CVE-2026-102117 in Kiteworks
Summary
by MITRE • 10/01/2026
On deployments where the remote-support capability is licensed and enabled, an authenticated System Administrator who also possessed the key protecting the submitted data could redirect the underlying system's outbound support connection to a destination of their choosing. That destination could then have operating-system commands executed on the node and receive their output, potentially resulting in remote code execution with the privileges of a local service account.
If you want to get best quality of vulnerability data, you may have to visit VulDB.
Analysis
by VulDB Data Team • 10/01/2026
The vulnerability described involves a critical flaw within the remote-support functionality of certain enterprise systems, specifically affecting deployments where this capability is both licensed and actively enabled. This security issue stems from an insufficient validation mechanism regarding outbound connection destinations when authenticated access is combined with possession of specific cryptographic keys. An attacker who has achieved authentication as a System Administrator and possesses the key required to protect submitted data can manipulate the configuration parameters that dictate where support connections are directed. By altering these parameters, the administrator can redirect the system's outbound traffic from its intended vendor or management server to an arbitrary destination controlled by the adversary. This misconfiguration bypasses standard security controls because the system trusts the authenticated user and validates the integrity of the data using the provided key, failing to verify that the target endpoint is authorized for receiving such sensitive operational commands.
From a technical perspective, this flaw represents a severe breakdown in access control logic and destination validation. The vulnerability allows an attacker with high-level privileges to exploit the trust relationship between the local system administrator role and the remote support protocol. Once the outbound connection is redirected, the adversary gains the ability to inject operating-system level commands into the communication stream destined for their controlled server. Because these commands are executed on the node itself during the processing of the support request or data submission process, they run with the privileges associated with the local service account that manages the remote-support agent. This effectively transforms a configuration manipulation issue into a full remote code execution vulnerability, as the attacker can execute arbitrary binaries, scripts, or system utilities under the context of this privileged service account rather than standard user permissions.
The operational impact of this vulnerability is profound, particularly in environments where sensitive data and critical infrastructure are managed through such systems. The ability to achieve remote code execution with local service account privileges allows an adversary to establish persistent access, escalate further if additional weaknesses exist within the service account's configuration, or move laterally across the network using credentials harvested from that privileged context. This can lead to complete compromise of the affected node, including theft of confidential data stored on the system, disruption of critical services, and potential pivoting into other parts of the enterprise network. The risk is exacerbated by the fact that the attack requires only authenticated access as a System Administrator with knowledge or possession of specific keys, which may be obtainable through social engineering, credential theft, or insider threats within organizations lacking strict separation of duties between administrative roles and cryptographic key management.
Mitigation strategies must focus on both immediate remediation and long-term architectural improvements. Organizations should immediately disable the remote-support capability if it is not strictly required for business operations, thereby removing the attack vector entirely. For deployments where this feature remains essential, vendors typically release patches that enforce stricter validation of outbound connection destinations, ensuring that only whitelisted or pre-approved endpoints can receive support data and commands. Additionally, implementing strict separation of duties between System Administrators who manage system configurations and personnel responsible for managing cryptographic keys can prevent a single actor from possessing both the access rights and the decryption capabilities needed to exploit this flaw. Network-level controls such as egress filtering should also be reviewed to restrict outbound connections to only necessary destinations, adding an additional layer of defense against unauthorized redirections even if application-layer validation fails.
This vulnerability aligns with several established industry standards for classifying security weaknesses. It corresponds closely to CWE-284 Improper Access Control, specifically regarding the failure to properly validate user input that influences system behavior in a privileged context. Furthermore, it relates to CWE-913 Improvement of Centralized Control of Managed Entities, as the flaw arises from inadequate control over remote management functions. In terms of offensive security frameworks like MITRE ATT&CK, this scenario maps to T1078 Valid Accounts, where an attacker uses legitimate credentials to gain access, and potentially T1562 Impair Defenses if the exploitation involves disabling logging or monitoring tools via the executed commands. Understanding these classifications helps organizations prioritize remediation efforts based on recognized risk profiles and align their security posture with best practices for preventing privilege escalation through misconfigured remote management features.