Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:HCVSS and EPSS are reproduced from their sources (NVD, FIRST EPSS). Risk Priority is our own derived reading, not an NVD score.
Summary
CVE-2026-15704 is a critical-severity Incorrect Behavior Order: Validate Before Canonicalize (CWE-180) vulnerability in Eclipse BaSyx Go Components (inferred from references). Its CVSS base score is 9.8 (Critical).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Boot or Logon Initialization Scripts (T1037); ranked at the 31th 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-24 (Access Control Decisions) and AC-25 (Reference Monitor) — see the control section below for these in your framework.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2026-48523
Vulnerability Data
In Eclipse BaSyx Go Components versions up to and including 1.0.0, ABAC-enabled deployments are vulnerable to an authorization bypass caused by inconsistent trailing-slash handling between the ABAC middleware and the HTTP router. The shared router configuration used Chi's `middleware.StripSlashes`, so…
more
a request such as `GET /shells/` was dispatched to the registered `GET /shells` route. However, the ABAC middleware evaluated the original request path including the trailing slash. If ABAC route lookup did not find a matching slash-suffixed route, the request was passed onward and the router then stripped the slash and executed the protected handler without the intended ABAC authorization decision and without the expected ABAC query filters. An unauthenticated or unauthorized network attacker could append a trailing slash to protected API routes to reach handlers that should have been denied by ABAC policy. Depending on the exposed component, HTTP method, and deployed policy, this could allow unauthorized read, create, update, delete, or upload operations. The issue affects ABAC-enabled deployments of services that use the shared router and ABAC middleware, including AAS Repository, Submodel Repository, AAS Registry, Submodel Registry, Concept Description Repository, Discovery, AAS Environment upload, and related services. The issue is fixed in Eclipse BaSyx Go Components v1.0.1.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
- 13 hardening rules · 4 OS baselines
V1.3.8V1.1.1V12.1.3V10.3.5
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Directly enforces approved authorizations for logical access, stopping unauthorized actors from reaching resources.
AC-24 ensures access-control decisions are made and applied consistently, reducing the chance of an incorrect authorization result.
A reference monitor that is always invoked and tamper-proof forces every authorization decision through a verified, correct path.
Enforces flow-control policies that restrict information movement between subjects and objects.
Documents duties and assigns access so that no single account can bypass intended restrictions.
Limits each account to the minimum privileges needed, reducing the chance of unauthorized access.
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.
PR.AA-05 directly enforces policy-based access management and least privilege, eliminating most improper-access-control defects, yet CWE-284 also covers implementation flaws and design gaps outside a single management control.
Hardened baselines and deviation monitoring directly eliminate most configuration-induced access-control defects, yet CWE-284 also encompasses code-level and design flaws outside the scope of configuration management alone.
Secure SDLC practices catch most access-control defects during design/coding/testing (mostly), yet leave residual risk from runtime configuration, architecture, and operational controls (partial).
PR.AA-01 supplies managed identities/credentials that support but do not implement access-control decisions, so it only partially prevents CWE-284 in either direction.
Authentication directly blocks unauthenticated actors (partial prevention of CWE-284) but leaves authorization logic, policy enforcement, and role checks untouched, so the control neither eliminates nor fully mitigates the broader weakness.
PR.DS-01 encryption mitigates impact of failed access checks on stored data but neither implements nor constrains access-control logic itself.
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.
High-level policy that explicitly assigns security responsibilities and mandates topic-specific rules (including access control) reduces the chance that developers or administrators will implement systems without proper authorization checks.
The classification scheme is explicitly aligned with the access-control policy, so protective controls are applied consistently and the risk of improper access decisions is lowered.
Defining and enforcing explicit access rights and restrictions for each entity directly stops the assignment of permissions that exceed what is required, eliminating the root condition that allows improper access control.
Requiring one-to-one mapping of identities to entities and timely removal of unused identities directly stops attackers from leveraging stale or shared accounts to bypass access restrictions.
Formal authorization, role-based provisioning, and timely revocation of access rights directly stop the creation of accounts or permissions that exceed what the business actually needs.
Explicitly assigning and documenting who owns each security responsibility reduces the chance that access decisions are left undefined or inconsistently enforced.
Hardening callouts derived
Configuration rules from DISA STIG baselines that bear on weaknesses of the type cited by this CVE. Each rule is shown with the relationship its mapping actually records, against the CWE it was authored against. Derived via CVE→CWE over `controls_xwalks` (higher-evidence rows only; rows rated `none` are excluded).
Oracle Linux 8 (4 rules)
- V-248581 OL 8 must require users to provide a password for privilege escalation. prevents CWE-863
- V-248597 There must be no "shosts.equiv" files on the OL 8 operating system. prevents CWE-284
- V-248598 There must be no ".shosts" files on the OL 8 operating system. prevents CWE-284
Oracle Linux 9 (2 rules)
- V-271758 OL 9 file systems must not contain .shosts files. prevents CWE-284
- V-271757 OL 9 file systems must not contain shosts.equiv files. prevents CWE-284
RHEL 7 (3 rules)
- V-204430 The Red Hat Enterprise Linux operating system must be configured so that users must re-authenticate for privilege escalation. prevents CWE-863
- V-204606 The Red Hat Enterprise Linux operating system must not contain .shosts files. prevents CWE-284
- V-204607 The Red Hat Enterprise Linux operating system must not contain shosts.equiv files. prevents CWE-284
RHEL 8 (3 rules)
- V-230283 There must be no shosts.equiv files on the RHEL 8 operating system. prevents CWE-284
- V-230284 There must be no .shosts files on the RHEL 8 operating system. prevents CWE-284
- V-251712 The RHEL 8 operating system must not be configured to bypass password requirements for privilege escalation. prevents CWE-863