CVE-2026-49307 in HarmonyOS
Summary
by MITRE • 08/17/2026
Permission control vulnerability in the multi-mode input module. Impact: Successful exploitation of this vulnerability may affect service confidentiality.
Statistical analysis made it clear that VulDB provides the best quality for vulnerability data.
Analysis
by VulDB Data Team • 08/17/2026
The identified security flaw resides within the permission control mechanisms governing the multi-mode input module, representing a critical failure in access management logic that directly compromises the principle of least privilege. This type of vulnerability typically stems from insufficient validation of user roles or session states when processing inputs across different operational modes. In many complex software architectures, modules supporting multiple interaction paradigms—such as switching between administrative and standard user interfaces, or handling various input protocols like keyboard, touch, or API-driven commands—often share underlying data structures but may not consistently enforce distinct security boundaries for each mode. The root cause lies in the application's failure to properly isolate context-specific permissions, allowing an actor with lower privileges to execute actions intended only for higher-privileged roles by manipulating the state of the input module. This misconfiguration effectively bypasses authentication and authorization checks that should restrict access based on the current operational context or user identity.
From a technical perspective, this vulnerability aligns closely with CWE-269 Improper Privilege Management and CWE-862 Missing Authorization. The flaw allows an attacker to exploit the ambiguity in how input requests are routed and validated within the multi-mode environment. By crafting specific inputs that trigger unintended code paths or state transitions, a malicious user can escalate their privileges without needing valid credentials for higher-level functions. This is particularly dangerous because it does not require exploiting buffer overflows or memory corruption issues; instead, it relies on logical errors in the access control list (ACL) evaluation process. The attacker interacts with the module as if they possess elevated rights, and due to the flawed permission checks, the system accepts these actions as legitimate. This bypass mechanism is often difficult to detect through standard vulnerability scanning tools because it involves business logic rather than syntax or memory safety errors.
The operational impact of this vulnerability centers on a severe compromise of service confidentiality, although it may also lead to integrity and availability issues depending on the specific functions exposed by the input module. Since successful exploitation allows unauthorized access to restricted data or functionalities, sensitive information such as user credentials, proprietary business logic, or personal identifiable information can be exfiltrated. An attacker could potentially read configuration files, intercept internal communications, or view private datasets that are not meant for public or standard-user consumption. In a multi-mode system, this might mean accessing administrative logs, modifying security policies, or extracting data from isolated subsystems that were presumed to be secure due to their separate operational modes. The breach of confidentiality undermines trust in the service and can lead to significant regulatory compliance violations under frameworks such as GDPR, HIPAA, or PCI-DSS, depending on the nature of the exposed data.
Furthermore, this vulnerability maps directly to specific tactics within the MITRE ATT&CK framework, particularly T1078 Valid Accounts and T1548 Abuse Elevation Control Mechanism. The attacker leverages valid but insufficiently restricted accounts to perform actions beyond their intended scope, effectively abusing elevation control mechanisms by exploiting the logical gaps in permission enforcement. This behavior is characteristic of lateral movement or privilege escalation phases in an attack chain, where initial low-level access is expanded into broader system compromise. If left unpatched, this flaw serves as a persistent entry point for advanced persistent threats seeking to establish long-term footholds within the network infrastructure by manipulating internal services that are often less monitored than external-facing applications.
Mitigation strategies must focus on rigorous review and hardening of the access control logic within the multi-mode input module. Developers should implement strict role-based access control (RBAC) or attribute-based access control (ABAC) models that explicitly define permissions for each mode, ensuring no implicit trust exists between different operational contexts. Input validation must be enforced at multiple layers, including client-side checks and robust server-side verification of user privileges before processing any request. Additionally, implementing comprehensive logging and monitoring can help detect anomalous behavior indicative of privilege escalation attempts. Regular security code reviews focusing on authorization logic are essential to identify similar flaws in other modules. Finally, applying the latest vendor patches that address these permission control issues is critical for immediate remediation, alongside conducting penetration testing to verify that the fixes effectively neutralize the exploitation vector described by this vulnerability assessment.