Cyber Resilience

CVE-2026-102490

Zammad 1.5.0 – 7.1.0

CISA KEVActive ExploitationEUVD Exploited
Published
30 September 2026
Modified
07 October 2026
KEV Added
02 October 2026
Patch / advisory
CVSS Score v4 9.4
Click a component to see what it means
Raw vectorCVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:P/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/SC:H/SI:H/SA:H/E:A/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:Y/R:X/V:C/RE:X/U:X
EPSS Score 0.0063 49th percentile
Risk Priority 100 floored blend · peak EPSS

CVSS and EPSS are reproduced from their sources (NVD, FIRST EPSS). Risk Priority is our own derived reading, not an NVD score.

Summary

CVE-2026-102490 is a critical-severity Improper Privilege Management (CWE-269) vulnerability in Zammad Zammad. Its CVSS base score is 9.4 (Critical).

Operationally, ranked at the 49th percentile by exploit likelihood (below the median); CISA has added it to the Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog.

The strongest mitigations our analysis identified map to AC-2 (Account Management) and AC-24 (Access Control Decisions) — see the control section below for these in your framework.

OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)

EU & UK References

Vulnerability Data

All versions of Zammad including the latest alpha enable the local zammad user to escalate privileges to root.

CWE(s)
KEV Date Added
02 October 2026

Related Threats

CVEs Like This One

CVE-2026-102489Same product: Docker Dockerboth on KEV
CVE-2013-0643Same product: Linux Linux Kernelboth on KEV
CVE-2013-6282Same product: Linux Linux Kernelboth on KEV
CVE-2013-2094Same product: Linux Linux Kernelboth on KEV
CVE-2020-3950Shared CWE-269both on KEV
CVE-2019-1405Shared CWE-269both on KEV
CVE-2019-1388Shared CWE-269both on KEV
CVE-2021-25337Shared CWE-269both on KEV
CVE-2002-0367Shared CWE-269both on KEV
CVE-2019-1215Shared CWE-269both on KEV

Affected Assets

zammad
zammad
7.1.0 · 1.5.0 — 7.1.0

Mitigating Controls

Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI

Account management directly governs assignment and tracking of privileges so proper implementation stops the weakness from being introduced.

Requiring explicit access-control decisions ensures privileges are evaluated rather than assumed or omitted.

Access enforcement applies the correct privilege checks at every request, structurally preventing unintended spheres of control.

Separation of duties constrains how privileges may be assigned, reducing the chance of overly broad actor control.

Least privilege is the direct countermeasure to improper privilege management; implementing it eliminates the root cause.

Mitigating Controls (ISO/IEC 27001:2022 Annex A) AI

Derived directly from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry via our AI-authored CWE→ISO cross-walk (authority under review) — links open the control.

blocks

A.5.15 directly mandates determining access requirements, defining/enforcing topic-specific access control policy, assigning rights/restrictions by entity/role, consistency with classification, need-to-know, privileged access restrictions, segregation, formal authorization, and dynamic rules — which stops most improper privilege management from being exploitable; bounded remainder is flawed implementation of those rules (e.g. incorrect mapping or enforcement bugs).

blocks

A.5.18 directly governs the provisioning, review, modification and timely revocation of access rights (including for role changes, termination and privilege levels), which stops most improper privilege spheres from being exploitable even if the assignment flaw exists; the bounded remainder is flaws in the underlying enforcement mechanism itself (e.g. AC-3/A.8.3)

blocks

Defining and communicating authorization levels for each role limits the assignment of excessive or unnecessary privileges.

A.8.15 Logging partial match
finds

Logging every use of privileges and protecting those records makes it harder for an attacker who has obtained elevated rights to operate without leaving evidence.

blocks

A.8.2 directly controls the identification, allocation, review, expiry, temporary use, and separation of privileged rights per policy, which prevents most improper privilege management (CWE-269) by design; the bounded remainder is flawed tracking/checking logic inside the product's own enforcement code (the AC-3 slice of 269).

blocks

A.8.27 mandates security-by-design principles including least privilege, default deny, fail securely, defence in depth, security architecture integration, hardening, and zero-trust verification of every request; these directly stop most improper privilege spheres from being exploitable even if the assignment flaw remains, with a bounded remainder (e.g. certain legacy or safety-overridden controls).

References