Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:HSummary
CVE-2026-45702 is a medium-severity Type Confusion (CWE-843) vulnerability in Trustedfirmware Op-Tee. Its CVSS base score is 4.4 (Medium).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Exploitation for Privilege Escalation (T1068); ranked at the 5th 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 SA-11 (Developer Testing and Evaluation) and SA-8 (Security and Privacy Engineering Principles) — see the control section below for these in your framework.
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2026-34160
Vulnerability Data
OP-TEE is a Trusted Execution Environment (TEE) designed as companion to a non-secure Linux kernel running on Arm; Cortex-A cores using the TrustZone technology. Starting in version 4.3.0 and prior to version 4.11.0, a type confusion vulnerability exists in OP-TEE…
more
OS when processing an FFA_MEM_SHARE request from the normal world. This only applies when OP-TEE is configured as an SPMC for S-EL0 SPs, that is, with `CFG_CORE_SEL1_SPMC=y` and `CFG_SECURE_PARTITION=y`. Version 4.11.0 fixes the issue.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
—
V1.5.2V3.2.3V15.3.5
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Developer testing and evaluation (including fuzzing and type-aware analysis) directly finds type-confusion flaws before deployment.
Engineering principles can require use of type-safe languages, static typing, and runtime type checks that structurally avoid allocating one type and accessing another.
Memory-protection controls limit the blast radius when a type-confusion access occurs but do not stop the flaw itself.
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 directly prevent type-confusion flaws via safe typing, static analysis, and code review while the control itself addresses many additional weaknesses.
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.
Security testing in development can detect type-confusion vulnerabilities through fuzzing and static analysis.
Secure SDLC mandates type-safe design and review that can catch type-confusion flaws.
Application security requirements can specify strong typing and interface contracts that reduce type confusion.
Secure architecture principles promote type-safe languages and memory-safety mechanisms that mitigate type confusion.
Secure coding standards directly forbid unsafe type casts and require static-analysis checks for type confusion.