its own primary key, organisation identifier, and default flag, which bypassed those guards during the save operation. Impact: - A user with perm_decaying could overwrite an existing decaying model belonging to another organisation in place, altering its name, formula, parameters, or ownership. - A user could create or modify a model flagged as the organisation default, affecting scoring behaviour for other users. - A user could reassign a model's organisation to an arbitrary value. Preconditions: - Authenticated user with decaying-model permission (perm_decaying). - Network access to the MISP instance. Affected: <2.5.48.

Published Oct 2, 2026Updated Oct 2, 2026Sources: NVD, MISP (CNA), GitHub, SOCRadar CTI

Triage

Is it exploited, how likely is exploitation, what does it touch, and how severe do the scoring sources call it.

Exploitation

Exploit code

public exploit, none observed

EPSS

ahead of 0% of scored CVEs

Affects

MISP

CVSS base

7.1

high

Remediation

The vendor's own words where we have them.

The import handler now builds the model record from an explicit allow-list of permitted fields (name, parameters, description, ref, formula, version, enabled, all_orgs) using array_intersect_key, discarding any unlisted keys including nested model objects. The organisation identifier and default flag are set unconditionally after filtering. The save operation is preceded by an explicit create() call and the data is wrapped in the proper model key, preventing the ORM from interpreting attacker-supplied nested keys as separate model attributes.

First 24 hours

Ordered from the record's own fields — exposure first, because you cannot patch what you have not found.

Identify exposed assets running affected vendor/product/version combinations.
Prioritize based on EPSS, PoC availability, and external exposure.
Search available logs for exploit probes, errors, authentication anomalies, or suspicious child processes matching the vulnerability class.

Affected scope

Vendor, product and version as the advisories word them.

Vendor	Product	Versions	Status
MISP	MISP	0 to < 2.5.48	Vulnerable

Attack characteristics

The CVSS vector, decoded. It describes the attack, not your exposure to it.

Scope

Attack Complexity

Low

Attack Vector

Network

Privileges Req

Low

User Interaction

None

Every base score collected

Sources score independently and disagree; each row says who scored it and under which version.

Score	Version	Severity	Expl.	Impact	Source
7.1	CVSS 4.0	high	—	—	MISP (CNA)

CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:N/VI:H/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N

What this weakness leads to

MITRE's own consequences and mitigations for the weakness class — the authority's wording, not guidance derived from the CVSS vector.

MITRE

CWE-285 · Improper Authorization

Read Application Data
Read Files or Directories
Modify Application Data
Modify Files or Directories

Mitigation: Divide the software into anonymous, normal, privileged, and administrative areas. Reduce the attack surface by carefully mapping roles with data and functionality. Use role-based access control (RBAC) to enforce the roles at the appropriate boundaries. Note that this approach may not protect against horizontal authorization, i.e., it will not protect a user from attacking others with the same role.

CWE-915 · Improperly Controlled Modification of Dynamically-Determined Object Attributes

Modify Application Data
Execute Unauthorized Code or Commands
Varies by Context
Alter Execution Logic::

Mitigation: If available, use features of the language or framework that allow specification of allowlists of attributes or fields that are allowed to be modified. If possible, prefer allowlists over denylists. For applications written with Ruby on Rails, use the attr_accessible (allowlist) or attr_protected (denylist) macros in each class that may be used in mass assignment.

Weakness & attack patterns

CWE-915
CWE-285

Attack patterns reported against this CVE. The ATT&CK techniques below are inferred from its weakness class.

CAPEC-1 · Accessing Functionality Not Properly Constrained by ACLsCAPEC-104 · Cross Zone ScriptingCAPEC-127 · Directory IndexingCAPEC-13 · Subverting Environment Variable ValuesCAPEC-17 · Using Malicious FilesCAPEC-39 · Manipulating Opaque Client-based Data TokensCAPEC-402 · Bypassing ATA Password SecurityCAPEC-45 · Buffer Overflow via Symbolic LinksCAPEC-5 · Blue BoxingCAPEC-51 · Poison Web Service RegistryCAPEC-59 · Session Credential Falsification through PredictionCAPEC-60 · Reusing Session IDs (aka Session Replay)

T1574.010Hijack Execution Flow: ServicesFile Permissions Weakness
T1083File and Directory Discovery
T1562.003Impair Defenses: Impair Command History Logging

Public exploit

Capability, not use: code existing is a different claim from anyone running it.

Repositories

Detection

Read off the CVSS vector and the weakness class. Starting points, not rules we have tested.

Prioritize edge telemetry for network-reachable MISP.
Monitor for scanner or exploit-pattern traffic after 1 public PoC repositories were reported.

web/proxy/WAF logsapplication logsnetwork IDS/IPS

Timeline

What happened to this CVE, newest first — with the readings a source repeats on a schedule counted underneath rather than listed.

2026
Added · CVSS 3.1 7.1 (AV:N)
Oct 2, 2026 · NVD
Initial · CVE published
Oct 2, 2026 · NVD
CVE published by MITRE.
Oct 2, 2026 · SOCRadar CTI

Source activity

Readings a source repeats on a schedule, counted rather than listed.

1×CVE modified by NIST: CWE updated.Oct 2, 2026 · SOCRadar CTI

References

1 on the record

github.com/MISP/MISP/commit/70e319e4b
Exploit, Third Party Advisory, Mitre, NIST

Elsewhere on this site

MISPevery CVE for this vendor
Unclassifiedsame class
CWE-915other pages naming this weakness

Not in any source we poll

Listed rather than left blank: an empty field and an unmeasured one look identical on screen, and only one is a reason to look elsewhere.

No confirmed IOCs, IP addresses, domains, file hashes, or malware artifacts supplied.
No organization-specific asset inventory, compensating-control status, or patch deployment evidence supplied.
No exploit packet captures, log samples, or incident case IDs supplied.

Answered from this record1

What should defenders know first?

CVE-2026-104908 is MISP Decaying Model Import Mass Assignment Allows Cross-Organization Model Overwrite and Default Flagging, a high vulnerability affecting MISP from MISP. The current evidence does not list it in CISA KEV, and the exploit status is: Active exploitation is not confirmed from current sources for CVE-2026-104908. Public exploit evidence is: 1 public PoC repositories reported; 0 marked weaponized in current dataset. The affected-version evidence is listed in the key facts and affected products tables. Defenders should first verify whether exposed or business-critical assets run those versions, then apply vendor patches or mitigations, restrict reachable attack surface, and preserve logs for detection review. CVSS 7.1 describes technical severity, while EPSS 0% helps estimate near-term exploit likelihood; neither replaces asset context. Unknown fields should remain explicit in tickets, and threat actor, IOC, victimology, or payload claims should not be added unless a cited source supports them. Monitor CISA KEV, vendor advisories, NVD changes, public PoC repositories, and internal telemetry for update triggers.