Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:NSummary
CVE-2026-60152 is a medium-severity Improper Authorization (CWE-285) vulnerability in Oracle Peoplesoft Enterprise Peopletools. Its CVSS base score is 5.4 (Medium).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Exploit Public-Facing Application (T1190); ranked at the 14th 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
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2026-46558
Vulnerability Data
Vulnerability in the PeopleSoft Enterprise PeopleTools product of Oracle PeopleSoft (component: Panel Processor). Supported versions that are affected are 8.61 and 8.62. Easily exploitable vulnerability allows unauthenticated attacker with network access via HTTP to compromise PeopleSoft Enterprise PeopleTools. Successful attacks…
more
require human interaction from a person other than the attacker. Successful attacks of this vulnerability can result in unauthorized update, insert or delete access to some of PeopleSoft Enterprise PeopleTools accessible data as well as unauthorized read access to a subset of PeopleSoft Enterprise PeopleTools accessible data. CVSS 3.1 Base Score 5.4 (Confidentiality and Integrity impacts). CVSS Vector: (CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:N).
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise TechniquesAI
Why these techniques?
Vulnerability in public-facing PeopleSoft web app (HTTP, unauthenticated) directly enables exploitation for unauthorized data access/modification per CWE-285.
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
- 6 hardening rules · 3 OS baselines
—
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.
Documented procedures facilitate correct implementation and ongoing management of authorization decisions.
Periodic reviews identify and correct flaws in authorization decisions or enforcement.
The control's documentation requirement reduces improper authorization by ensuring only mission-justified actions bypass authentication.
Establishing permitted attributes and values, plus auditing changes, ensures authorization decisions are based on correctly managed policy data.
Explicitly mandates authorizing remote access types before permitting connections, directly mitigating improper authorization.
The control explicitly requires authorization of each wireless access type prior to permitting connections.
Mandating explicit authorization of mobile device connections reduces the risk of improper authorization decisions for system access.
Specifying access authorizations for each account and requiring approvals for account requests enforces proper authorization decisions.
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 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.
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 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.
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 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.
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.
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.
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.
Independent reviewers evaluate whether authorization logic matches policy, thereby reducing the window in which incorrect or missing authorization checks remain in production.
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.
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.