Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:LSummary
CVE-2026-10702 is a medium-severity Type Confusion (CWE-843) vulnerability in Mozilla Firefox. Its CVSS base score is 4.3 (Medium).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Drive-by Compromise (T1189); ranked at the 43th 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 SI-2 (Flaw Remediation) and CM-7 (Least Functionality) — see the control section below for these in your framework.
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2026-33990
Vulnerability Data
JIT miscompilation in the JavaScript Engine: JIT component. This vulnerability was fixed in Firefox 151.0.3.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise TechniquesAI
Why these techniques?
JIT type confusion (CWE-843) in browser JS engine directly enables client-side RCE via malicious web content (drive-by) or crafted JS payloads.
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Directly requires timely application of the vendor patch (Firefox 151.0.3) that corrects the JIT miscompilation.
Allows disabling or restricting JIT compilation features (e.g., IonMonkey, Baseline) to reduce attack surface for type-confusion flaws.
Enables monitoring of anomalous JavaScript execution or process behavior that would result from successful exploitation of the miscompiled code.
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 type-confusion flaws via safe typing, static analysis, and code review while the control itself addresses many additional weaknesses.
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 in development can detect type-confusion vulnerabilities through fuzzing and static analysis.
Secure SDLC mandates type-safe design and review that can catch type-confusion flaws.
Application security requirements can specify strong typing and interface contracts that reduce type confusion.
Secure architecture principles promote type-safe languages and memory-safety mechanisms that mitigate type confusion.
Secure coding standards directly forbid unsafe type casts and require static-analysis checks for type confusion.