Cyber Resilience

CVE-2026-18329

Published
02 September 2026
Modified
03 September 2026
CVSS Score v4 8.8
Click a component to see what it means
Raw vectorCVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/VI:L/VA:N/SC:N/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:X
EPSS Score 0.0038 31th percentile
Risk Priority 44 floored blend · peak EPSS

CVSS and EPSS are reproduced from their sources (NVD, FIRST EPSS). Risk Priority is our own derived reading, not an NVD score.

Summary

CVE-2026-18329 is a high-severity Failing Open (CWE-636) vulnerability. Its CVSS base score is 8.8 (High).

Operationally, 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 CP-12 (Safe Mode) and SC-24 (Fail in Known State) — see the control section below for these in your framework.

OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)

A10:2025 Mishandling of Exceptional Conditions

EU & UK References

Vulnerability Data

Description NGINX JavaScript (njs) and QuickJS (qjs) engines have a vulnerability when a js_access handler performs asynchronous request body processing and an exception is thrown during asynchronous access-control evaluation before an explicit access denial is returned. An unauthenticated attacker can…

more

exploit this vulnerability by sending a crafted HTTP request that triggers an error condition in the access validation logic. This may cause the js_access phase to fail open, allowing the request to proceed instead of being denied, resulting in an authentication or authorization bypass and unauthorized access to protected resources. Impact This vulnerability may allow remote attackers to bypass js_access controls. There is no control plane exposure; this is a data plane issue only. Note: Software versions which have reached End of Technical Support (EoTS) are not evaluated.

CWE(s)
CWE-636

Related Threats

CVEs Like This One

CVE-2026-69306Shared CWE-636
CVE-2026-53837Shared CWE-636
CVE-2026-68746Shared CWE-636
CVE-2026-22034Shared CWE-636
CVE-2025-41759Shared CWE-636
CVE-2025-21210Shared CWE-636
CVE-2024-8185Shared CWE-636
CVE-2026-40525Shared CWE-636
CVE-2026-42423Shared CWE-636
CVE-2024-43532Shared CWE-636

Affected Assets

—
Software
inferred from references and description; NVD did not file a CPE for this CVE

Mitigating Controls

Control response

Prevent
Stop it (NIST 800-53)

—

Detect
Catch it (NIST detect / respond)

—

Harden
Shrink the surface (DISA STIG)

—

Validate
Prove the fix (OWASP ASVS)
  • V3.2.1
  • V7.4.1
  • V8.3.3
  • V10.3.4

Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI

SC-24 Fail in Known State good match

SC-24 directly requires the system to fail to a known state that preserves security properties, structurally stopping fallback to a less-secure mode.

SI-17 Fail-safe Procedures good match

SI-17 mandates explicit fail-safe procedures that activate on indicated failures, preventing the insecure fallback behavior.

CP-12 Safe Mode good match

CP-12 forces entry into a safe mode on detected conditions, limiting exposure but not covering every failure path.

SA-8 Security and Privacy Engineering Principles partial match

SA-8 requires application of engineering principles that include fail-secure design, reducing the likelihood the weakness is introduced.

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 partial match
prevents

Least-privilege policy and enforcement directly counters the permissive-access fallback example in the CWE.

PR.PS-01 partial match
prevents

Hardened baselines and configuration management reduce the chance that error paths default to insecure settings.

PR.PS-06 partial match
prevents

Secure-development practices explicitly include designing error and failure handling to remain in a secure state.

References