CVE-2026-55772 (GCVE-0-2026-55772)
Vulnerability from cvelistv5 – Published: 2026-07-13 18:44 – Updated: 2026-07-13 18:44
VLAI
EPSS
VEX
Title
CedarJava has a type confusion vulnerability
Summary
CedarJava is an open source Java implementation of the Cedar policy language, used for fine-grained authorization decisions. In versions prior to 2.3.6, 3.4.1 and 4.9.0, under certain circumstances, improper input handling could allow Record-to-Entity type confusion across the Java-Rust FFI boundary. CedarJava sends authorization requests to the Rust cedar-policy evaluator as JSON. The JSON protocol reserves magic single-key object shapes (__entity and __extn) for entity references and extension values. When serializing a CedarMap, there is no validation preventing these reserved keys from being used. If an integrating service builds a CedarMap from caller-supplied key/value data (such as request headers, user-defined metadata, or resource tags), an actor who controls those keys could cause the Rust evaluator to interpret a record as an entity reference. This issue requires the integrating service to build a CedarMap where the an actor controls the keys, and a policy must reference that value in a when/unless clause. This vulnerability has been fixed in versions 2.3.6, 3.4.1, and 4.9.
Severity
8.8 (High)
CWE
- CWE-843 - Access of Resource Using Incompatible Type ('Type Confusion')
Assigner
References
1 reference
| URL | Tags |
|---|---|
| https://github.com/cedar-policy/cedar-java/securi… | x_refsource_CONFIRM |
Impacted products
1 product
| Vendor | Product | Version | |
|---|---|---|---|
| cedar-policy | cedar-java |
Affected:
< 2.3.6
Affected: >= 3.1.2, < 3.4.1 Affected: >= 4.0.0, < 4.9.0 |
{
"containers": {
"cna": {
"affected": [
{
"product": "cedar-java",
"vendor": "cedar-policy",
"versions": [
{
"status": "affected",
"version": "\u003c 2.3.6"
},
{
"status": "affected",
"version": "\u003e= 3.1.2, \u003c 3.4.1"
},
{
"status": "affected",
"version": "\u003e= 4.0.0, \u003c 4.9.0"
}
]
}
],
"descriptions": [
{
"lang": "en",
"value": "CedarJava is an open source Java implementation of the Cedar policy language, used for fine-grained authorization decisions. In versions prior to 2.3.6, 3.4.1 and 4.9.0, under certain circumstances, improper input handling could allow Record-to-Entity type confusion across the Java-Rust FFI boundary. CedarJava sends authorization requests to the Rust cedar-policy evaluator as JSON. The JSON protocol reserves magic single-key object shapes (__entity and __extn) for entity references and extension values. When serializing a CedarMap, there is no validation preventing these reserved keys from being used. If an integrating service builds a CedarMap from caller-supplied key/value data (such as request headers, user-defined metadata, or resource tags), an actor who controls those keys could cause the Rust evaluator to interpret a record as an entity reference. This issue requires the integrating service to build a CedarMap where the an actor controls the keys, and a policy must reference that value in a when/unless clause. This vulnerability has been fixed in versions 2.3.6, 3.4.1, and 4.9."
}
],
"metrics": [
{
"cvssV3_1": {
"attackComplexity": "LOW",
"attackVector": "NETWORK",
"availabilityImpact": "HIGH",
"baseScore": 8.8,
"baseSeverity": "HIGH",
"confidentialityImpact": "HIGH",
"integrityImpact": "HIGH",
"privilegesRequired": "LOW",
"scope": "UNCHANGED",
"userInteraction": "NONE",
"vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
"version": "3.1"
}
}
],
"problemTypes": [
{
"descriptions": [
{
"cweId": "CWE-843",
"description": "CWE-843: Access of Resource Using Incompatible Type (\u0027Type Confusion\u0027)",
"lang": "en",
"type": "CWE"
}
]
}
],
"providerMetadata": {
"dateUpdated": "2026-07-13T18:44:47.577Z",
"orgId": "a0819718-46f1-4df5-94e2-005712e83aaa",
"shortName": "GitHub_M"
},
"references": [
{
"name": "https://github.com/cedar-policy/cedar-java/security/advisories/GHSA-93g4-m6xv-cmvr",
"tags": [
"x_refsource_CONFIRM"
],
"url": "https://github.com/cedar-policy/cedar-java/security/advisories/GHSA-93g4-m6xv-cmvr"
}
],
"source": {
"advisory": "GHSA-93g4-m6xv-cmvr",
"discovery": "UNKNOWN"
},
"title": "CedarJava has a type confusion vulnerability"
}
},
"cveMetadata": {
"assignerOrgId": "a0819718-46f1-4df5-94e2-005712e83aaa",
"assignerShortName": "GitHub_M",
"cveId": "CVE-2026-55772",
"datePublished": "2026-07-13T18:44:47.577Z",
"dateReserved": "2026-06-17T14:34:51.881Z",
"dateUpdated": "2026-07-13T18:44:47.577Z",
"state": "PUBLISHED"
},
"dataType": "CVE_RECORD",
"dataVersion": "5.2",
"vulnerability-lookup:meta": {
"epss": {
"cve": "CVE-2026-55772",
"date": "2026-07-14",
"epss": "0.0048",
"percentile": "0.38127"
},
"nvd": "{\"cve\":{\"id\":\"CVE-2026-55772\",\"sourceIdentifier\":\"security-advisories@github.com\",\"published\":\"2026-07-13T19:17:15.183\",\"lastModified\":\"2026-07-13T19:49:37.150\",\"vulnStatus\":\"Deferred\",\"cveTags\":[],\"descriptions\":[{\"lang\":\"en\",\"value\":\"CedarJava is an open source Java implementation of the Cedar policy language, used for fine-grained authorization decisions. In versions prior to 2.3.6, 3.4.1 and 4.9.0, under certain circumstances, improper input handling could allow Record-to-Entity type confusion across the Java-Rust FFI boundary. CedarJava sends authorization requests to the Rust cedar-policy evaluator as JSON. The JSON protocol reserves magic single-key object shapes (__entity and __extn) for entity references and extension values. When serializing a CedarMap, there is no validation preventing these reserved keys from being used. If an integrating service builds a CedarMap from caller-supplied key/value data (such as request headers, user-defined metadata, or resource tags), an actor who controls those keys could cause the Rust evaluator to interpret a record as an entity reference. This issue requires the integrating service to build a CedarMap where the an actor controls the keys, and a policy must reference that value in a when/unless clause. This vulnerability has been fixed in versions 2.3.6, 3.4.1, and 4.9.\"}],\"affected\":[{\"source\":\"security-advisories@github.com\",\"affectedData\":[{\"vendor\":\"cedar-policy\",\"product\":\"cedar-java\",\"versions\":[{\"version\":\"\u003c 2.3.6\",\"status\":\"affected\"},{\"version\":\"\u003e= 3.1.2, \u003c 3.4.1\",\"status\":\"affected\"},{\"version\":\"\u003e= 4.0.0, \u003c 4.9.0\",\"status\":\"affected\"}]}]}],\"metrics\":{\"cvssMetricV31\":[{\"source\":\"security-advisories@github.com\",\"type\":\"Secondary\",\"cvssData\":{\"version\":\"3.1\",\"vectorString\":\"CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H\",\"baseScore\":8.8,\"baseSeverity\":\"HIGH\",\"attackVector\":\"NETWORK\",\"attackComplexity\":\"LOW\",\"privilegesRequired\":\"LOW\",\"userInteraction\":\"NONE\",\"scope\":\"UNCHANGED\",\"confidentialityImpact\":\"HIGH\",\"integrityImpact\":\"HIGH\",\"availabilityImpact\":\"HIGH\"},\"exploitabilityScore\":2.8,\"impactScore\":5.9}]},\"weaknesses\":[{\"source\":\"security-advisories@github.com\",\"type\":\"Primary\",\"description\":[{\"lang\":\"en\",\"value\":\"CWE-843\"}]}],\"references\":[{\"url\":\"https://github.com/cedar-policy/cedar-java/security/advisories/GHSA-93g4-m6xv-cmvr\",\"source\":\"security-advisories@github.com\"}]}}"
}
}
Loading…
Loading…
Experimental. This forecast is provided for visualization only and may change without notice. Do not use it for operational decisions.
Forecast uses a logistic model when the trend is rising, or an exponential decay model when the trend is falling. Fitted via linearized least squares.
Sightings
| Author | Source | Type | Date | Other |
|---|
Nomenclature
- Seen: The vulnerability was mentioned, discussed, or observed by the user.
- Confirmed: The vulnerability has been validated from an analyst's perspective.
- Published Proof of Concept: A public proof of concept is available for this vulnerability.
- Exploited: The vulnerability was observed as exploited by the user who reported the sighting.
- Patched: The vulnerability was observed as successfully patched by the user who reported the sighting.
- Not exploited: The vulnerability was not observed as exploited by the user who reported the sighting.
- Not confirmed: The user expressed doubt about the validity of the vulnerability.
- Not patched: The vulnerability was not observed as successfully patched by the user who reported the sighting.
Loading…
Loading…