CVE-2026-81515
Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:HCVSS and EPSS are reproduced from their sources (NVD, FIRST EPSS). Risk Priority is our own derived reading, not an NVD score.
Summary
CVE-2026-81515 is a high-severity Improper Handling of Exceptional Conditions (CWE-755) vulnerability. Its CVSS base score is 7.5 (High).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Exploitation for Client Execution (T1203); ranked at the 27th 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-2026-81901
Vulnerability Data
Steeltoe is an open source project that provides a collection of libraries that helps users build cloud-native applications. From 4.0.0 until 4.3.0, EurekaDiscoveryClient deserializes the registry response as one unit, and an unrecognized actionType or status, a non-Boolean isCoordinatingDiscoveryServer, or…
more
a nonnumeric timestamp can abort the entire response. A principal that can register or update an instance can cause all connected Steeltoe clients to receive an empty or stale instance list until the malformed registration is removed. The JsonInstanceInfoConverter, BoolStringJsonConverter, and LongStringJsonConverter parsing paths are affected. This issue is distinct from the earlier DataCenterInfo.name parsing vulnerability. This issue is fixed in version 4.3.0.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
- 1 hardening rule · 1 OS baseline
—
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 defined handling (alert and additional actions) for the exceptional condition of audit logging failure.
Supplies a concrete handling action (safe mode) for exceptional conditions, mitigating risks from improper or absent handling that could allow continued attacks.
By preparing users for contingency scenarios, the control promotes proper handling of exceptional conditions instead of default or unsafe behaviors.
An updated contingency plan defines current actions for exceptional conditions, reducing the window for attackers to exploit improper handling leading to system failure.
Procedures ensure proper handling of exceptional conditions to support effective incident response.
Incident response testing confirms proper handling of exceptional conditions to limit exploit impact.
Gives users guidance on incident handling, reducing improper handling of exceptional conditions that could stem from exploited weaknesses.
Enforces structured response to exceptional conditions so the system cannot remain in an unsafe state.
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.
Secure SDLC practices explicitly require proper exception and error handling during design and coding.
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.
Documented operating procedures may specify exception handling but do not guarantee implementation.
Logging captures unhandled exceptions, aiding detection but not preventing the weakness.
Monitoring can surface unhandled exceptions but does not enforce proper handling.
Secure SDLC mandates exception-handling requirements and testing that directly prevent improper handling of exceptional conditions.
Application security requirements explicitly include handling of error and exceptional conditions.
Secure architecture and engineering principles require robust exception and error management.