Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:HSummary
CVE-2026-46894 is a high-severity CSRF (CWE-352) vulnerability in Oracle Isupplier Portal. Its CVSS base score is 8.0 (High).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Valid Accounts (T1078); ranked at the 6th 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 IA-12 (Identity Proofing) and IA-5 (Authenticator Management) — see the control section below for these in your framework.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2026-37386
Vulnerability Data
Vulnerability in the Oracle iSupplier Portal product of Oracle E-Business Suite (component: Home Page). Supported versions that are affected are 12.2.3-12.2.15. Easily exploitable vulnerability allows low privileged attacker with network access via HTTPS to compromise Oracle iSupplier Portal. Successful attacks…
more
require human interaction from a person other than the attacker. Successful attacks of this vulnerability can result in takeover of Oracle iSupplier Portal. CVSS 3.1 Base Score 8.0 (Confidentiality, Integrity and Availability impacts). CVSS Vector: (CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H).
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
—
V3.3.2V3.5.1V10.2.1V3.7.2
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Identity proofing at appropriate assurance levels ensures forgotten-password recovery cannot succeed without strong verification of the user.
Authenticator management requires secure distribution, reset, and verification procedures that directly address weak password recovery flows.
Input validation directly checks and rejects untrusted redirect targets before they are used in a response.
Access enforcement requires verifying that state-changing requests originate from the authenticated user rather than a forged cross-site source.
Information flow enforcement can restrict redirects to only approved/trusted destinations, stopping untrusted user-supplied URLs from being followed.
Protecting session authenticity prevents attackers from replaying or forging authenticated requests via the victim's browser.
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.
Credential lifecycle management directly includes password reset/recovery flows.
Identity proofing is the core control that prevents weak or bypassed recovery mechanisms.
Secure SDLC practices directly require anti-CSRF controls such as tokens or SameSite attributes.
Authentication policy covers strength/MFA but does not address recovery path 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.
Strong authentication-information lifecycle rules directly address weak password-recovery flows.
By denying access to phishing or malicious sites, the control lowers the likelihood that a user will be tricked into submitting a forged request that performs an unintended action on another site.
Secure-SDLC practices can embed strong recovery design, yet the control is broader than this single weakness.
Application-security requirements can mandate secure recovery flows, but the control covers many other requirements.
Secure-coding standards can prevent weak recovery implementations, yet the control is wider in scope.
Secure-authentication requirements include robust forgotten-password procedures.