Raw vector
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:N/VI:H/VA:H/SC:N/SI:N/SA:H/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:XCVSS and EPSS are reproduced from their sources (NVD, FIRST EPSS). Risk Priority is our own derived reading, not an NVD score.
Summary
CVE-2026-27841 is a high-severity CSRF (CWE-352) vulnerability in Senselive X3500 Firmware. Its CVSS base score is 8.4 (High).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Exploit Public-Facing Application (T1190); ranked at the 6th 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 SC-23 (Session Authenticity) — 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-2026-27841 is a Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerability, classified under CWE-352, affecting the web management interface of the SenseLive X3050 device. The flaw enables state-changing operations to be triggered without adequate CSRF protections, as the application fails to enforce server-side validation of request origins or implement CSRF tokens. This allows a malicious external webpage to cause a user's browser to submit unauthorized configuration requests to the device. The vulnerability has a CVSS v3.1 base score of 8.1 (AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:H), indicating high severity due to its potential for significant integrity and availability impacts.
Exploitation requires an attacker to lure an authenticated user—typically an administrator accessing the web interface—into visiting a malicious external webpage. No privileges are needed on the target device, and the attack is feasible over the network with low complexity, though it relies on user interaction. Successful exploitation enables the attacker to perform unauthorized configuration changes, potentially disrupting device operations or altering settings with high integrity and availability consequences.
Mitigation guidance is detailed in the CISA ICS Advisory ICSA-26-111-12, available at https://www.cisa.gov/news-events/ics-advisories/icsa-26-111-12, along with the corresponding CSAF JSON file at https://github.com/cisagov/CSAF/blob/develop/csaf_files/OT/white/2026/icsa-26-111-12.json. Additional support, including potential patches, can be obtained by contacting SenseLive via https://senselive.io/contact.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2026-25352
Vulnerability Data
A vulnerability in SenseLive X3050's web management interface allows state-changing operations to be triggered without proper Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) protections. Because the application does not enforce server-side validation of request origin or implement CSRF tokens, a malicious external webpage…
more
could cause a user's browser to submit unauthorized configuration requests to the device.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
—
V3.3.2V3.5.1V10.2.1
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Access enforcement requires verifying that state-changing requests originate from the authenticated user rather than a forged cross-site source.
Protecting session authenticity prevents attackers from replaying or forging authenticated requests via the victim's browser.
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 SDLC practices directly require anti-CSRF controls such as tokens or SameSite attributes.
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.
By denying access to phishing or malicious sites, the control lowers the likelihood that a user will be tricked into submitting a forged request that performs an unintended action on another site.