GCVE Workshop - 22 September 2026 (14:00-18:00), Luxembourg Before The Vulnopticon Conference - Registration

GHSA-5X4V-9547-947F

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-09-09 15:35 – Updated: 2026-09-09 15:35
VLAI
Details

Snipe-IT through version 8.6.3 fails to perform object-level authorization in the updateLicense, updateConsumable, updateAccessory, and updateModel endpoints and in the storeModel endpoint for Predefined Kits. The existing check authorizes only the parent Predefined Kit (update on PredefinedKit) and not the child object being attached. As a result, an authenticated user holding only the kits.edit permission can attach a License, Consumable, Accessory, or Asset Model that they are otherwise denied (HTTP 403) from reading directly to a Predefined Kit, and the kit relation index then discloses the attached object's name back to that low-privilege user. This is the update-path and storeModel counterpart to CVE-2026-55478, which fixed only the storeLicense, storeConsumable, and storeAccessory methods in 8.6.2. Note that updateModel was code-vulnerable in 8.6.3 but not reachable in practice because a route-name typo bound the route to a nonexistent controller method, causing HTTP 500 responses. The issue is fixed in Snipe-IT 8.7.0.

Show details on source website

{
  "affected": [],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2026-86773"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-863"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": false,
    "github_reviewed_at": null,
    "nvd_published_at": "2026-09-09T14:17:28Z",
    "severity": "MODERATE"
  },
  "details": "Snipe-IT through version 8.6.3 fails to perform object-level authorization in the updateLicense, updateConsumable, updateAccessory, and updateModel endpoints and in the storeModel endpoint for Predefined Kits. The existing check authorizes only the parent Predefined Kit (update on PredefinedKit) and not the child object being attached. As a result, an authenticated user holding only the kits.edit permission can attach a License, Consumable, Accessory, or Asset Model that they are otherwise denied (HTTP 403) from reading directly to a Predefined Kit, and the kit relation index then discloses the attached object\u0027s name back to that low-privilege user. This is the update-path and storeModel counterpart to CVE-2026-55478, which fixed only the storeLicense, storeConsumable, and storeAccessory methods in 8.6.2. Note that updateModel was code-vulnerable in 8.6.3 but not reachable in practice because a route-name typo bound the route to a nonexistent controller method, causing HTTP 500 responses. The issue is fixed in Snipe-IT 8.7.0.",
  "id": "GHSA-5x4v-9547-947f",
  "modified": "2026-09-09T15:35:14Z",
  "published": "2026-09-09T15:35:14Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/grokability/snipe-it/security/advisories/GHSA-4j5f-mm59-hf9w"
    },
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-86773"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://www.vulncheck.com/advisories/snipe-it-8.6.3-broken-access-control-via-kit-update-endpoints"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": [
    {
      "score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:N",
      "type": "CVSS_V3"
    },
    {
      "score": "CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/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",
      "type": "CVSS_V4"
    }
  ]
}



Log in or create an account to share your comment.




Tags
Taxonomy of the tags.


Loading…

Loading…

Loading…

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.

Loading…

Detection rules are retrieved from Rulezet.

Loading…

Loading…

Loading…