CVE-2026-83548
SSRF in Sonicwall Sma8200V ≤ 12.4.3-03526
Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/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-2026-83548 is a critical-severity Confused Deputy (CWE-441) vulnerability in Sonicwall Sma8200V. Its CVSS base score is 10.0 (Critical).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Proxy (T1090); ranked in the top 9% of CVEs by exploit likelihood; CISA has added it to the Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog.
The strongest mitigations our analysis identified map to AC-16 (Security and Privacy Attributes) and AC-4 (Information Flow Enforcement) — see the control section below for these in your framework.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2026-69704
Vulnerability Data
A Pre-authentication SSRF vulnerability exists in the SMA1000 Appliance Work Place interface due to an unintended alternate access path. A remote unauthenticated attacker could potentially exploit this vulnerability to gain unauthorized access to sensitive functionality and perform unauthorized operations.
- CWE(s)
- KEV Date Added
- 02 September 2026
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
—
V3.2.1V3.5.1V3.5.3V3.5.8
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Associating and preserving security attributes such as original source identity prevents the loss of provenance that creates the confused deputy.
Information flow enforcement requires preserving and checking source attributes before forwarding requests outside the trust boundary.
Input validation directly stops untrusted URLs from being accepted and fetched without destination checks.
Access enforcement directly stops a component from acting on forwarded requests without verifying original source authorizations.
Boundary protection limits and inspects external forwarding, reducing the ability of an intermediary to act as an unintended proxy.
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.
Runtime monitoring of web applications and services can detect anomalous outbound requests indicative of SSRF.
Vulnerability identification processes can discover and record SSRF flaws in web applications.
Proper conveyance and verification of original identity assertions directly prevents loss of request source when forwarding.
Enforcing least-privilege authorizations on forwarded requests reduces confused-deputy abuse even if source identity is lost.
Network segmentation and egress controls can limit the damage from successful SSRF requests.
Secure development practices directly include input validation and destination allow-listing that prevent SSRF.
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.
Access-control rules can limit which upstream identities may cause the product to act on their behalf, reducing confused-deputy risk.
Proper identity management ensures the original requester identity is preserved and validated before the product forwards requests.
Explicit access-rights assignment can restrict the product’s ability to act as an unintended proxy for external actors.
Operational threat data describing SSRF campaigns can be used to tighten outbound-request allow-lists and detection rules before attackers exploit them.
Privileged-access controls limit the rights the product may exercise on behalf of upstream callers, mitigating confused-deputy abuse.
Network-security controls can enforce source validation and prevent the product from blindly proxying traffic to external actors.