Cyber Resilience

CVE-2026-55077

Access Control in Coder ≤ 2.29.17

Published
07 July 2026
Modified
09 July 2026
Patch / advisory
CVSS Score v3.1 7.2
Click a component to see what it means
Raw vectorCVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
EPSS Score 0.0034 26th percentile
Risk Priority 55 floored blend · peak EPSS

Summary

CVE-2026-55077 is a high-severity Improper Authorization (CWE-285) vulnerability in Coder Coder. Its CVSS base score is 7.2 (High).

Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Account Manipulation (T1098); ranked at the 26th 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 AC-3 (Access Enforcement) and AC-6 (Least Privilege) — see the control section below for these in your framework.

OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)

EU & UK References

Vulnerability Data

Coder allows organizations to provision remote development environments via Terraform. Prior to versions 2.29.7, 2.32.7, 2.33.8, and 2.34.2, the `PUT /api/v2/users/{user}/password` endpoint authorized only `ActionUpdatePersonal` and did not prevent a `user-admin` from resetting an `owner` account's password. It also did…

more

not require the current password when an admin reset another user's password. Exploitation requires the privileged `user-admin` role so practical risk is limited to deployments that grant `user-admin` to less trusted operators. The fix in versions 2.29.7, 2.32.7, 2.33.8, and 2.34.2 prevents non-owner users from resetting the password of an account that holds the `owner` role. As a workaround, restrict the `user-admin` role to trusted administrators.

CWE(s)

Related Threats

MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise TechniquesAI

T1098 Account Manipulation Persistence
Adversaries may manipulate accounts to maintain and/or elevate access to victim systems.
T1078.002 Domain Accounts Stealth
Adversaries may obtain and abuse credentials of a domain account as a means of gaining Initial Access, Persistence, Privilege Escalation, or Defense Evasion.
Why these techniques?

The vulnerability allows a user-admin to reset an owner's password without the current password, directly enabling account manipulation (T1098) and use of valid domain/owner accounts (T1078.002) for privilege escalation or persistence.

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

CVEs Like This One

CVE-2026-55428Same product: Coder Coder
CVE-2026-46354Same product: Coder Coder
CVE-2026-55427Same product: Coder Coder
CVE-2024-27918Same product: Coder Coder
CVE-2026-55437Same product: Coder Coder
CVE-2026-55432Same product: Coder Coder
CVE-2026-55078Same product: Coder Coder
CVE-2026-55075Same product: Coder Coder
CVE-2026-55079Same product: Coder Coder
CVE-2025-66411Same product: Coder Coder

Affected Assets

coder
coder
≤ 2.29.17 · 2.30.0 — 2.32.7 · 2.33.0 — 2.33.8

Mitigating Controls

Control response

Prevent
Stop it (NIST 800-53)
  • AC-3 Access Enforcement
  • AC-6 Least Privilege
  • AC-2 Account Management
Detect
Catch it (NIST detect / respond)

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

Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI

prevent

Enforces authorization checks so that only the owner role (or explicitly authorized subjects) can change an owner account password via the PUT /api/v2/users/{user}/password endpoint.

prevent

Limits the user-admin role to the minimum privileges required, preventing assignment of the role to less-trusted operators who could otherwise reset owner passwords.

prevent

Manages privileged account creation/modification so that only trusted administrators receive the user-admin role, reducing the attack surface for owner-password resets.

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 mostly match
prevents

PR.AA-05 mostly prevents CWE-285 via enforced policy, reviews, and least-privilege authorization decisions, yet CWE-285 remains only partially prevented because code-level check omissions or errors can still occur outside that single control.

PR.PS-06 mostly match
prevents

Secure SDLC practices catch and eliminate most authorization defects before release, yet a single broad outcome cannot address every design, role, and runtime facet of CWE-285.

PR.AA-01 partial match
prevents

PR.AA-01 supplies managed identities and access-request workflows that can support downstream authorization decisions, yet does nothing to enforce or verify authorization checks inside a product, leaving CWE-285 fully unaddressed by this control alone.

PR.IR-01 partial match
prevents

Network segmentation/zero-trust limits external reachability (partial prevention of exploitation) but leaves application-level authorization logic untouched, so the CWE remains fully introducible and only one facet of its risk is addressed.

PR.PS-05 none match
prevents

PR.PS-05 blocks unauthorized binaries/DNS while CWE-285 is an in-product authorization-check defect, so the control neither prevents the weakness nor removes any of its risk.

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

Granular, policy-driven assignment of permissions and dynamic enforcement of those permissions prevent the incorrect or missing authorization decisions that lead to improper authorization flaws.

prevents

By requiring documented authorization rules and periodic policy reviews, the control makes it less likely that authorization decisions will be omitted or implemented inconsistently across applications.

prevents

Mapping access rights to information classification and business requirements forces correct enforcement of authorization decisions, blocking the incorrect authorization weakness at the policy and implementation stage.

detects

Independent reviewers evaluate whether authorization logic matches policy, thereby reducing the window in which incorrect or missing authorization checks remain in production.

detects

By requiring managers to verify that authorization decisions match policy and to remediate deviations, the control limits the persistence of incorrect or missing authorization checks.

prevents

Requiring authorization processes and privilege assignments to be specified during project initiation prevents downstream components from receiving overly broad or incorrect rights that would allow unauthorized actions.

References