CVE-2026-128790

HIGHPre-NVD 7.17.1
EchelonGraph scoreLOW confidence

This high-severity CVE scores 7.1 under a secondary CVSS source (NVD's own analysis pending). EPSS exploit-prediction score not yet available (the EPSS model rescores nightly; freshly-published CVEs typically appear within 48 hours). No GitHub Security Advisory CVSS is on record for this CVE.

Triggered by: Headline CVSS from a secondary CVSS source
Sources: a secondary CVSS source

Also known asEUVD-2026-125342 (ENISA EUVD)Source: ENISA EUVD

7.1EG
EchelonGraph verdictPlan a fixRemediate within your standard update timelines (the SSVC decision on this page).
  • High severity, but no confirmed exploitation yet
CISA-KEV: Not listedEPSS PROB: —CVSS: 7.1Exploit: None knownExposed services: Not assessed

A fix is available — apply it.

In Eclipse BaSyx Go Components versions up to and including 1.1.2, ABAC-enabled deployments of the Submodel Repository and the AAS Environment do not apply an access rule's FILTERLIST fragment filters to single Submodel reads.

GET /submodels removes the fields that a rule's FILTERLIST hides, but GET /submodels/{submodelIdentifier} and GET /submodels/{submodelIdentifier}/$metadata return them unfiltered. An authenticated caller with READ access to a Submodel can therefore read fields that the access rules hide from them, for example supplementalSemanticIds keys that name the other parties allowed to read the Submodel.

If versioning is enabled (history.mode set to api or audit), GET /submodels/{submodelIdentifier}/$history and GET /shells/{aasIdentifier}/$history in the Submodel Repository, AAS Repository and AAS Environment return the complete stored version without applying the rule's formula or fragment filters. A caller whose rules grant READ on these routes can read fields that the access rules hide, and Submodels and Asset Administration Shells that the direct read does not return to them at all.

The issue is fixed in Eclipse BaSyx Go Components v1.1.3.

CVSS
7.1
EG Score
7.1HIGHlow confidence
EG Risk
32
EG Risk 32/100

EG Risk is EchelonGraph's 0–100 priority score. It fuses impact severity (EG Severity, the CVSS base score, never the KEV-floored or EPSS-lifted EG Score) with real-world exploitation and automatability, under weights EchelonGraph set by hand, so you can rank equal-severity CVEs and fix the most dangerous first. Higher = act sooner.

How it’s computed (value × EchelonGraph’s weight)
Severity71% × 45%
Impact severity (EG Severity): CVSS 7.1 of 10. Never the KEV-floored or EPSS-lifted EG Score.
Exploitation0% × 40%
No KEV listing, EG-KEV tier or EPSS when EchelonGraph scored this CVE.
Automatability0% × 15%
CISA's BOD 26-04 default: no one has published Automatable for this CVE, and CISA treats it as “no” for a CVE not in KEV.
SSVC (CISA's decision table, applied by EchelonGraph): Track at low or medium mission impact; Track* at high (mission-essential systems).
Exploitation none (no CISA value, KEV listing or exploit code on record) · Automatable no (CISA's BOD 26-04 default) · Technical impact total (CISA's BOD 26-04 default). EchelonGraph holds no SSVC assessment of this CVE from CISA: none of these inputs is from Vulnrichment. EchelonGraph applied CISA's decision table to them; CISA publishes SSVC inputs and the table, not a decision for each CVE.
Action: A fix is available. Apply it within your standard update timelines.
EPSS PROB
—
EPSS %ILE
—
KEV
Not listed

What the EG score is made of (scorer v4.0: the three questions the 0–10 score mixes, published apart · methodology)

The EG score (7.1): severity, escalated by confirmed exploitation. This CVE's 7.1 is its impact severity (EG Severity), not escalated.

EG Severity
7.1 HIGHCVSS-B, impact only: no KEV listing, EPSS or EG-KEV tier raises it.a secondary CVSS source
EG Likelihood
Unknown (no EPSS on record)Unknown, not low: FIRST has published no EPSS probability for this CVE.
Confirmed exploitation
None on record (CISA KEV, EG-KEV Tier 1)Reported apart from the likelihood: an observed fact, not a probability.
EG Priority
SSVC Track at medium mission impactTrack at low or medium mission impact; Track* at high (mission-essential systems).CISA BOD 26-04: 14 days if the affected system is publicly exposed; Fix on system upgrade if it is not.Each input and its source, and whom BOD 26-04 binds: the SSVC and BOD 26-04 blocks below.

SSVC (CISA's decision table, applied by EchelonGraph)Track at low or medium mission impact; Track* at high (mission-essential systems).

A fix is available. Apply it within your standard update timelines.

Exploitation none (no CISA value, KEV listing or exploit code on record) · Automatable no (CISA's BOD 26-04 default) · Technical impact total (CISA's BOD 26-04 default). EchelonGraph holds no SSVC assessment of this CVE from CISA: none of these inputs is from Vulnrichment. EchelonGraph applied CISA's decision table to them; CISA publishes SSVC inputs and the table, not a decision for each CVE. Mission impact is CISA's Mission & Well-being decision point, and only you can judge it. CISA's table makes it high when Mission Prevalence is Essential — the vulnerable component "directly provides capabilities that constitute at least one MEF for at least one entity" (MEF: mission essential function) — or when Public Well-Being Impact is Irreversible: "multiple fatalities are likely", the cyber-physical system "is likely lost or destroyed", "extreme or serious externalities" are imposed on other parties, or social systems such as elections or the financial grid "are destabilized and potentially collapse". CISA's decision table

BOD 26-04 (CISA's remediation timeline, Table 1)14 days if the affected system is publicly exposed; Fix on system upgrade if it is not.

The score's inputs: In CISA KEV no (CISA's KEV catalog) · Automatable no (CISA's BOD 26-04 default) · Technical impact total (CISA's BOD 26-04 default). Where an input reads “CISA's BOD 26-04 default”, no one has published it for this CVE, and CISA's implementation guidance says: “If “Automatable” and “Technical Impact” information items about a CVE ID are not available and the CVE ID is not in the KEV Catalog, CISA will treat its values as “no” and “total,” respectively, until CISA or a third party provides metadata about the CVE ID. CISA will always provide the Vulnrichment data for a CVE ID listed in the KEV Catalog.” Whether your system is publicly exposed is yours to answer. BOD 26-04 binds US Federal Civilian Executive Branch agencies; for anyone else it is CISA's published timeline, a reference rather than an obligation. The directive · how EchelonGraph applies it

Published

November 13, 2026

Last Modified

November 13, 2026

Advisory Details (5)

Auto-updated Nov 13, 2026
Patch available. Sources: github_pr, github_release.
Web page

Submodel element list returns elements outside the caller's ABAC grant (#1371) · Issues · Eclipse Projects Security / vulnerability-reports · GitLab

https://gitlab.eclipse.org/security/vulnerability-reports/-/work_items/1371#note_8664220
Web page

[Eclipse BaSyx] [CVE Request] CWE-863: ABAC FILTERLIST not applied to single Submodel and history reads in Eclipse BaSyx Go Components (#577) · Issues · Eclipse Projects Security / cve-assignment · GitLab

https://gitlab.eclipse.org/security/cve-assignment/-/work_items/577
GitHub release Patch Available

v1.1.3

Patch available: eclipse-basyx/basyx-go-components v1.1.3

https://github.com/eclipse-basyx/basyx-go-components/releases/tag/v1.1.3
GitHub pull request

Apply ABAC filters to history reads

Fix merged in eclipse-basyx/basyx-go-components PR #883 on 2026-11-12 — awaiting tagged release

https://github.com/eclipse-basyx/basyx-go-components/pull/883
GitHub pull request

query filter idShort

Fix merged in eclipse-basyx/basyx-go-components PR #855 on 2026-11-11 — awaiting tagged release

https://github.com/eclipse-basyx/basyx-go-components/pull/855

Vendor Advisories for CVE-2026-128790(1)

These vendors published their own advisory mentioning this CVE — often with vendor-specific remediation steps + affected product lists not in NVD.

Weakness Classification(2)

MITRE Common Weakness Enumeration — the root-cause categories this CVE belongs to.

Data Freshness Timeline

(refreshed 3× in last 7d / 3× in last 30d)

Each row is a time one of our pipelines fetched, updated or re-scored this CVE. For example, "NVD update" means NVD published or revised its analysis for this CVE; "MITRE cvelistV5" means we ingested or refreshed its CVE.org record (CNA or CISA ADP). An arrow marks a change the record states ("CVSS → 9.1"); EPSS and GHSA rows show the values recorded at that time, not what changed (EPSS values are rounded; hover one for the exact figures). "EchelonGraph re-scored" is our own recompute of this CVE's score, not an update from a source, and is not counted in the refreshes above. Most recent first.

  1. 2026-11-13 15:53 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  2. 2026-11-13 15:53 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-grwr-c8jg-hx89 · GitHub severity HIGH
  3. 2026-11-13 15:01 UTCENISA EUVD ID recordedEUVD-2026-125342 · Source: ENISA EUVD
  4. 2026-11-13 14:19 UTCEchelonGraph re-scoredFirst assessed: 7.1 HIGH
  5. 2026-11-13 14:16 UTCMITRE cvelistV5first tracked

Frequently asked(4)

What is CVE-2026-128790?
CVE-2026-128790 is a high-severity vulnerability; its CVE record was published on November 13, 2026. In Eclipse BaSyx Go Components versions up to and including 1.1.2, ABAC-enabled deployments of the Submodel Repository and the AAS Environment do not apply an access rule's FILTERLIST fragment filters to single Submodel reads. GET /submodels removes the fields that a rule's FILTERLIST hides, but…
When was the CVE record for CVE-2026-128790 published?
The CVE record for CVE-2026-128790 was published on November 13, 2026. That is the record's publication date; the vulnerability itself may have been made public earlier. EchelonGraph's copy of the record carries a last-modified date of November 13, 2026; the record at its source may have been updated since.
What is the CVSS score of CVE-2026-128790?
CVE-2026-128790 has a CVSS base score of 7.1 (a secondary CVSS source that NVD displays; NVD's own analysis pending). The EG score is currently aggregating — additional source signals are being incorporated as they become available..
How do I remediate CVE-2026-128790?
A fix for CVE-2026-128790 is available: update to the fixed version the vendor names in its advisory. The vendor advisories EchelonGraph has for CVE-2026-128790 are linked in the Vendor Advisories panel on this page.

Dependency Blast Radius

Explore the affected products and dependency analysis for CVE-2026-128790

Explore →

Is Your Infrastructure Affected by CVE-2026-128790?

EchelonGraph automatically scans your cloud infrastructure and maps CVE exposure using blast radius analysis.