CVE-2026-84474
Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/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-2026-84474 is a critical-severity Reliance on Untrusted Inputs in a Security Decision (CWE-807) vulnerability. Its CVSS base score is 9.9 (Critical).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Exploit Public-Facing Application (T1190); ranked in the top 45% of CVEs by exploit likelihood; it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog.
The strongest mitigations our analysis identified map to AC-24 (Access Control Decisions) and AC-3 (Access Enforcement) — see the control section below for these in your framework.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2026-85555
Vulnerability Data
A flaw was found in Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform's automation- controller. The provisioning-callback secret (host_config_key) is exposed to users holding only the read-level view_jobtemplate permission -- both in the job template API representation and in the activity stream --…
more
and the provisioning callback endpoint trusts a client-supplied X-Forwarded-For header to determine the calling host when the controller is deployed behind the AAP gateway with an empty proxy allow-list. By reading the secret and spoofing X-Forwarded-For to match any host in the job template's inventory, a minimally privileged or unauthenticated remote attacker can launch the job template against arbitrary managed hosts using the job template's credentials, resulting in privilege escalation and remote code execution on managed hosts.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
- 1 hardening rule · 1 OS baseline
—
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Explicitly requires that every access decision be based on authoritative, protected decision data rather than caller-supplied inputs.
Access enforcement requires decisions to be made from trusted policy data rather than modifiable client-supplied inputs.
Information-flow enforcement applies rules to validated, internal attributes instead of untrusted external values.
Input validation can reject malformed or attacker-controlled values before they reach a security decision point.
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.
Proper management of identities/credentials reduces the chance that security decisions will be driven by untrusted inputs.
Strong authentication mechanisms directly prevent security decisions from depending on modifiable, untrusted inputs.
Verification and protection of identity assertions stops reliance on attacker-controlled values for authorization decisions.
Policy-driven, least-privilege authorization reduces opportunities to bypass controls via tampered inputs.
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.
Monitoring can detect exploitation but does not stop the underlying weakness.
Application security requirements explicitly call for validation of inputs used in security decisions.
Secure architecture principles mandate treating all external inputs as untrusted.
Secure coding standards directly prohibit using untrusted inputs for security-critical decisions.
Security testing in development catches input-validation flaws before deployment.
Access-control rules can be bypassed if they rely on untrusted inputs.