Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:HCVSS and EPSS are reproduced from their sources (NVD, FIRST EPSS). EPSS, Forum of Incident Response and Security Teams (FIRST), epss.first.org. Risk Priority is our own derived reading, not an NVD score.
Summary
CVE-2026-106622 is a critical-severity SSRF (CWE-918) vulnerability in Adobe Coldfusion. Its CVSS base score is 10.0 (Critical).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Proxy (T1090); ranked in the top 44% of CVEs by exploit likelihood; it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog.
The strongest mitigations our analysis identified map to AC-4 (Information Flow Enforcement) and SC-7 (Boundary Protection) — see the control section below for these in your framework.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2026-100669
Vulnerability Data
ColdFusion is affected by a Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) vulnerability that could result in privilege escalation. Exploitation of this issue does not require user interaction. Scope is changed.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
MITRE ATT&CK v20.0
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
—
V1.3.6V1.5.3V5.3.2V10.4.7
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5)
Our mappings, made for this CVE.
Information flow enforcement can restrict which destinations the server is allowed to contact on behalf of users.
Boundary protection limits the network reach of server-initiated requests even if SSRF occurs.
Input validation directly stops untrusted URLs from being accepted and fetched without destination checks.
Mitigating Controls (NIST CSF 2.0)
Our mappings, derived directly from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry via our CWE→CSF cross-walk — links open the control.
Secure development practices directly include input validation and destination allow-listing that prevent SSRF.
Runtime monitoring of web applications and services can detect anomalous outbound requests indicative of SSRF.
Vulnerability identification processes can discover and record SSRF flaws in web applications.
Network segmentation and egress controls can limit the damage from successful SSRF requests.
Mitigating Controls (ISO/IEC 27001:2022 Annex A)
Our mappings, derived directly from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry via our CWE→ISO cross-walk — links open the control.
Network segregation with gateway controls blocks SSRF exploitation against internal network resources (internal admin panels, cross-domain port scanning, internal services), which is a major portion of the weakness's damage surface, but the weakness remains exploitable for external destinations, localhost services, and cloud metadata endpoints that the segregation does not reach.
A.8.28 mandates secure coding principles that include URL/destination validation and allowlisting practices which, where followed, prevent SSRF from being introduced; but the clause is a practice-based control whose effect depends on developer implementation rigor, so it catches only a minority of instances — the same reading that graded A.8.28 -> CWE-502 and A.8.28 -> CWE-79 at `partial`, and the clause's declared ceiling on this verb.