Quick answer
Direct answer
Risk scores
| CVSS metric | What it means |
|---|---|
| Attack vector (AV:N) | Network: reachable remotely |
| Attack complexity (AC:L) | Low complexity |
| Attack requirements (AT:N) | No attack requirements |
| Privileges required (PR:N) | No privileges required |
| User interaction (UI:N) | No user interaction |
| Confidentiality (VC:L) | Low confidentiality impact |
| Integrity (VI:H) | High integrity impact |
| Availability (VA:N) | No availability impact |
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:L/VI:H/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:X/CR:X/IR:X/AR:X/MAV:X/MAC:X/MAT:X/MPR:X/MUI:X/MVC:X/MVI:X/MVA:X/MSC:X/MSI:X/MSA:X/S:X/AU:X/R:X/V:X/RE:X/U:X
About Eclipse Milo
CVE-2026-58080 affects Eclipse Milo, a product from Eclipse. Before acting, confirm where Eclipse Milo runs in your estate, who owns it and whether it is reachable from the internet, because exposure decides real risk more than the score alone.
What the flaw is
In plain terms: In Eclipse Milo versions 1.0.0 through 1.1.4, `OpcUaServerConfig.copy()` fails to preserve a configured `RoleMapper`. On servers that rely on role permissions and construct the running configuration through `copy()`, sessions receive no role IDs and the default access controller skips role-permission checks, allowing an anonymous client where anonymous sessions are permitted to read role-permission metadata, invoke protected methods, or delete protected nodes.
The weakness class is Missing Authorization. The software does not check permissions before an action.
Based on its CVSS vector, the flaw can be reached over the network, needs no login, and needs no user interaction. Apply the vendor fix and confirm exposure on internet facing and business critical assets first.
Affected versions and timeline
| Field | Detail |
|---|---|
| Product | Eclipse Milo |
| Affected versions | Milo from 1.0.0 before 1.1.5 |
| Published | Aug 4, 2026 |
| Last modified | Aug 5, 2026 |
| Added to CISA KEV | Not listed |
| Assigning CNA | emo@eclipse.org |
How to detect it
- Inventory every instance of Eclipse Milo and record the running version against the affected range above.
- Check external attack surface scans for internet facing instances of the component.
- Review logs on affected systems for unusual requests, errors or new processes around the vulnerable function.
- Confirm with an authenticated vulnerability scan once your scanner has a check for this CVE.
How to fix it
- Apply the fixed version of Eclipse Milo named in the vendor advisory.
- If patching must wait, restrict network access to the affected service and put it behind authentication or a web application firewall rule.
- Rescan after the change to prove the exposure is gone, then close the ticket.
CTEM action plan
| CTEM stage | What to do for this CVE |
|---|---|
| Scope | Add every business service that depends on Eclipse Milo to the current CTEM cycle. |
| Discover | Find all instances, including shadow and cloud deployments, and record versions and exposure. |
| Prioritize | Rank using EPSS and CVSS together with asset exposure and business impact. |
| Validate | Confirm the flaw is reachable and exploitable in your environment and that compensating controls work. |
| Mobilize | Assign the fix to the asset owner with a due date matched to the priority, then verify closure. |
CWE References
- CWE-862: Missing Authorization More CVEs with this weakness
Technical References
Frequently asked questions
Related CVEs
In Eclipse Milo versions 0.6.0 through 1.1.4, UASC server transport handlers fail to release retained partial message chunks when a channel disconnects, allowing a remote unauthenticated client to exhaust pooled direct memory by repeatedly sending incomplete chunks and disconnecting, potentially terminating the server.
In Eclipse Milo versions 1.0.0 through 1.1.4, the Call service dispatches the original mixed batch to address-space handlers after calculating authorization, allowing an anonymous or otherwise low-privileged client to execute a denied method by batching it with an allowed method.
In Eclipse Milo versions 0.6.0 through 1.1.4, username-token processing returns distinguishable errors for invalid RSA PKCS#1 v1.5 padding and other authentication failures, allowing an on-path attacker who captures a victim's `Basic128Rsa15`-encrypted username token to use repeated unauthenticated `ActivateSession` requests as a padding oracle, recover the victim's password, and authenticate with the recovered credentials.
In Eclipse Jetty, the Digest authentication server-side component uses ISO-8859-1 to encode the password as bytes. This was done because the initial specification for HTTP did not specify explicitly a charset, and it was assumed to be ISO-8859-1 for historical reasons. If the password contains characters that cannot be represented in ISO-8859-1, they are silently replaced by `?`. This happens with passwords that contain Chinese, Cyrillic or Greek characters, for example: `αβ123` converts to `??123`. An attacker can send a request with a digest `Authorization` header crafted with a password made of only `?` characters; the server would match any password of the same length that contains non-ISO-8859-1 characters. Recent HTTP Digest [RFC-7616](https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc7616) supports a `charset` parameters that defaults to UTF-8 that allows for correct encoding/decoding of passwords.
Eclipse Kura versions prior to 5.6.2 trust the client-supplied X-Forwarded-For HTTP header as the authoritative source of the client IP address in audit log entries. The org.eclipse.kura.web2 (Web Console) and org.eclipse.kura.rest.provider (REST API) components use this header as the primary IP source when initializing audit context, and org.eclipse.kura.jetty.customizer unconditionally installs Jetty's ForwardedRequestCustomizer on all HTTP/HTTPS connectors, causing HttpServletRequest.getRemoteAddr() to reflect the attacker-controlled header value. An unauthenticated remote attacker can exploit this vulnerability to bypass IP-based brute-force protections — such as fail2ban — by spoofing the logged IP address to a non-routable value, allowing a brute-force attack to proceed undetected, or to cause a denial of service against a third party by injecting a victim's IP address and triggering a ban on that address.
In versions up to and including 4.5.29 (4.x branch) and 5.1.4 (5.x branch), the WebClientSession component of Eclipse Vert.x Web Client does not validate that the Domain attribute of a Set-Cookie response header matches the originating server's domain, in violation of RFC 6265 section 5.3. An attacker who controls any server that the victim application contacts can inject a cookie scoped to an arbitrary third-party domain; because the session store performs no cross-domain ownership check, it stores and later transmits that cookie to the targeted domain. When the victim application subsequently sends a request to the targeted domain using the same WebClientSession, it presents the attacker-injected cookie, causing the receiving service to process the request under the attacker's account. Sensitive data included in the victim application's requests, such as payment amounts, card details, or other API payloads, may then be accessible to the attacker through their own account on that service.
Earn your free CTEM certification.
Learn to scope, prioritize, validate and mobilize fixes for CVEs like CVE-2026-58080 with a free CTEM certification.
Beginner / Practitioner / Program Leader
Explore certifications