VulnerabilityPublished 17 Jun 2026

CVE-2026-50201: SteeltoeOSS Steeltoe.Management.Endpoint · Improper Privilege Management

Affects SteeltoeOSS Steeltoe.Management.EndpointSource CVE Database V5

Compare

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 6.5 Medium : upgrade to 4.2.0 when convenient.

Data as of 30 Oct 2026, 20:25 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

6.5Medium

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

EPSS: 0.2% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 13% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.
Patch: Available – fixed in 4.2.0, 3.4.0

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

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

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

Attack Vector: Network: The vulnerable component is bound to the network stack and the set of possible attackers extends beyond the other options listed, up to and including the entire Internet. Such a vulnerability is often termed 'remotely exploitable' and can be thought of as an attack being exploitable at the protocol level one or more network hops away (e.g., across one or more routers).
Attack Complexity: Low: Specialized access conditions or extenuating circumstances do not exist. An attacker can expect repeatable success against the vulnerable component.
Privileges Required: Low: The attacker is authorized with (i.e., requires) privileges that provide basic user capabilities that could normally affect only settings and files owned by a user. Alternatively, an attacker with Low privileges may have the ability to cause an impact only to non-sensitive resources.
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: High: There is total loss of confidentiality, resulting in all resources within the impacted component being divulged to the attacker. Alternatively, access to only some restricted information is obtained, but the disclosed information presents a direct, serious impact.
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 17 Jun 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

Upgrade Steeltoe.Management.Endpoint and SteeltoeOSS/steeltoe.management.endpoint to 4.2.0; Steeltoe.Management.EndpointBase and SteeltoeOSS/steeltoe.management.endpointcore to 3.4.0.

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
SteeltoeOSSSteeltoe.Management.Endpoint	Affected <4.2.0	Fixed in 4.2.0
SteeltoeOSSSteeltoe.Management.EndpointBase	Affected <3.4.0	Fixed in 3.4.0
NuGetSteeltoeOSS/steeltoe.management.endpoint`pkg:nuget/SteeltoeOSS/steeltoe.management.endpoint`Other threats	Affected <4.2.0	Fixed in 4.2.0
NuGetSteeltoeOSS/steeltoe.management.endpointcore`pkg:nuget/SteeltoeOSS/steeltoe.management.endpointcore`Other threats	Affected <3.4.0	Fixed in 3.4.0

Check your own hosts for these packages with threat-finder (opens in a new tab), our free open-source scanner.

AI-suggested

A fix is available by upgrading to Steeltoe.Management.Endpoint version 4.2.0 or later and Steeltoe.Management.EndpointCore version 3.4.0 or later. If immediate upgrade is not possible, explicitly set 'RequiredPermissions = EndpointPermissions.Full' in the options for HeapDumpEndpointOptions, EnvironmentEndpointOptions, and ThreadDumpEndpointOptions. Additionally, consider registering only the required actuators individually instead of using 'AddAllActuators()' to avoid exposing sensitive endpoints unnecessarily.

Description

CVE-2026-50201 is a privilege management vulnerability in Steeltoe.Management.Endpoint prior to version 4.2.0 and Steeltoe.Management.EndpointCore prior to version 3.4.0. Sensitive actuator endpoints such as heap dump, environment, and thread dump do not enforce the higher 'read_sensitive_data' permission, instead defaulting to a lower permission level. This could allow users with lower privileges to access sensitive data. The issue is patched in Steeltoe.Management.Endpoint 4.2.0 and Steeltoe.Management.EndpointCore 3.4.0. Mitigation includes upgrading to these versions or explicitly setting required permissions for sensitive endpoints or limiting actuator registration.

Impact

Users with lower privilege roles in Cloud Foundry environments may gain unauthorized read access to sensitive actuator endpoints such as heap dumps, environment variables, and thread dumps. This exposure could lead to leakage of sensitive application or system information. The vulnerability does not impact integrity or availability but has a high confidentiality impact. There are no known exploits in the wild at this time.

CWE-269Improper Privilege Management (opens in a new tab)
Class weaknessLikelihood of exploit: MediumOWASP Top 10 A06:2025: Insecure Design (opens in a new tab)
The product does not properly assign, modify, track, or check privileges for an actor, creating an unintended sphere of control for that actor.
MITRE discourages mapping vulnerabilities to this broad entry; the root cause is usually a more specific weakness.
Architecture and Design · Operation
Very carefully manage the setting, management, and handling of privileges. Explicitly manage trust zones in the software.
Architecture and Design · Separation of Privilege
Follow the principle of least privilege when assigning access rights to entities in a software system.
Architecture and Design · Separation of Privilege
Consider following the principle of separation of privilege. Require multiple conditions to be met before permitting access to a system resource.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Docker Security (opens in a new tab)
Third Party Javascript Management (opens in a new tab)
Virtual Patching (opens in a new tab)
Secure Design Principles (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V1.4.4 (opens in a new tab)
V1.4.5 (opens in a new tab)
V1.10.1 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Restful Privilege Elevation (opens in a new tab)
Privilege Abuse (opens in a new tab)
Privilege Escalation (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).
CWE-285Improper Authorization (opens in a new tab)
Class weaknessLikelihood of exploit: HighOWASP Top 10 A01:2025: Broken Access Control (opens in a new tab)
The product does not perform or incorrectly performs an authorization check when an actor attempts to access a resource or perform an action.
MITRE discourages mapping vulnerabilities to this broad entry; the root cause is usually a more specific weakness.
Architecture and Design
Divide the product into anonymous, normal, privileged, and administrative areas. Reduce the attack surface by carefully mapping roles with data and functionality. Use role-based access control (RBAC) to enforce the roles at the appropriate boundaries.
Architecture and Design
Ensure that you perform access control checks related to your business logic. These checks may be different than the access control checks that you apply to more generic resources such as files, connections, processes, memory, and database records.
Architecture and Design · Libraries or Frameworks
Use a vetted library or framework that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Authorization (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V8.3.8 (opens in a new tab)
V13.4.2 (opens in a new tab)
V7.2.2 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Accessing Functionality Not Properly Constrained by ACLs (opens in a new tab)
Cross Zone Scripting (opens in a new tab)
Directory Indexing (opens in a new tab)
Subverting Environment Variable Values (opens in a new tab)
Using Malicious Files (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 2 Jul 2026, 23:07 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-269, CWE-285

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats