Raw vector
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:A/VC:H/VI:H/VA:N/SC:H/SI:N/SA:N/E:X/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-2026-15643 is a critical-severity SSRF (CWE-918) vulnerability in Amazon (inferred from references). Its CVSS base score is 9.2 (Critical).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Exploit Public-Facing Application (T1190); ranked at the 13th percentile by exploit likelihood (below the median); it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog.
This vulnerability is AI-related — categorised as AI Agent Protocols and Integrations; in the Protocol-Specific Risks risk domain.
The strongest mitigations our analysis identified map to AC-4 (Information Flow Enforcement) and SI-10 (Information Input Validation) — see the control section below for these in your framework.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2026-44455
Vulnerability Data
AWS HealthLake MCP Server (awslabs.healthlake-mcp-server) is a Model Context Protocol server that enables AI assistants to interact with AWS HealthLake FHIR datastores. A server-side request forgery in the pagination handling component in AWS awslabs.healthlake-mcp-server before 0.0.14 on all platforms might…
more
allow a remote authenticated user to exfiltrate AWS temporary security credentials to an arbitrary endpoint via a crafted next_token parameter. The server does not validate that pagination URLs point back to the expected HealthLake endpoint, allowing an actor to redirect subsequent requests to an actor-controlled server. Its recommended to upgrade to version 0.0.14 or later.
- CWE(s)
AI Security AnalysisAI
- AI Category
- AI Agent Protocols and Integrations
- Risk Domain
- Protocol-Specific Risks
- OWASP Top 10 for LLMs 2025
- None mapped
- Classification Reason
- Matched keywords: mcp, mcp, model context protocol, ai, mcp
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise TechniquesAI
Why these techniques?
SSRF vulnerability in public-facing MCP server directly enables exploitation of the application to redirect requests and exfiltrate credentials.
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Validates the next_token pagination parameter to ensure the URL points only to the expected HealthLake endpoint, blocking the SSRF redirect.
Enforces information flow rules so that subsequent requests from the server are restricted to authorized HealthLake domains only.
Applies boundary protection mechanisms (e.g., allow-lists or proxies) that can block outbound connections to arbitrary attacker-controlled endpoints.
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 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) 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.
Operational threat data describing SSRF campaigns can be used to tighten outbound-request allow-lists and detection rules before attackers exploit them.