CVE-2026-46620 (GCVE-0-2026-46620)
Vulnerability from cvelistv5 – Published: 2026-05-26 15:04 – Updated: 2026-05-27 16:04
VLAI
EPSS
VEX
Title
e107: CSRF in comment.php moderation endpoints via token-optional validation in session_handler::check()
Summary
e107 is a content management system (CMS). Prior to 2.3.5, e107 CMS does not properly enforce CSRF token validation on comment moderation actions. The problem comes down to how session_handler::check() handles CSRF tokens. Instead of requiring a token on every state-changing request, it only validates the token if one happens to be present. If there is no token at all, the check is skipped entirely. This vulnerability is fixed in 2.3.5.
Severity
6.5 (Medium)
SSVC
Exploitation: poc
Automatable: no
Technical Impact: partial
CISA Coordinator (v2.0.3)
Assigner
References
1 reference
| URL | Tags |
|---|---|
| https://github.com/e107inc/e107/security/advisori… | x_refsource_CONFIRM |
{
"containers": {
"adp": [
{
"metrics": [
{
"other": {
"content": {
"id": "CVE-2026-46620",
"options": [
{
"Exploitation": "poc"
},
{
"Automatable": "no"
},
{
"Technical Impact": "partial"
}
],
"role": "CISA Coordinator",
"timestamp": "2026-05-27T16:04:28.086263Z",
"version": "2.0.3"
},
"type": "ssvc"
}
}
],
"providerMetadata": {
"dateUpdated": "2026-05-27T16:04:41.864Z",
"orgId": "134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0",
"shortName": "CISA-ADP"
},
"references": [
{
"tags": [
"exploit"
],
"url": "https://github.com/e107inc/e107/security/advisories/GHSA-m4hh-m278-jwg5"
}
],
"title": "CISA ADP Vulnrichment"
}
],
"cna": {
"affected": [
{
"product": "e107",
"vendor": "e107inc",
"versions": [
{
"status": "affected",
"version": "\u003c 2.3.5"
}
]
}
],
"descriptions": [
{
"lang": "en",
"value": "e107 is a content management system (CMS). Prior to 2.3.5, e107 CMS does not properly enforce CSRF token validation on comment moderation actions. The problem comes down to how session_handler::check() handles CSRF tokens. Instead of requiring a token on every state-changing request, it only validates the token if one happens to be present. If there is no token at all, the check is skipped entirely. This vulnerability is fixed in 2.3.5."
}
],
"metrics": [
{
"cvssV3_1": {
"attackComplexity": "LOW",
"attackVector": "NETWORK",
"availabilityImpact": "NONE",
"baseScore": 6.5,
"baseSeverity": "MEDIUM",
"confidentialityImpact": "NONE",
"integrityImpact": "HIGH",
"privilegesRequired": "NONE",
"scope": "UNCHANGED",
"userInteraction": "REQUIRED",
"vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:N",
"version": "3.1"
}
}
],
"problemTypes": [
{
"descriptions": [
{
"cweId": "CWE-285",
"description": "CWE-285: Improper Authorization",
"lang": "en",
"type": "CWE"
}
]
},
{
"descriptions": [
{
"cweId": "CWE-352",
"description": "CWE-352: Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF)",
"lang": "en",
"type": "CWE"
}
]
}
],
"providerMetadata": {
"dateUpdated": "2026-05-26T15:04:32.092Z",
"orgId": "a0819718-46f1-4df5-94e2-005712e83aaa",
"shortName": "GitHub_M"
},
"references": [
{
"name": "https://github.com/e107inc/e107/security/advisories/GHSA-m4hh-m278-jwg5",
"tags": [
"x_refsource_CONFIRM"
],
"url": "https://github.com/e107inc/e107/security/advisories/GHSA-m4hh-m278-jwg5"
}
],
"source": {
"advisory": "GHSA-m4hh-m278-jwg5",
"discovery": "UNKNOWN"
},
"title": "e107: CSRF in comment.php moderation endpoints via token-optional validation in session_handler::check()"
}
},
"cveMetadata": {
"assignerOrgId": "a0819718-46f1-4df5-94e2-005712e83aaa",
"assignerShortName": "GitHub_M",
"cveId": "CVE-2026-46620",
"datePublished": "2026-05-26T15:04:32.092Z",
"dateReserved": "2026-05-15T19:34:14.012Z",
"dateUpdated": "2026-05-27T16:04:41.864Z",
"state": "PUBLISHED"
},
"dataType": "CVE_RECORD",
"dataVersion": "5.2",
"vulnerability-lookup:meta": {
"epss": {
"cve": "CVE-2026-46620",
"date": "2026-08-04",
"epss": "0.00133",
"percentile": "0.03214"
},
"nvd": "{\"cve\":{\"id\":\"CVE-2026-46620\",\"sourceIdentifier\":\"security-advisories@github.com\",\"published\":\"2026-05-26T16:16:26.130\",\"lastModified\":\"2026-07-24T11:10:00.170\",\"vulnStatus\":\"Deferred\",\"cveTags\":[],\"descriptions\":[{\"lang\":\"en\",\"value\":\"e107 is a content management system (CMS). Prior to 2.3.5, e107 CMS does not properly enforce CSRF token validation on comment moderation actions. The problem comes down to how session_handler::check() handles CSRF tokens. Instead of requiring a token on every state-changing request, it only validates the token if one happens to be present. If there is no token at all, the check is skipped entirely. This vulnerability is fixed in 2.3.5.\"},{\"lang\":\"es\",\"value\":\"e107 es un sistema de gesti\u00f3n de contenidos (CMS). Antes de la versi\u00f3n 2.3.5, e107 CMS no aplica correctamente la validaci\u00f3n del token CSRF en las acciones de moderaci\u00f3n de comentarios. El problema radica en c\u00f3mo session_handler::check() maneja los tokens CSRF. En lugar de requerir un token en cada solicitud de cambio de estado, solo valida el token si este est\u00e1 presente. Si no hay ning\u00fan token, la verificaci\u00f3n se omite por completo. Esta vulnerabilidad est\u00e1 corregida en la versi\u00f3n 2.3.5.\"}],\"affected\":[{\"source\":\"security-advisories@github.com\",\"affectedData\":[{\"vendor\":\"e107inc\",\"product\":\"e107\",\"versions\":[{\"version\":\"\u003c 2.3.5\",\"status\":\"affected\"}]}]}],\"metrics\":{\"cvssMetricV31\":[{\"source\":\"security-advisories@github.com\",\"type\":\"Secondary\",\"cvssData\":{\"version\":\"3.1\",\"vectorString\":\"CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:N\",\"baseScore\":6.5,\"baseSeverity\":\"MEDIUM\",\"attackVector\":\"NETWORK\",\"attackComplexity\":\"LOW\",\"privilegesRequired\":\"NONE\",\"userInteraction\":\"REQUIRED\",\"scope\":\"UNCHANGED\",\"confidentialityImpact\":\"NONE\",\"integrityImpact\":\"HIGH\",\"availabilityImpact\":\"NONE\"},\"exploitabilityScore\":2.8,\"impactScore\":3.6}],\"ssvcV203\":[{\"source\":\"134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0\",\"ssvcData\":{\"timestamp\":\"2026-05-27T16:04:28.086263Z\",\"id\":\"CVE-2026-46620\",\"options\":[{\"exploitation\":\"poc\"},{\"automatable\":\"no\"},{\"technicalImpact\":\"partial\"}],\"role\":\"CISA Coordinator\",\"version\":\"2.0.3\"}}]},\"weaknesses\":[{\"source\":\"security-advisories@github.com\",\"type\":\"Secondary\",\"description\":[{\"lang\":\"en\",\"value\":\"CWE-285\"},{\"lang\":\"en\",\"value\":\"CWE-352\"}]}],\"references\":[{\"url\":\"https://github.com/e107inc/e107/security/advisories/GHSA-m4hh-m278-jwg5\",\"source\":\"security-advisories@github.com\"},{\"url\":\"https://github.com/e107inc/e107/security/advisories/GHSA-m4hh-m278-jwg5\",\"source\":\"134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0\"}]}}",
"redhat_vex": {
"current_release_date": "2026-05-27T20:13:53+00:00",
"cve": "CVE-2026-46620",
"id": "CVE-2026-46620",
"initial_release_date": "2026-01-01T00:00:00+00:00",
"product_status:known_not_affected": "1",
"source": "Red Hat CSAF VEX",
"status": "final",
"title": "e107: CSRF in comment.php moderation endpoints via token-optional validation in session_handler::check()",
"url": "https://security.access.redhat.com/data/csaf/v2/vex/2026/cve-2026-46620.json",
"version": "3"
},
"vulnrichment": {
"containers": "{\"cna\": {\"title\": \"e107: CSRF in comment.php moderation endpoints via token-optional validation in session_handler::check()\", \"source\": {\"advisory\": \"GHSA-m4hh-m278-jwg5\", \"discovery\": \"UNKNOWN\"}, \"metrics\": [{\"cvssV3_1\": {\"scope\": \"UNCHANGED\", \"version\": \"3.1\", \"baseScore\": 6.5, \"attackVector\": \"NETWORK\", \"baseSeverity\": \"MEDIUM\", \"vectorString\": \"CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:N\", \"integrityImpact\": \"HIGH\", \"userInteraction\": \"REQUIRED\", \"attackComplexity\": \"LOW\", \"availabilityImpact\": \"NONE\", \"privilegesRequired\": \"NONE\", \"confidentialityImpact\": \"NONE\"}}], \"affected\": [{\"vendor\": \"e107inc\", \"product\": \"e107\", \"versions\": [{\"status\": \"affected\", \"version\": \"\u003c 2.3.5\"}]}], \"references\": [{\"url\": \"https://github.com/e107inc/e107/security/advisories/GHSA-m4hh-m278-jwg5\", \"name\": \"https://github.com/e107inc/e107/security/advisories/GHSA-m4hh-m278-jwg5\", \"tags\": [\"x_refsource_CONFIRM\"]}], \"descriptions\": [{\"lang\": \"en\", \"value\": \"e107 is a content management system (CMS). Prior to 2.3.5, e107 CMS does not properly enforce CSRF token validation on comment moderation actions. The problem comes down to how session_handler::check() handles CSRF tokens. Instead of requiring a token on every state-changing request, it only validates the token if one happens to be present. If there is no token at all, the check is skipped entirely. This vulnerability is fixed in 2.3.5.\"}], \"problemTypes\": [{\"descriptions\": [{\"lang\": \"en\", \"type\": \"CWE\", \"cweId\": \"CWE-285\", \"description\": \"CWE-285: Improper Authorization\"}]}, {\"descriptions\": [{\"lang\": \"en\", \"type\": \"CWE\", \"cweId\": \"CWE-352\", \"description\": \"CWE-352: Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF)\"}]}], \"providerMetadata\": {\"orgId\": \"a0819718-46f1-4df5-94e2-005712e83aaa\", \"shortName\": \"GitHub_M\", \"dateUpdated\": \"2026-05-26T15:04:32.092Z\"}}, \"adp\": [{\"title\": \"CISA ADP Vulnrichment\", \"metrics\": [{\"other\": {\"type\": \"ssvc\", \"content\": {\"id\": \"CVE-2026-46620\", \"role\": \"CISA Coordinator\", \"options\": [{\"Exploitation\": \"poc\"}, {\"Automatable\": \"no\"}, {\"Technical Impact\": \"partial\"}], \"version\": \"2.0.3\", \"timestamp\": \"2026-05-27T16:04:28.086263Z\"}}}], \"references\": [{\"url\": \"https://github.com/e107inc/e107/security/advisories/GHSA-m4hh-m278-jwg5\", \"tags\": [\"exploit\"]}], \"providerMetadata\": {\"shortName\": \"CISA-ADP\", \"orgId\": \"134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0\", \"dateUpdated\": \"2026-05-27T16:04:38.565Z\"}}]}",
"cveMetadata": "{\"cveId\": \"CVE-2026-46620\", \"state\": \"PUBLISHED\", \"dateUpdated\": \"2026-05-26T15:04:32.092Z\", \"dateReserved\": \"2026-05-15T19:34:14.012Z\", \"assignerOrgId\": \"a0819718-46f1-4df5-94e2-005712e83aaa\", \"datePublished\": \"2026-05-26T15:04:32.092Z\", \"assignerShortName\": \"GitHub_M\"}",
"dataType": "CVE_RECORD",
"dataVersion": "5.2"
}
}
}
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…
The MITRE ATT&CK techniques below are AI-generated suggestions, inferred from the description of the
vulnerability by the CIRCL/vulnerability-attack-technique-classification-roberta-base
model, served locally by ML-Gateway.
They have not been verified by an analyst and are provided for guidance only.
Loading…
Loading…