Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:LCVSS and EPSS are reproduced from their sources (NVD, FIRST EPSS). Risk Priority is our own derived reading, not an NVD score.
Summary
CVE-2026-33950 is a critical-severity Improper Authorization (CWE-285) vulnerability in Signalk Signal K Server. Its CVSS base score is 9.4 (Critical).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Exploitation for Stealth (T1211); ranked at the 36th 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-2026-33950 is a privilege escalation vulnerability in Signal K Server, an application that runs on a central hub in boats to manage vessel data. Prior to version 2.24.0-beta.4, the flaw allows Admin Role Injection via the /enableSecurity endpoint, enabling attackers to bypass authentication and authorization controls. It is associated with CWE-285 (Improper Authorization), CWE-288 (Authentication Bypass Using an Alternate Path or Channel), and CWE-862 (Missing Authorization), and carries a CVSS v3.1 base score of 9.4 (AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:L), reflecting high confidentiality, integrity, and limited availability impact.
An unauthenticated remote attacker can exploit this vulnerability over the network with low complexity and no user interaction required. Successful exploitation grants full Administrator access to the Signal K Server at any time, allowing the attacker to modify sensitive vessel routing data, alter server configurations, and access restricted endpoints, potentially compromising navigation safety and operational integrity.
The issue has been addressed in Signal K Server version 2.24.0-beta.4. Security practitioners should upgrade to this version or later. Additional details are available in the GitHub security advisory at https://github.com/SignalK/signalk-server/security/advisories/GHSA-x8hc-fqv3-7gwf and the release notes at https://github.com/SignalK/signalk-server/releases/tag/v2.24.0-beta.4.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2026-18372
Vulnerability Data
Signal K Server is a server application that runs on a central hub in a boat. Prior to version 2.24.0-beta.4, there is a privilege escalation vulnerability by Admin Role Injection via /enableSecurity. An unauthenticated attacker can gain full Administrator access…
more
to the SignalK server at any time, allowing them to modify sensitive vessel routing data, alter server configurations, and access restricted endpoints. This issue has been patched in version 2.24.0-beta.4.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
- 18 hardening rules · 4 OS baselines
V6.4.3V6.6.1V12.1.3
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.
Mandates unique identification and authentication for all organizational users, covering the primary authentication requirement.
Controls all external and key internal interfaces, reducing the chance of unauthenticated alternate channels.
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.
Requiring authentication on every channel and path directly eliminates alternate-path bypasses.
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.
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.
Authentication information management ensures credentials and mechanisms are consistently applied across all access paths.
Access rights provisioning and review prevent bypass via unmonitored or alternate channels.
Segregating the approval of access rights from their implementation provides an independent check that reduces the impact of missing authorization checks in the resulting system configuration.
Independent reviewers evaluate whether authorization logic matches policy, thereby reducing the window in which incorrect or missing authorization checks remain in production.
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` (higher-evidence rows only; rows rated `none` are excluded).
Oracle Linux 8 (4 rules)
- V-248598 There must be no ".shosts" files on the OL 8 operating system. prevents CWE-288
- V-248827 OL 8 must not have the rsh-server package installed. prevents CWE-288
- V-252656 The OL 8 operating system must not be configured to bypass password requirements for privilege escalation. prevents CWE-285, CWE-862
Oracle Linux 9 (2 rules)
- V-271757 OL 9 file systems must not contain shosts.equiv files. prevents CWE-288
- V-271758 OL 9 file systems must not contain .shosts files. prevents CWE-288
RHEL 7 (6 rules)
- V-204440 Red Hat Enterprise Linux operating systems version 7.2 or newer using Unified Extensible Firmware Interface (UEFI) must require authentication upon booting into single-user and maintenance modes. prevents CWE-288
- V-204442 The Red Hat Enterprise Linux operating system must not have the rsh-server package installed. prevents CWE-288
- V-251704 The Red Hat Enterprise Linux operating system must not be configured to bypass password requirements for privilege escalation. prevents CWE-285, CWE-862
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