VulnerabilityPublished 5 Nov 2026

CVE-2026-109849: Hinemos · Incorrect Privilege Assignment Issue Exists

Source GCVE Database

Compare

Authoritative record:CVE-2026-109849· Medium 6.5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 6.5 Medium.

Data as of 5 Nov 2026, 04:42 UTC

CVSS 3.0 base score

6.5Medium

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

Thin evidence

One scorer or none

CVSS scores by source
CNA (jpcert)	CVSS 3.0	6.5
CNA (jpcert)	CVSS 4.0	7.1

CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:N

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: Low
User Interaction: None
Scope: Unchanged
Confidentiality: None
Integrity: High
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: None: There is no loss of confidentiality within the impacted component.
Integrity: High: There is a total loss of integrity, or a complete loss of protection. For example, the attacker is able to modify any/all files protected by the impacted component. Alternatively, only some files can be modified, but malicious modification would present a direct, serious consequence to 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 5 Nov 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 5 Nov 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.

ghsa-6hp4-rjwq-mvpj

What to do

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
NTT DATA INTELLILINK CorporationHinemos	Affected >=7.1.0 <=7.1.2 >=7.0.0 <=7.0.4 >=6.2.0 <=6.2.2 >=6.1.0 <=6.1.2 >=6.0.0 <=6.0.3 =7.2.0	Fixed in–
Mavenjp.co.nttdata.intellilink/hinemos`pkg:maven/jp.co.nttdata.intellilink/hinemos`Other threats	Affected 6.0.0 <=6.0.3 6.1.0 <=6.1.2 6.2.0 <=6.2.2 7.0.0 <=7.0.4 7.1.0 <=7.1.2 =7.2.0	Fixed in–

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

AI-suggested

Until a fix is available, restrict access to the password change API and carefully review permission assignments to ensure non-administrative users cannot obtain permissions that allow password changes for administrative accounts.

Description

An incorrect privilege assignment vulnerability exists in Hinemos that allows an attacker with access to the password change API and specific permissions (which can be assigned to non-administrative users) to change the password of an administrative user. This could lead to privilege escalation within the affected system.

Impact

An attacker with the required permissions can change administrative user passwords, potentially gaining administrative control over the system. This compromises the integrity of the system by allowing unauthorized privilege escalation. There is no indication of impact on confidentiality or availability.

Summary

CVE-2026-109849 describes a privilege assignment flaw in Hinemos where permissions to access the password change API can be granted to non-administrative users. Exploiting this vulnerability enables such users to change administrative user passwords, effectively escalating their privileges. The vulnerability is categorized under CWE-266 (Incorrect Privilege Assignment). The CVSS 3.0 base score is 6.5, indicating a medium severity with network attack vector, low attack complexity, and requiring low privileges but no user interaction. Confidentiality is not impacted, but integrity is highly impacted, and availability is unaffected.

CWE-266Incorrect Privilege Assignment (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessOWASP Top 10 A06:2025: Insecure Design (opens in a new tab)
A product incorrectly assigns a privilege to a particular actor, creating an unintended sphere of control for that actor.
Architecture and Design · Operation
Very carefully manage the setting, management, and handling of privileges. Explicitly manage trust zones in the software.
Architecture and Design · Operation · Environment Hardening
Run your code using the lowest privileges that are required to accomplish the necessary tasks. If possible, create isolated accounts with limited privileges that are only used for a single task. That way, a successful attack will not immediately give the attacker access to the rest of the software or its environment.
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)
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 5 Nov 2026, 04:42 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-266

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats