Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:HSummary
CVE-2026-15630 is a critical-severity Improper Privilege Management (CWE-269) vulnerability in Vokecyber (inferred from references). Its CVSS base score is 9.9 (Critical).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Exploitation for Privilege Escalation (T1068); ranked at the 16th 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 AC-3 (Access Enforcement) and AC-4 (Information Flow Enforcement) — see the control section below for these in your framework.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2026-48418
Vulnerability Data
A non-global organization admin in one tenant can bypass tenant boundaries to delete, create, or modify resources in any other tenant by exploiting a mismatch between authorization (based on ?id=) and action (based on request body).
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise TechniquesAI
Why these techniques?
The vulnerability is a cross-tenant authorization bypass (IDOR-style mismatch between ?id= authz and body-driven action) that directly allows a limited admin to perform unauthorized create/delete/modify operations on resources belonging to other tenants, which maps to exploitation for privilege escalation.
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Directly enforces authorization decisions on every request so a tenant admin cannot perform create/delete/modify actions on resources outside their tenant regardless of parameter vs. body mismatch.
Enforces information-flow policy between security domains (tenants), blocking the unauthorized cross-tenant data modification described in the CVE.
Limits privileges of non-global tenant admins so they cannot be granted or exercise rights that would allow actions in other tenants even if the enforcement check is flawed.
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.
Enforcing authorization policy and least privilege directly blocks user-controlled key tampering that bypasses access checks.
Logical access controls prevent unauthorized data access that results from missing authorization checks on object references.
PR.AA-01 supplies credential/identity lifecycle support that can reduce some privilege-assignment errors but does not itself assign, modify, or check privileges, leaving most of CWE-269's risk unaddressed.
Config baselines and default reviews can enforce some privilege-related settings (one facet) but do not address code-level assignment/tracking logic that defines CWE-269.
PR.PS-05 can partially limit exploitability of some privilege issues via execution restrictions, but does not address the core design/implementation flaws of CWE-269 at all.
PR.DS-10 protects data-in-use without touching privilege assignment/tracking, so it neither prevents CWE-269 nor removes more than one narrow facet of its risk.
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.
Requiring owner approval, segregation of duties, and periodic reviews prevents the assignment of excessive or unnecessary privileges to users or processes.
Enforcing minimum-necessary privileges, temporary grants, and separation of administrative versus normal identities prevents the over-assignment of rights that CWE-269 describes.
Security testing can detect missing authorization checks but does not prevent the weakness in production.
Dynamic techniques that grant the minimum necessary rights for a given time window and revoke them afterward reduce the window in which excessive or unnecessary privileges can be exploited.
Explicit restrictions on privileged access and segregation of duties limit the scope of privileges that can be assigned, reducing the chance that excessive or unnecessary privileges are granted to entities.
Defining and communicating authorization levels for each role limits the assignment of excessive or unnecessary privileges.