CVE-2026-60705
Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:L/A:LSummary
CVE-2026-60705 is a high-severity Exposure of Sensitive Information to an Unauthorized Actor (CWE-200) vulnerability. Its CVSS base score is 7.0 (High).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Exploit Public-Facing Application (T1190); ranked at the 20th 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 IA-2 (Identification and Authentication (Organizational Users)) — see the control section below for these in your framework.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2026-47055
Vulnerability Data
Vulnerability in the Siebel CRM Cloud Applications product of Oracle Siebel CRM (component: Siebel Cloud Manager). Supported versions that are affected are 22.3-26.5. Difficult to exploit vulnerability allows unauthenticated attacker with network access via HTTP to compromise Siebel CRM Cloud…
more
Applications. Successful attacks of this vulnerability can result in unauthorized access to critical data or complete access to all Siebel CRM Cloud Applications accessible data as well as unauthorized update, insert or delete access to some of Siebel CRM Cloud Applications accessible data and unauthorized ability to cause a partial denial of service (partial DOS) of Siebel CRM Cloud Applications. CVSS 3.1 Base Score 7.0 (Confidentiality, Integrity and Availability impacts). CVSS Vector: (CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:L/A:L).
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise TechniquesAI
Why these techniques?
Direct remote exploitation of a public-facing Siebel CRM Cloud application over HTTP by an unauthenticated attacker, matching T1190.
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
- 21 hardening rules · 10 OS baselines
V10.4.9V11.7.1V14.1.2V14.2.4
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Directly enforces authentication and authorization checks on HTTP requests to Siebel Cloud Manager, blocking the unauthenticated access path described in CWE-284 and CWE-306.
Requires identification and authentication of all network users before granting access to critical Siebel CRM functions, eliminating the missing-authentication weakness (CWE-306).
Boundary protection mechanisms can restrict or mediate unauthenticated HTTP traffic to the Cloud Manager component, limiting the attack surface that leads to data exposure and partial DoS.
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.
Directly requires authentication of users/services/hardware, which eliminates missing authentication for critical functions.
PR.AA-05 directly enforces least-privilege authorization that blocks most unauthorized disclosures, yet CWE-200 also arises from logging, error messages, and side-channel paths that access controls alone do not address.
PR.DS-10 mostly prevents CWE-200 by directly eliminating unauthorized access to sensitive data-in-use, yet only partially addresses the weakness because CWE-200 spans many other exposure vectors outside runtime protection.
PR.IR-01's segmentation/zero-trust controls largely eliminate network-level unauthorized access paths that enable exposure, yet CWE-200 spans many additional vectors (API responses, logs, app logic) that network controls alone cannot close.
Hardened baselines and deviation monitoring directly eliminate most configuration-induced access-control defects, yet CWE-284 also encompasses code-level and design flaws outside the scope of configuration management alone.
Secure SDLC practices catch most exposure flaws via design, testing and release controls, yet CWE-200 spans runtime/config issues a single development outcome cannot fully close.
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.
Defining and enforcing explicit access rights and restrictions for each entity directly stops the assignment of permissions that exceed what is required, eliminating the root condition that allows improper access control.
Formal authorization, role-based provisioning, and timely revocation of access rights directly stop the creation of accounts or permissions that exceed what the business actually needs.
Restricting anonymous or unknown access and encrypting high-value information limits the exposure of sensitive data that would otherwise be obtainable by unauthorized actors.
Suppressing system details, error specifics, and previous log-on information until successful authentication reduces the information an unauthenticated attacker can gather.
By requiring owners to assign sensitivity labels and corresponding handling rules, the control ensures that information is not left unmarked and therefore reduces the chance that sensitive data will be exposed to unauthorized actors.
Requiring encryption, access controls, and recipient authentication for transfers directly reduces the chance that sensitive data reaches an unauthorized observer.