Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:HSummary
CVE-2026-22039 is a critical-severity Improper Privilege Management (CWE-269) vulnerability in Kyverno Kyverno. Its CVSS base score is 9.9 (Critical).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Abuse Elevation Control Mechanism (T1548); ranked at the 41th percentile by exploit likelihood (below the median); it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog; a public proof-of-concept is referenced.
The strongest mitigations our analysis identified map to AC-2 (Account Management) and AC-24 (Access Control Decisions) — see the control section below for these in your framework.
Deeper analysis AI-assisted summary
Synthesised by an AI model from the NVD description and linked references — a reading aid, not an authoritative source.
CVE-2026-22039 is a critical authorization boundary bypass vulnerability in the namespaced Kyverno Policy apiCall feature of Kyverno, a policy engine for cloud native platform engineering teams. It affects Kyverno versions prior to 1.16.3 and 1.15.3. The issue arises because the resolved `urlPath` is executed using the Kyverno admission controller ServiceAccount without enforcement limiting requests to the policy's namespace. This allows control of the `urlPath` through context variable substitution, enabling Kyverno to perform Kubernetes API requests targeting any API path permitted by the ServiceAccount's RBAC. The vulnerability is rated 9.9 on the CVSS 3.1 scale (AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H) and is associated with CWE-269 (Improper Privilege Management) and CWE-918 (Server-Side Request Forgery).
Any authenticated user with permission to create a namespaced Policy can exploit this vulnerability. By crafting a Policy that substitutes variables into the `urlPath`, the attacker causes Kyverno to issue Kubernetes API requests using the elevated privileges of the admission controller ServiceAccount. This breaks namespace isolation, allowing cross-namespace reads such as ConfigMaps and Secrets (where permitted by RBAC), as well as cluster-scoped or cross-namespace writes, for example creating ClusterPolicies.
Kyverno versions 1.16.3 and 1.15.3 address the vulnerability with patches, as detailed in the GitHub security advisory GHSA-8p9x-46gm-qfx2 and specific commits e0ba4de4f1e0ca325066d5095db51aec45b1407b and eba60fa856c781bcb9c3be066061a3df03ae4e3e. Security practitioners should upgrade to these fixed versions to mitigate the risk.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2026-4811
Vulnerability Data
Kyverno is a policy engine designed for cloud native platform engineering teams. Versions prior to 1.16.3 and 1.15.3 have a critical authorization boundary bypass in namespaced Kyverno Policy apiCall. The resolved `urlPath` is executed using the Kyverno admission controller ServiceAccount,…
more
with no enforcement that the request is limited to the policy’s namespace. As a result, any authenticated user with permission to create a namespaced Policy can cause Kyverno to perform Kubernetes API requests using Kyverno’s admission controller identity, targeting any API path allowed by that ServiceAccount’s RBAC. This breaks namespace isolation by enabling cross-namespace reads (for example, ConfigMaps and, where permitted, Secrets) and allows cluster-scoped or cross-namespace writes (for example, creating ClusterPolicies) by controlling the urlPath through context variable substitution. Versions 1.16.3 and 1.15.3 contain a patch for the vulnerability.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
- 5 hardening rules · 5 OS baselines
V1.3.6V1.5.3V5.3.2V10.4.7
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Account management directly governs assignment and tracking of privileges so proper implementation stops the weakness from being introduced.
Requiring explicit access-control decisions ensures privileges are evaluated rather than assumed or omitted.
Access enforcement applies the correct privilege checks at every request, structurally preventing unintended spheres of control.
Information flow enforcement can restrict which destinations the server is allowed to contact on behalf of users.
Separation of duties constrains how privileges may be assigned, reducing the chance of overly broad actor control.
Least privilege is the direct countermeasure to improper privilege management; implementing it eliminates the root cause.
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 enforces least privilege/SoD and periodic reviews that directly remove most privilege-assignment defects, yet CWE-269 also covers escalation paths and role design outside a single access-management 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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Separating duties such as developing software from administering production systems prevents any one person from accumulating excessive privileges that would constitute improper privilege management.
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` (authoritative rows only; rows rated `none` are excluded).
Windows 10 (1 rule)
- V-220712 Only accounts responsible for the administration of a system must have Administrator rights on the system. prevents CWE-269
Windows 11 (1 rule)
- V-253269 Only accounts responsible for the administration of a system must have Administrator rights on the system. prevents CWE-269
Windows Server 2016 (1 rule)
- V-225007 Only administrators responsible for the member server or standalone or nondomain-joined system must have Administrator rights on the system. prevents CWE-269
Windows Server 2019 (1 rule)
- V-205746 Windows Server 2019 must only allow Administrators responsible for the member server or standalone or nondomain-joined system to have Administrator rights on the system. prevents CWE-269
Windows Server 2022 (1 rule)
- V-254428 Windows Server 2022 must only allow administrators responsible for the member server or standalone or nondomain-joined system to have Administrator rights on the system. prevents CWE-269