Cyber Resilience

CVE-2026-39816

Access Control in Apache Nifi 2.0.0 – 2.9.0

Published
08 May 2026
Modified
17 June 2026
Patch / advisory
CVSS Score v4 7.5
Click a component to see what it means
Raw vectorCVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:H/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/SC:L/SI:L/SA:L/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:Y/R:I/V:C/RE:L/U:Green
EPSS Score 0.0076 52th percentile
Risk Priority 30 floored blend · peak EPSS

Summary

CVE-2026-39816 is a high-severity Missing Authorization (CWE-862) vulnerability in Apache Nifi. Its CVSS base score is 7.5 (High).

Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Exploitation for Privilege Escalation (T1068); ranked in the top 48% of CVEs by exploit likelihood; it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog.

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.

OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)

EU & UK References

Vulnerability Data

The optional extension component TinkerpopClientService is missing the Restricted annotation with the Execute Code Required Permission in Apache NiFi 2.0.0-M1 through 2.8.0. The TinkerpopClientService supports configuration of ByteCode Submission for the Script Submission Type, enabling Groovy Script execution in the…

more

service prior to submitting the query. The missing Restricted annotation allows users without the Execute Code Permission to configure the Service in installations that use fine-grained authorization and have the optional TinkerpopClientService installed. Apache NiFi installations that do not have the nifi-other-graph-services-nar installed are not subject to this vulnerability. Upgrading to Apache NiFi 2.9.0 is the recommended mitigation.

CWE(s)

Related Threats

MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques

T1068 Exploitation for Privilege Escalation Privilege Escalation
Adversaries may exploit software vulnerabilities in an attempt to elevate privileges.
T1190 Exploit Public-Facing Application Initial Access
Adversaries may attempt to exploit a weakness in an Internet-facing host or system to initially access a network.
T1210 Exploitation of Remote Services Lateral Movement
Adversaries may exploit remote services to gain unauthorized access to internal systems once inside of a network.
T1548 Abuse Elevation Control Mechanism Privilege Escalation
Adversaries may circumvent mechanisms designed to control privilege elevation to gain higher-level permissions.
T1556 Modify Authentication Process Defense Impairment
Adversaries may modify authentication mechanisms and processes to access user credentials or enable otherwise unwarranted access to accounts.
Derived from this CVE’s CWE(s) via the direct CWE→ATT&CK cross-walk.

CVEs Like This One

CVE-2024-56512Same product: Apache Nifi
CVE-2023-50944Same vendor: Apache
CVE-2023-51650Same vendor: Apache
CVE-2024-45461Same vendor: Apache
CVE-2024-27906Same vendor: Apache
CVE-2024-23944Same vendor: Apache
CVE-2023-26269Same vendor: Apache
CVE-2023-49620Same vendor: Apache
CVE-2022-23944Same vendor: Apache
CVE-2025-43838Shared CWE-862

Affected Assets

apache
nifi
2.0.0 — 2.9.0

Mitigating Controls

Control response

Prevent
Stop it (NIST 800-53)

Detect
Catch it (NIST detect / respond)

Harden
Shrink the surface (DISA STIG)
  • 5 hardening rules · 3 OS baselines
Validate
Prove the fix (OWASP ASVS)

Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI

AC-3 directly requires enforcement of authorization decisions on every access request, structurally eliminating missing authorization checks.

AC-24 mandates that access control decisions are applied to each request, preventing bypass of authorization logic.

AC-25 requires a tamperproof, always-invoked reference monitor that ensures authorization checks cannot be omitted.

AC-6 reduces the set of actions reachable without proper authorization, limiting blast radius of missing checks.

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 full match
prevents

Explicitly requires defining, enforcing, and reviewing authorizations and least privilege, directly preventing missing authorization checks.

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.

prevents

Requiring authentication and credentials before any access occurs eliminates the absence of authorization checks that would otherwise allow an unauthenticated actor to reach protected resources.

prevents

Requiring formal authorization of every access request before rights are granted ensures that checks for required permissions are performed, preventing missing authorization checks from being introduced.

prevents

Mandatory authorization checks and central records of granted rights ensure that every access attempt is preceded by an explicit decision rather than relying on missing checks.

mitigates

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.

finds

By requiring competent outsiders to verify that every function enforces the need-to-know principle, the control lowers the likelihood that missing authorization checks persist undetected.

prevents

Defining authorization responsibilities and reviewing risk-treatment progress throughout the project lifecycle catches missing authorization checks before the system is deployed.

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-248581 OL 8 must require users to provide a password for privilege escalation. prevents CWE-862
  • V-252656 The OL 8 operating system must not be configured to bypass password requirements for privilege escalation. prevents CWE-862
RHEL 7 (2 rules)
  • V-251704 The Red Hat Enterprise Linux operating system must not be configured to bypass password requirements for privilege escalation. prevents CWE-862
  • V-204429 The Red Hat Enterprise Linux operating system must be configured so that users must provide a password for privilege escalation. prevents CWE-862

References