CVE-2026-42363
Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:H/I:N/A:HSummary
CVE-2026-42363 is a critical-severity Reliance on Security Through Obscurity (CWE-656) vulnerability in Com (inferred from references). Its CVSS base score is 9.3 (Critical).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique System Information Discovery (T1082); ranked at the 8th 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 SA-8 (Security and Privacy Engineering Principles) and SC-13 (Cryptographic Protection) — 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-2026-42363 is an insufficient encryption vulnerability in the Device Authentication functionality of GeoVision GV-IP Device Utility version 9.0.5. The issue arises because the utility broadcasts privileged commands over UDP, including the username and password encrypted with a Blowfish-derived cryptographic protocol. However, the symmetric key used for encryption is also transmitted in the same packet, rendering the protection reliant solely on the obscurity of the scheme and allowing decryption by anyone capturing the traffic.
An attacker on the same local area network (LAN) can exploit this by passively listening to broadcast packets sent when an administrator uses the utility to interact with Geovision devices. This requires no privileges from the attacker but depends on user interaction from an admin triggering the broadcast. Successful capture and decryption of the credentials grants full control over the affected device, enabling actions such as changing its IP address or resetting it to factory defaults. The vulnerability has a CVSS v3.1 base score of 9.3 (AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:H/I:N/A:H) and is associated with CWE-656 (Reliance on Security Through Obscurity).
Mitigation guidance and further details are available in advisories from Talos Intelligence at https://talosintelligence.com/vulnerability_reports/ and GeoVision at https://www.geovision.com.tw/cyber_security.php.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2026-25743
Vulnerability Data
An insufficient encryption vulnerability exists in the Device Authentication functionality of GeoVision GV-IP Device Utility 9.0.5. Listening to broadcast packets can lead to credentials leak. An attacker can listen to broadcast messages to trigger this vulnerability. When interacting with various…
more
Geovision devices on the network, the utility may send privileged commands; in order to do so, the username and password of the device need to be provided. In some instances the command is broadcasted over UDP and the username/password are encrypted using a cryptographic protocol that appears to be derivated from Blowfish. However the symmetric key used for the encryption is also included in the packet, and thus the security of the username/password only relies on the "obscurity" of the encryption scheme. An attacker on the same LAN can listen to the broadcast traffic once an admin user interacts with the device, and decrypt the credentials using their own implementation of the algorithm. With this password the attacker would have full control over the device configuration, allowing them to change its ip address or even reset it to factory default.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
—
V6.3.4
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Requires selection and implementation of approved cryptographic methods whose strength does not rest on secrecy of design.
Security and privacy engineering principles explicitly prohibit reliance on obscurity and require documented, verifiable protection mechanisms.
Requires cryptographic or equivalent protection of information at rest, eliminating dependence on obscurity for confidentiality.
Mandates actual cryptographic or equivalent protection of transmitted data rather than depending on hidden algorithms or keys.
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 explicitly reject obscurity-based designs in favor of proven controls.
Risk-management policy can mandate avoidance of obscurity but does not itself implement technical alternatives.
Risk analysis surfaces obscurity as a weakness yet does not prevent its introduction.
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.
Mandates use of cryptography whose strength is independent of secrecy of design or keys.
Requires secure architecture and engineering principles that reject reliance on obscurity.
Requires authentication mechanisms whose strength does not depend on secrecy of implementation.
Secure-coding rules prohibit hidden or undocumented security mechanisms.
Security testing can expose mechanisms whose only protection is obscurity.