Skip to main content

ClearPass OnGuard EUVDEUVD-2026-93892

| CVE-2026-79806 HIGH
Improper Privilege Management (CWE-269)
2026-10-06 security-alert@hpe.com GHSA-pp5m-v773-p3rf
7.8
CVSS 3.1 · Vendor: hpe
View

Attack ChainAIDerived

Hypothetical attack flow derived from CVE metadata – not a confirmed exploit chain

  1. Access
    Obtain local unprivileged shell
  2. Delivery
    Interact with OnGuard Linux agent component
  3. Exploit
    Trigger privilege escalation flaw
  4. Execution
    Execute code as root
  5. Impact
    Full host compromise

Vulnerability Assessment

Weakness
CWE
OWASP Top 10:2025
A06:2025 - Insecure Design
ASVS 5.0
V8 - Authorization Least privilege enforcement
MITRE ATT&CK

1 technique across 1 tactic: Privilege Escalation

The technique list with ATT&CK links and the kill-chain view is part of the Basic plan and up.

Exploitation Conditions

Exploitation requires the ClearPass Policy Manager OnGuard agent to be installed and running on a Linux client, and the attacker must already possess a local, low-privileged account or equivalent local code-execution on that same host (PR:L, AV:L). No user interaction and no special non-default configuration is indicated by the description beyond having the OnGuard Linux agent deployed. Limiting factors that reduce real-world risk: the attacker cannot exploit this remotely over the network (local vector only), must first establish a foothold on the endpoint, and the issue only affects Linux instances running the OnGuard agent - Windows/macOS clients or hosts without the agent are not in scope per the description.

Impact

The provided CVSS 3.1 vector (AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H, base 7.8 HIGH) describes a local privilege escalation requiring an already-authenticated low-privileged user on the affected Linux host, with low attack complexity and no user interaction, yielding full confidentiality, integrity and availability impact (root). This is consistent with the description, which states a malicious local user on a Linux instance can elevate to root via the OnGuard agent. No EPSS score was provided; no CISA KEV listing is present; and no public proof-of-concept was supplied in the intelligence - so this is 'no public exploit identified at time of analysis.' The absence of a network vector materially lowers real-world urgency: this is not a remotely-wormable flaw but a local escalation that presupposes the attacker already has a foothold (valid local account or code execution) on a machine running the OnGuard Linux agent. As a classic local priv-esc in a deployed endpoint agent it is a genuine post-compromise concern for defense-in-depth rather than an internet-facing emergency. Key missing signals: EPSS probability unknown, KEV status not confirmed, and no CWE was assigned, so the exact weakness class (e.g., insecure file permissions, symlink, or SUID/service misuse) cannot be verified from the input.

Exploit ScenarioDerived

An attacker who already has an unprivileged shell on a Linux endpoint running the ClearPass OnGuard agent (for example a standard user on a corporate laptop, or an attacker who gained limited code execution) abuses the agent's elevated functionality to run code as root. This converts a low-value local account into full root control of the host. No public exploit code was identified at time of analysis, and no user interaction is required.

This Week Schedule remediation this week. Why: HIGH severity (CVSS 7.0-8.9).
No patch listed yet 0.1% exploitation probability (EPSS)

Get an e-mail when this CVE is exploited, patched or re-scored. Free account.

Alert me

AnalysisAIv1 – Oct 06, 2026

Local privilege escalation in the HPE/Aruba ClearPass Policy Manager OnGuard Linux agent lets a user who already holds a low-privileged account on a managed Linux endpoint elevate to root, rated CVSS 3.1 base 7.8 (HIGH). Exploitation is local only (AV:L), requires an existing foothold on the host (PR:L), needs no user interaction, and yields full confidentiality, integrity, and availability impact once root is obtained; Windows and macOS clients, and Linux hosts without the OnGuard agent, are out of scope per the vendor report. No CISA KEV listing, public proof-of-concept, or EPSS score was supplied with the available intelligence, so the current status is no public exploit identified at time of analysis, and the practical exposure is limited to environments that deploy the OnGuard Linux agent to endpoints where an attacker can first obtain a local unprivileged account.

RemediationAI

Obtain the fixed OnGuard Linux agent version and application guidance directly from the HPE security bulletin (https://support.hpe.com/hpesc/public/docDisplay?docId=hpesbnw05158en_us&docLocale=en_US); the provided intelligence does not include an exact patched build number, and no vendor-confirmed patch status or version should be assumed beyond what that advisory states. Where immediate upgrade is not possible, reduce the local attack surface: restrict interactive login and shell access on OnGuard-managed Linux endpoints to the minimum set of users (trade-off: reduced operational flexibility for administrators and support staff), remove unnecessary sudo rights and locally installed toolchains that ease post-exploitation (trade-off: may break legitimate admin workflows), and consider temporarily uninstalling or disabling the OnGuard Linux agent on hosts that do not strictly require posture enforcement (trade-off: loss of NAC compliance checks, health attestation, and remediation enforcement, which weakens network access control for those endpoints). Harden the agent installation itself by verifying that its binaries, configuration, log, and temporary directories are root-owned and not writable by unprivileged users (trade-off: permission drift from vendor defaults may require re-validation after upgrades), deploy application allowlisting or an EDR rule set to detect unexpected setuid/root-context child processes spawned from unprivileged parents (trade-off: potential false positives from legitimate agent updates), and enable privileged-execution auditing, such as auditd rules on setuid binaries and the agent's privileged helpers, to detect exploitation attempts. Because exploitation requires an existing low-privileged foothold, tightening initial-access controls on Linux endpoints remains an effective compensating measure while patching is scheduled.

Affected VersionsENISA

ClearPass Policy Manager (CPPM) 6.11.0 ≤6.11.15
ClearPass Policy Manager (CPPM) 6.14.0 ≤6.14.0

Affected Packages

euvd clearpass_policy_manager_cppm no fix

Source: OSV (Open Source Vulnerabilities)

Affects your stack

Affects 1 package in euvd

Checking this CVE against your own stacks and servers is part of the Basic plan and up.

Technical ContextAI · show details

ClearPass Policy Manager is HPE/Aruba's network access control (NAC) and policy platform, and OnGuard is its endpoint posture/health agent that runs with elevated privileges on managed clients to collect and enforce compliance checks. Because the agent must inspect and remediate endpoint state, its Linux components execute as root or via privileged helper services, which makes the boundary between the agent's privileged code paths and unprivileged local users a classic local privilege escalation surface - typically insecure file or directory permissions, world-writable configuration or log paths, unsafe symlink or temporary-file handling, PATH/command-injection in a root-run script, or an over-permissive helper binary/socket that a low-privileged process can influence. The CVSS vector AV:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H confirms the flaw is reachable only from the local host by an attacker who already has some level of privileges, requires no victim interaction, and stays within a single security scope while delivering complete loss of confidentiality, integrity, and availability via root. No CWE identifier or CPE string was provided in the source data, so the precise root-cause class cannot be independently confirmed from the available intelligence beyond the privilege-escalation category, and the underlying defect should be characterized from the HPE advisory rather than inferred.

Know when the next one hits your stack

  • Watch products and get an email when something new is published
  • Check this CVE against your own stack and servers
  • Exploit and PoC references, threat intelligence from 22 sources

No credit card · 7-day full trial

Severity by source

Vendor (hpe) PRIMARY 7.8 HIGH
AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
vuln.today AI 7.8 HIGH

Local-only attack by an existing low-privileged user (AV:L, PR:L) with no interaction escalating to root, giving full C/I/A impact within an unchanged scope.

3.1 AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
4.0 AV:L/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N

Primary rating from Vendor (hpe).

CVSS VectorVendor: hpe

Attack Vector
Local
Attack Complexity
Low
Privileges Required
Low
User Interaction
None
Scope
Unchanged
Confidentiality
High
Integrity
High
Availability
High

DescriptionCVE.org

A privilege escalation vulnerability in the ClearPass Policy Manager OnGuard Linux agent could allow malicious users on a Linux instance to elevate their user privileges. A successful exploit allows a malicious user to escalate to root privileges on the affected Linux client.

Executive ViewAI

Why It Matters

HPE/Aruba ClearPass Policy Manager's OnGuard Linux agent contains a high-severity local privilege escalation flaw (CVE-2026-79806, CVSS 7.8) that allows anyone who already holds a low-privileged account on an affected Linux endpoint to obtain full root control of that host. Because ClearPass governs network access policy, a compromised managed endpoint could be used to undermine the trust decisions the platform enforces, and no vendor patch is currently available, leaving remediation dependent on manual mitigation. Only Linux endpoints running the OnGuard agent are exposed; Windows and macOS clients and Linux hosts without the agent are unaffected.

Business Impact: Medium
Compensating Controls

No vendor-released patch identified at time of analysis. Interim mitigations: reduce the number of low-privileged and shared local accounts on Linux endpoints running the OnGuard agent (the prerequisite for exploitation), enforce least privilege and unique credentials, monitor and alert on local privilege-escalation behavior and unexpected root-level processes via EDR/auditd, restrict interactive local logon where operationally feasible, and pursue a vendor hotfix or configuration hardening through an HPE/Aruba support case. Windows and macOS clients and Linux hosts without the OnGuard agent require no action.

Threat Intelligence Overview

EPSS Score
0.1%
Top 99% exploitable
Prevalence
Medium
enterprise NAC endpoint agent, common in Aruba/HPE shops but not everywhere
Data Quality
5 sources
Confidence: Medium

How this decision was reached

The engine reads each signal below and applies a fixed list of rules from top to bottom. The first rule that matches sets the recommended action – like a statement, every line is shown.

SignalValue
Severity HIGH
CISA KEV No
Public POC No
EPSS 0.1%
Patch available No
Active threat No
Deciding rule
HIGH severity (CVSS 7.0-8.9)
What every action level means
Emergency Immediate action required. Criteria: CRITICAL + in CISA KEV (actively exploited) without patch, OR CRITICAL + EPSS > 30% without patch, OR CRITICAL + active threat signals without patch.
Act Now Prioritize within 24-48h. Criteria: in KEV with patch available, OR CRITICAL + public POC, OR HIGH + EPSS > 10%, OR CRITICAL + active threat, OR any CRITICAL severity.
This Week Schedule remediation this week. Criteria: HIGH severity (CVSS 7.0-8.9). Patch within normal change window.
This Month Plan within 30 days. Criteria: MEDIUM severity (CVSS 4.0-6.9), lower exploitation probability. Include in regular patch cycle.
Monitor Track and reassess. Criteria: LOW severity (CVSS 0.1-3.9), minimal exploitation risk. No immediate action needed.

SSVC AssessmentENISA

SSVC Decision
Defer
Exploitation
None
System Exposure· derived
Small
Automatable
No
Human Impact
Medium
Technical Impact
Total

Priority Score

39
Low Medium High Critical
KEV: 0
EPSS: 0
CVSS: +39
PoC: 0
Weaponized: 0
Threat intel: 0
Gov advisory: 0

Attack Technique

Privilege escalation occurs when an attacker leverages flaws in access control mechanisms to gain permissions beyond what they were originally granted.

This site uses cookies essential for authentication and security. No tracking or analytics cookies are used. Privacy Policy