Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:NCVSS and EPSS are reproduced from their sources (NVD, FIRST EPSS). Risk Priority is our own derived reading, not an NVD score.
Summary
CVE-2026-33180 is a high-severity Exposure of Sensitive Information to an Unauthorized Actor (CWE-200) vulnerability in Redhat (inferred from references). Its CVSS base score is 7.5 (High).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Token Impersonation/Theft (T1134.001); ranked at the 18th 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 AC-4 (Information Flow Enforcement) — 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-2026-33180 affects HAPI FHIR, a Java-based implementation of the HL7 FHIR standard for healthcare interoperability. In versions prior to 6.9.0, the library's internal HTTP client forwards all request headers—including those with privacy-sensitive information or data that could enable impersonation of the client—to the host specified in the Location header during 30X redirects. This violates expectations that headers remain confined to the initial target host, exposing sensitive data to unintended parties and mapping to CWE-200 (Exposure of Sensitive Information). The vulnerability carries a CVSS v3.1 base score of 7.5 (AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N).
Attackers can exploit this remotely without authentication or user interaction by controlling a server that issues a 30X redirect response, tricking the HAPI FHIR client into sending the full set of headers to the attacker's designated host. This enables unauthorized access to confidential header data, such as authentication tokens, session identifiers, or other client-specific details, potentially leading to privacy breaches or request impersonation in healthcare interoperability scenarios.
The GitHub security advisory (GHSA-p7m9-v2cm-2h7m) confirms the issue has been patched in HAPI FHIR version 6.9.0, urging users to upgrade immediately. No workarounds are available.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2026-13828
Vulnerability Data
HAPI FHIR is a complete implementation of the HL7 FHIR standard for healthcare interoperability in Java. Prior to version 6.9.0, when setting headers in HTTP requests, the internal HTTP client sends headers first to the host in the initial URL…
more
but also, if asked to follow redirects and a 30X HTTP response code is returned, to the host mentioned in URL in the Location: response header value. Sending the same set of headers to subsequent hosts is a problem as this header often contains privacy sensitive information or data that could allow others to impersonate the client's request. This issue has been patched in release 6.9.0. No known workarounds are available.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
- 7 hardening rules · 6 OS baselines
V10.4.9V11.7.1V14.1.2V14.2.4
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Access enforcement directly stops unauthorized actors from obtaining sensitive information.
Information flow enforcement structurally prevents sensitive data from reaching unauthorized recipients.
Protection of information at rest prevents unauthorized exposure of stored sensitive data.
Transmission confidentiality mechanisms stop exposure of sensitive data on the wire.
Least privilege reduces the set of actors who can reach sensitive information.
Requires validation of outbound information to ensure sensitive content is not disclosed in responses or messages.
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 least-privilege authorization that blocks most unauthorized disclosures, yet CWE-200 also arises from logging, error messages, and side-channel paths that access controls alone do not address.
PR.DS-10 mostly prevents CWE-200 by directly eliminating unauthorized access to sensitive data-in-use, yet only partially addresses the weakness because CWE-200 spans many other exposure vectors outside runtime protection.
PR.IR-01's segmentation/zero-trust controls largely eliminate network-level unauthorized access paths that enable exposure, yet CWE-200 spans many additional vectors (API responses, logs, app logic) that network controls alone cannot close.
Secure SDLC practices catch most exposure flaws via design, testing and release controls, yet CWE-200 spans runtime/config issues a single development outcome cannot fully close.
Monitoring runtime data flows and outputs can detect sensitive data being transmitted.
PR.AA-01 supplies proper credential lifecycle controls that reduce unauthorized access paths, yet leaves many other exposure vectors (error messages, logging, side channels, etc.) unaddressed.
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.
Restricting anonymous or unknown access and encrypting high-value information limits the exposure of sensitive data that would otherwise be obtainable by unauthorized actors.
Suppressing system details, error specifics, and previous log-on information until successful authentication reduces the information an unauthenticated attacker can gather.
By requiring owners to assign sensitivity labels and corresponding handling rules, the control ensures that information is not left unmarked and therefore reduces the chance that sensitive data will be exposed to unauthorized actors.
Requiring encryption, access controls, and recipient authentication for transfers directly reduces the chance that sensitive data reaches an unauthorized observer.
Secure delivery, protected storage, and confidentiality of allocation records limit exposure of authentication material to unauthorized observers.
Requiring defined procedures, assigned roles, and technical/organizational measures for handling PII reduces the chance that sensitive personal data will be exposed to unauthorized actors through inadequate handling or missing safeguards.
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).
Ubuntu 22.04 (1 rule)
- V-260470 Ubuntu 22.04 LTS, when booted, must require authentication upon booting into single-user and maintenance modes. prevents CWE-200
Ubuntu 24.04 (2 rules)
- V-270647 Ubuntu 24.04 LTS must not have the telnet package installed. prevents CWE-200
- V-270675 Ubuntu 24.04 LTS when booted must require authentication upon booting into single-user and maintenance modes. prevents CWE-200
Windows 10 (1 rule)
- V-220737 Administrative accounts must not be used with applications that access the Internet, such as web browsers, or with potential Internet sources, such as email. prevents CWE-200
Windows Server 2016 (1 rule)
- V-224974 Domain-created Active Directory Organizational Unit (OU) objects must have proper access control permissions. prevents CWE-200
Windows Server 2019 (1 rule)
- V-205743 Windows Server 2019 organization created Active Directory Organizational Unit (OU) objects must have proper access control permissions. prevents CWE-200