VulnerabilityPublished 4 Mar 2026Updated 1 Apr 2026

CVE-2026-23811: Hewlett Packard Enterprise (HPE) HPE Aruba Networking Wireless Operating Systems (AOS-8 & AOS-10) · CWE-300

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

Compare

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 4.3 Medium.

Data as of 29 Oct 2026, 19:04 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

4.3Medium

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

EPSS: 0.1% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 4% 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:N/A:N

Attack Vector: Adjacent
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: None
User Interaction: None
Scope: Unchanged
Confidentiality: Low
Integrity: None
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: None: There is no loss of integrity within 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 29 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 Systems (AOS-8 & AOS-10)	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

Organizations should implement the following specific mitigations to reduce risk from CVE-2026-23811: 1) Immediately audit wireless network configurations to verify client isolation settings and monitor for unusual client-to-client traffic patterns that may indicate exploitation attempts. 2) Segment wireless networks with additional security controls such as VLANs and firewall rules to limit the impact of any client isolation bypass. 3) Employ network intrusion detection systems (NIDS) capable of detecting port-stealing and Man-in-the-Middle attack signatures within wireless segments. 4) Restrict wireless network access to trusted devices using strong authentication methods (e.g., WPA3-Enterprise with 802.1X) to reduce the likelihood of attacker presence on the network. 5) Monitor HPE security advisories closely and prepare to deploy patches or firmware updates as soon as they become available. 6) Consider temporary compensating controls such as disabling client-to-client communication at higher network layers or using VPN tunnels for sensitive wireless clients. 7) Conduct regular wireless network penetration testing to identify and remediate potential exploitation paths. These steps go beyond generic advice by focusing on layered defenses, active monitoring, and readiness for patch deployment.

Description

A vulnerability in the client isolation mechanism may allow an attacker to bypass Layer 2 (L2) communication restrictions between clients and redirect traffic at Layer 3 (L3). In addition to bypassing policy enforcement, successful exploitation - when combined with a port-stealing attack - may enable a bi-directional Machine-in-the-Middle (MitM) attack.

Impact

The primary impact of CVE-2026-23811 is the potential compromise of network confidentiality and policy enforcement within wireless environments using affected HPE Aruba AOS versions. By bypassing client isolation, attackers can communicate directly with other wireless clients, which is normally restricted to prevent lateral movement and unauthorized access. This can lead to unauthorized data interception or traffic manipulation at Layer 3, undermining network segmentation and security controls. When combined with port-stealing attacks, the vulnerability enables bi-directional Man-in-the-Middle attacks, increasing the risk of sensitive information disclosure and further network exploitation. For organizations, this could mean exposure of internal communications, credential theft, or facilitation of advanced persistent threats within the wireless network. Although the vulnerability does not affect system integrity or availability directly, the breach of confidentiality and policy circumvention can have significant operational and compliance consequences. Enterprises relying on Aruba wireless infrastructure for secure client segmentation are particularly at risk, especially in environments with sensitive data or regulatory requirements. The lack of known exploits in the wild reduces immediate risk but does not eliminate the threat, especially as attackers may develop exploits once patches are released.

CWE-300Channel Accessible by Non-Endpoint (opens in a new tab)
Class weaknessOWASP Top 10 A07:2025: Authentication Failures (opens in a new tab)
The product does not adequately verify the identity of actors at both ends of a communication channel, or does not adequately ensure the integrity of the channel, in a way that allows the channel to be accessed or influenced by an actor that is not an endpoint.
MITRE discourages mapping vulnerabilities to this broad entry; the root cause is usually a more specific weakness.
Implementation
In order to establish secure communication between two parties, it is often important to adequately verify the identity of entities at each end of the communication channel. Always fully authenticate both ends of any communications channel.
Architecture and Design
Adhere to the principle of complete mediation.
Implementation
A certificate binds an identity to a cryptographic key to authenticate a communicating party. Often, the certificate takes the encrypted form of the hash of the identity of the subject, the public key, and information such as time of issue or expiration using the issuer's private key.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Docker Security (opens in a new tab)
OWASP Authentication (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V1.14.1 (opens in a new tab)
V1.4.4 (opens in a new tab)
V1.4.5 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Leveraging Active Adversary in the Middle Attacks to Bypass Same Origin Policy (opens in a new tab)
Utilizing REST's Trust in the System Resource to Obtain Sensitive Data (opens in a new tab)
DNS Blocking (opens in a new tab)
IP Address Blocking (opens in a new tab)
WiFi MAC Address Tracking (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-300

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats