Security Resilience

CVE-2026-60492

Oracle Jd Edwards Enterpriseone Hcm Foundation 9.2

Published
21 July 2026
Modified
06 August 2026
Patch / advisory
CVSS Score v3.1 7.1
Click a component to see what it means
Raw vectorCVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:H
EPSS Score 0.0034 26th percentile
Risk Priority 53 floored blend · peak EPSS

CVSS and EPSS are reproduced from their sources (NVD, FIRST EPSS). Risk Priority is our own derived reading, not an NVD score.

Summary

CVE-2026-60492 is a high-severity Improper Privilege Management (CWE-269) vulnerability in Oracle Jd Edwards Enterpriseone Hcm Foundation. Its CVSS base score is 7.1 (High).

Operationally, 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-2 (Account Management) and AC-24 (Access Control Decisions) — see the control section below for these in your framework.

OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)

EU & UK References

Vulnerability Data

Vulnerability in the JD Edwards EnterpriseOne HCM Foundation product of Oracle JD Edwards (component: OW HR PR Foundation). The supported version that is affected is 9.2. Easily exploitable vulnerability allows low privileged attacker with network access via HTTP to compromise…

more

JD Edwards EnterpriseOne HCM Foundation. Successful attacks of this vulnerability can result in unauthorized ability to cause a hang or frequently repeatable crash (complete DOS) of JD Edwards EnterpriseOne HCM Foundation and unauthorized read access to a subset of JD Edwards EnterpriseOne HCM Foundation accessible data. CVSS 3.1 Base Score 7.1 (Confidentiality and Availability impacts). CVSS Vector: (CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:H).

CWE(s)

Related Threats

CVEs Like This One

CVE-2026-60619Same product: Oracle Jd Edwards Enterpriseone Hcm Foundation
CVE-2026-61061Same vendor: Oracle
CVE-2026-46873Same vendor: Oracle
CVE-2026-46837Same vendor: Oracle
CVE-2025-53025Same vendor: Oracle
CVE-2026-60406Same vendor: Oracle
CVE-2026-61336Same vendor: Oracle
CVE-2026-87273Same vendor: Oracle
CVE-2026-61091Same vendor: Oracle
CVE-2026-87204Same vendor: Oracle

Affected Assets

oracle
jd edwards enterpriseone hcm foundation
9.2

Mitigating Controls

Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI

Account management directly governs assignment and tracking of privileges so proper implementation stops the weakness from being introduced.

Requiring explicit access-control decisions ensures privileges are evaluated rather than assumed or omitted.

Access enforcement applies the correct privilege checks at every request, structurally preventing unintended spheres of control.

Separation of duties constrains how privileges may be assigned, reducing the chance of overly broad actor control.

Least privilege is the direct countermeasure to improper privilege management; implementing it eliminates the root cause.

Binding security attributes to subjects/objects supplies the mechanism needed to track and enforce privileges correctly.

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.

blocks

A.5.15 directly mandates determining access requirements, defining/enforcing topic-specific access control policy, assigning rights/restrictions by entity/role, consistency with classification, need-to-know, privileged access restrictions, segregation, formal authorization, and dynamic rules — which stops most improper privilege management from being exploitable; bounded remainder is flawed implementation of those rules (e.g. incorrect mapping or enforcement bugs).

blocks

A.5.18 directly governs the provisioning, review, modification and timely revocation of access rights (including for role changes, termination and privilege levels), which stops most improper privilege spheres from being exploitable even if the assignment flaw exists; the bounded remainder is flaws in the underlying enforcement mechanism itself (e.g. AC-3/A.8.3)

blocks

A.8.2 directly controls the identification, allocation, review, expiry, temporary use, and separation of privileged rights per policy, which prevents most improper privilege management (CWE-269) by design; the bounded remainder is flawed tracking/checking logic inside the product's own enforcement code (the AC-3 slice of 269).

blocks

A.8.3 directly restricts access per policies (config mechanisms, per-user/group rights, isolation, dynamic techniques, auth/credential enforcement), which stops exploitation of most improper privilege management cases even if the assignment/tracking flaw remains; named remainder exists for non-access-control privilege errors (e.g. pure assignment bugs outside enforcement).

Hardening callouts derived

DISA STIG baselines are authored against specific weaknesses. Where this CVE cites a broad weakness class, the mapping is not asserted at that abstraction (owner ruling, 2026-09-25: grade only at Base and below), so no rule is shown here rather than a rule shown against the wrong grain.

References