VulnerabilityPublished 4 Mar 2026Updated 1 Apr 2026

CVE-2026-23809: Hewlett Packard Enterprise (HPE) HPE Aruba Networking Wireless Operating System (AOS-10 & AOS-8) · Uncontrolled Resource Consumption

Affects Hewlett Packard Enterprise (HPE) HPE Aruba Networking Wireless Operating System (AOS-10 & AOS-8)Source CVE Database V5

Compare

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 5.4 Medium.

Data as of 30 Oct 2026, 11:52 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

5.4Medium

How severe the flaw is on the 0–10 CVSS scale.

EPSS: 0.2% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 17% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:N

Attack Vector: Adjacent
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: None
User Interaction: None
Scope: Unchanged
Confidentiality: Low
Integrity: Low
Availability: None

Bold values are the worst case: easiest to exploit or largest impact.

Attack Vector: Adjacent: The vulnerable component is bound to the network stack, but the attack is limited at the protocol level to a logically adjacent topology. This can mean an attack must be launched from the same shared physical (e.g., Bluetooth or IEEE 802.11) or logical (e.g., local IP subnet) network, or from within a secure or otherwise limited administrative domain (e.g., MPLS, secure VPN to an administrative network zone).
Attack Complexity: Low: Specialized access conditions or extenuating circumstances do not exist. An attacker can expect repeatable success against the vulnerable component.
Privileges Required: None: The attacker is unauthorized prior to attack, and therefore does not require any access to settings or files to carry out an attack.
User Interaction: None: The vulnerable system can be exploited without any interaction from any user.
Scope: Unchanged: An exploited vulnerability can only affect resources managed by the same security authority. In this case, the vulnerable component and the impacted component are either the same, or both are managed by the same security authority.
Confidentiality: Low: There is some loss of confidentiality. Access to some restricted information is obtained, but the attacker does not have control over what information is obtained, or the amount or kind of loss is limited. The information disclosure does not cause a direct, serious loss to the impacted component.
Integrity: Low: Modification of data is possible, but the attacker does not have control over the consequence of a modification, or the amount of modification is limited. The data modification does not have a direct, serious impact on the impacted component.
Availability: None: There is no impact to availability within the impacted component.

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v3.1 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 4 Mar 2026
Detectable: no evidence on record.
No public nuclei template indexed
Weaponized: no evidence on record.
No public exploit code indexed in Metasploit or Exploit-DB
Exploited in the wildExploited: no evidence on record.
Not in CISA KEV and no source reports exploitation
Observed by OffSeq MirageSeen by Mirage: no evidence on record.
No attack traffic recorded by OffSeq Mirage sensors

A missing step is not evidence of safety. Sources: cve.org (opens in a new tab), the Metasploit, Exploit-DB and nuclei-templates index as of 30 Oct 2026.

Disclosed: The CVE record is public on cve.org. Its publication is t = 0.
Detectable: A public nuclei template can find exposed instances, for defenders and attackers alike.
Weaponized: A Metasploit exploit module or Exploit-DB entry exists (Metasploit scanner modules do not count), or CISA SSVC or the CVSS exploit maturity reports a public proof of concept.
Exploited in the wild: CISA KEV lists it, CISA SSVC rates exploitation active, or a source reports attacks.
Observed by OffSeq Mirage: OffSeq Mirage honeypot sensors recorded attack traffic for this CVE, or found exposed hosts without attack traffic.

Moments are spaced evenly, not to scale; a dashed line marks a gap of six months or more. Deltas count from t = 0. Sources that give only a date (CISA KEV, Exploit-DB, or a time of exactly 00:00Z) read “same day” rather than hours. Metasploit modules carry the flaw’s disclosure date, not their release date, and nuclei templates carry no date, so both appear above but not on the timeline.

What to do

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
Hewlett Packard Enterprise (HPE)HPE Aruba Networking Wireless Operating System (AOS-10 & AOS-8)	Affected >=10.7.0.0 <=10.7.2.2 >=10.4.0.0 <=10.4.1.10 >=8.13.0.0 <=8.13.1.1 >=8.12.0.0 <=8.12.0.6 >=8.10.0.0 <=8.10.0.21 =10.8.0.0	Fixed in–

AI-suggested

Monitor Hewlett Packard Enterprise advisories closely and apply patches or firmware updates promptly once available to address CVE-2026-23809.
Until patches are released, implement strict network access controls to limit wireless network access to trusted devices and users only.
Segment wireless networks carefully, avoiding unnecessary use of multiple BSSIDs where possible, or enforce additional isolation mechanisms at higher network layers (e.g., VLANs, firewall rules).
Deploy wireless intrusion detection and prevention systems (WIDS/WIPS) to detect anomalous traffic patterns indicative of port stealing or traffic redirection attempts.
Use strong encryption protocols (WPA3 or WPA2-Enterprise) and robust authentication methods to reduce unauthorized network access.
Regularly audit wireless network configurations to ensure inter-BSSID isolation is properly enforced and verify no misconfigurations exist.
Educate network administrators about this vulnerability and encourage proactive monitoring of network traffic for signs of interception or session hijacking.
Consider implementing network segmentation and zero trust principles beyond wireless segmentation to limit lateral movement in case of compromise.
Employ endpoint security controls to detect unusual network behavior on client devices connected to the wireless network.

Description

A technique has been identified that adapts a known port-stealing method to Wi-Fi environments that use multiple BSSIDs. By leveraging the relationship between BSSIDs and their associated virtual ports, an attacker could potentially bypass inter-BSSID isolation controls. Successful exploitation may enable an attacker to redirect and intercept the victim's network traffic, potentially resulting in eavesdropping, session hijacking, or denial of service.

Impact

The primary impact of CVE-2026-23809 is the potential compromise of confidentiality and integrity of network traffic within affected wireless environments. Organizations using HPE Aruba AOS with multiple BSSID configurations may face risks of sensitive data interception, including credentials, proprietary information, or session tokens. Session hijacking could lead to unauthorized access to internal systems or services. Denial of service conditions could disrupt business operations reliant on wireless connectivity. Since the vulnerability allows bypassing of inter-BSSID isolation, it undermines network segmentation strategies, increasing the attack surface. The medium CVSS score suggests moderate risk; however, the impact could be significant in high-security environments such as government, finance, healthcare, and critical infrastructure sectors. The absence of required authentication or user interaction means attackers with network access can exploit this vulnerability relatively easily, especially in open or poorly secured wireless networks. The lack of known exploits currently limits immediate widespread impact, but the potential for future exploitation remains. Organizations globally that rely on HPE Aruba wireless solutions for enterprise Wi-Fi connectivity are at risk, particularly those with complex multi-BSSID deployments.

CWE-400Uncontrolled Resource Consumption (opens in a new tab)
Class weaknessLikelihood of exploit: High
The product does not properly control the allocation and maintenance of a limited resource.
MITRE discourages mapping vulnerabilities to this broad entry; the root cause is usually a more specific weakness.
Architecture and Design
Design throttling mechanisms into the system architecture. The best protection is to limit the amount of resources that an unauthorized user can cause to be expended. A strong authentication and access control model will help prevent such attacks from occurring in the first place.
Architecture and Design
Mitigation of resource exhaustion attacks requires that the target system either: recognizes the attack and denies that user further access for a given amount of time, or; uniformly throttles all requests in order to make it more difficult to consume resources more quickly than they can again be freed.
Architecture and Design
Ensure that protocols have specific limits of scale placed on them.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
File Upload (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V12.1.1 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
XML Ping of the Death (opens in a new tab)
Regular Expression Exponential Blowup (opens in a new tab)
Sustained Client Engagement (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).

References

support.hpe.com/hpesc/public/docDisplay?docId=hpesbnw05026en_us&docLocale=en_US (opens in a new tab)

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 2 Apr 2026, 11:40 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-400

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats