Raw vector
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:P/VC:H/VI:H/VA:N/SC:H/SI:H/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-2026-30793 is a critical-severity Improper Authorization (CWE-285) vulnerability in Rustdesk Rustdesk. Its CVSS base score is 9.3 (Critical).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Exploit Public-Facing Application (T1190); ranked at the 23th 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-24 (Access Control Decisions) and AC-25 (Reference Monitor) — 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-2026-30793 is a Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in the RustDesk Client (rustdesk-client) on Windows, macOS, Linux, iOS, and Android platforms. The flaw affects the Flutter URI scheme handler and FFI bridge modules, specifically involving program files flutter/lib/common.dart, src/flutter_ffi.rs, and routines such as the URI handler for rustdesk://password/ and bind.MainSetPermanentPassword(). This issue enables privilege escalation and impacts RustDesk Client versions through 1.4.5. It carries a CVSS v3.1 base score of 9.8 (AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H) and maps to CWEs 285 (Improper Authorization) and 352 (CSRF).
A network-based attacker requires no privileges or user interaction to exploit this vulnerability with low attack complexity. Exploitation allows privilege escalation, yielding high impacts on confidentiality, integrity, and availability of the affected system.
Mitigation details are outlined in related advisories and project resources, including the primary publication at https://docs.google.com/document/d/e/2PACX-1vSds6jjpd38oO_yIAyd1HYtKNUuea-I-ozAPpGhYI7QgAU-QGJ7D8a4rOZVj1vmiUXV1EcdRHf9aZAW/pub, RustDesk repositories at https://github.com/rustdesk/hbb_common and https://github.com/rustdesk/rustdesk, and additional coverage at https://www.vulsec.org/. Security practitioners should consult these for patch availability and remediation steps.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2026-9827
Vulnerability Data
Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in rustdesk-client RustDesk Client rustdesk-client on Windows, MacOS, Linux, iOS, Android (Flutter URI scheme handler, FFI bridge modules) allows Privilege Escalation. This vulnerability is associated with program files flutter/lib/common.Dart, src/flutter_ffi.Rs and program routines URI handler…
more
for rustdesk://password/, bind.MainSetPermanentPassword(). This issue affects RustDesk Client: through 1.4.5.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
- 6 hardening rules · 3 OS baselines
V3.3.2V3.5.1V10.2.1
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Mandates that access-control decisions are made and applied to each request before access occurs.
Requires a tamperproof, always-invoked reference monitor that performs authorization checks.
Directly requires enforcement of approved authorizations for every access request, stopping improper or missing checks.
Limits granted privileges so that even a bypassed check affects fewer resources.
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.
PR.AA-05 mostly prevents CWE-285 via enforced policy, reviews, and least-privilege authorization decisions, yet CWE-285 remains only partially prevented because code-level check omissions or errors can still occur outside that single control.
Secure SDLC practices catch and eliminate most authorization defects before release, yet a single broad outcome cannot address every design, role, and runtime facet of CWE-285.
PR.AA-01 supplies managed identities and access-request workflows that can support downstream authorization decisions, yet does nothing to enforce or verify authorization checks inside a product, leaving CWE-285 fully unaddressed by this control alone.
Network segmentation/zero-trust limits external reachability (partial prevention of exploitation) but leaves application-level authorization logic untouched, so the CWE remains fully introducible and only one facet of its risk is addressed.
PR.PS-05 blocks unauthorized binaries/DNS while CWE-285 is an in-product authorization-check defect, so the control neither prevents the weakness nor removes any of its risk.
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.
Granular, policy-driven assignment of permissions and dynamic enforcement of those permissions prevent the incorrect or missing authorization decisions that lead to improper authorization flaws.
By requiring documented authorization rules and periodic policy reviews, the control makes it less likely that authorization decisions will be omitted or implemented inconsistently across applications.
Mapping access rights to information classification and business requirements forces correct enforcement of authorization decisions, blocking the incorrect authorization weakness at the policy and implementation stage.
Independent reviewers evaluate whether authorization logic matches policy, thereby reducing the window in which incorrect or missing authorization checks remain in production.
By requiring managers to verify that authorization decisions match policy and to remediate deviations, the control limits the persistence of incorrect or missing authorization checks.
Requiring authorization processes and privilege assignments to be specified during project initiation prevents downstream components from receiving overly broad or incorrect rights that would allow unauthorized actions.
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).
Oracle Linux 8 (2 rules)
- V-252656 The OL 8 operating system must not be configured to bypass password requirements for privilege escalation. prevents CWE-285
- V-248581 OL 8 must require users to provide a password for privilege escalation. prevents CWE-285
RHEL 7 (3 rules)
- V-204429 The Red Hat Enterprise Linux operating system must be configured so that users must provide a password for privilege escalation. prevents CWE-285
- V-204430 The Red Hat Enterprise Linux operating system must be configured so that users must re-authenticate for privilege escalation. prevents CWE-285
- V-251704 The Red Hat Enterprise Linux operating system must not be configured to bypass password requirements for privilege escalation. prevents CWE-285
RHEL 8 (1 rule)
- V-251712 The RHEL 8 operating system must not be configured to bypass password requirements for privilege escalation. prevents CWE-285