CVE-2026-10271
Raw vector
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:P/VC:L/VI:L/VA:L/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:P/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:XSummary
CVE-2026-10271 is a low-severity EAR (CWE-698) vulnerability. Its CVSS base score is 2.1 (Low).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Exploit Public-Facing Application (T1190); ranked at the 22th percentile by exploit likelihood (below the median); it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog.
The strongest mitigations our analysis identified map to SA-11 (Developer Testing and Evaluation) and AC-3 (Access Enforcement) — see the control section below for these in your framework.
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2026-33695
Vulnerability Data
A flaw has been found in a4m4 Student-Management-System up to f0c5f6842c5e8c431ff02b5260a565ca844df3a0. The affected element is an unknown function of the file admin/ of the component Admin Endpoint. This manipulation of the argument uid causes execution after redirect. It is possible…
more
to initiate the attack remotely. The exploit has been published and may be used. This product is using a rolling release to provide continious delivery. Therefore, no version details for affected nor updated releases are available. Multiple endpoints are affected. The project was informed of the problem early through an issue report but has not responded yet.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Developer testing and evaluation can discover execution paths that continue after a redirect.
Proper access enforcement reduces the impact of continued execution after a redirect by limiting what the remaining code can do.
Requiring a documented secure development process and standards can mandate exiting immediately after issuing redirects.
Security engineering principles can require structured control-flow constructs and explicit state transitions that avoid improper scoping after tasks or errors.
Failing to a known state on indicated failures limits damage from control-flow errors without preventing the underlying scoping mistake.
Fail-safe procedures reduce the consequences of unhandled or mis-scoped control flow on failure but do not correct the scoping defect itself.
Mitigating Controls (NIST CSF 2.0) AI
Derived directly from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry via our AI-authored CWE→CSF cross-walk (authority under review) — links open the control.
Secure SDLC practices directly prevent improper redirect handling via code review and static analysis, but eliminating only this flaw covers a narrow slice of the control's broader intent.
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.
Security testing can detect EAR flaws before deployment.
Secure development lifecycle requires proper handling of redirects and exit logic, reducing EAR risk.
Application security requirements can mandate safe redirect patterns and post-redirect termination.
Secure architecture principles discourage continued execution after redirects.
Secure coding standards directly address proper redirect handling and flow termination.