Cyber Resilience

CVE-2026-46919

Critical

Published: 17 June 2026

Published
17 June 2026
Modified
18 June 2026
KEV Added
Patch
CVSS Score v3.1 9.8 CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
EPSS Score 0.0036 28.2th percentile
Risk Priority 70 floored blend · peak EPSS

Summary

CVE-2026-46919 is a critical-severity Improper Access Control (CWE-284) vulnerability in Oracle Siebel Cloud Manager. Its CVSS base score is 9.8 (Critical).

Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Exploit Public-Facing Application (T1190); ranked at the 28.2th percentile by exploit likelihood (below the median); it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog.

OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)

EU & UK References

Vulnerability details

Vulnerability in the Siebel CRM Cloud Applications product of Oracle Siebel CRM (component: Siebel Cloud Manager). Supported versions that are affected are 17.0-26.5. Easily exploitable vulnerability allows unauthenticated attacker with network access via HTTP to compromise Siebel CRM Cloud Applications.…

more

Successful attacks of this vulnerability can result in takeover of Siebel CRM Cloud Applications. CVSS 3.1 Base Score 9.8 (Confidentiality, Integrity and Availability impacts). CVSS Vector: (CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H).

CWE(s)

Related Threats

MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise TechniquesAI

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.
Why these techniques?

Unauthenticated remote HTTP access enabling full application takeover on public-facing Siebel CRM directly matches T1190.

Confidence: HIGH · MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise v19.0

Affected Assets

oracle
siebel cloud manager
17.0 — 26.5

Mitigating Controls

Likely Mitigating Controls AI

Per-CVE control mapping for this CVE has not run yet; the list below is derived from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry.

Provides capability to review session content, directly detecting violations of access control.

Control assessments verify that access controls are implemented correctly and operating as intended, detecting improper access control before exploitation.

Identity providers centralize and enforce authentication mechanisms, reducing improper authentication.

Approving and monitoring nonlocal maintenance per policy enforces access control over remote diagnostic activities.

Architectures explicitly define requirements and mechanisms for access control to protect confidentiality, integrity, and availability.

The policy establishes consistent rules for granting, reviewing, and revoking access based on personnel status, tangibly limiting improper access control.

Risk assessment explicitly identifies threats from unauthorized access and drives decisions to implement or strengthen access control mechanisms.

Explicit training on access control mechanisms and their operation makes improper access control harder to introduce via misconfiguration.

References