Skip to content

GHSA-f54h-78c9-c24h CVE-2026-7887

Concrete CMS: OAuth 2.0 Authorization-Code Handler Bypasses Account Status

Medium Packagist
Severity
0.0 / 10
Medium · CVSS 4.0
Exploit chance (EPSS)
0.17%
Chance of exploitation in the next 30 days. Higher than 6.60% of scored vulnerabilities.
Known exploited
No
Not in CISA's catalog
Weakness
CWE-1287 Improper Validation of Specified Type of Input
Fix
9.5.1
Upgrade concrete5/concrete5 to this version or later

Description

For Concrete CMS 9.5.0 and below, OAuth 2.0 Authorization-Code Handler Bypasses Account Status. A user with uIsActive=0 (suspended, banned, terminated employee) can still authenticate via OAuth and receive valid API tokens.

Affected versions

Packagist

PackageVulnerableFixed in
concrete5/concrete5
< 9.5.1
9.5.1

How to fix

Move to the fixed version or later with your package manager, update the lockfile, and run your tests. If the package only arrives through another dependency, upgrade that dependency first. If none of its releases pulls a fixed version yet, force the version with your package manager's override.

concrete5/concrete5 Packagist → 9.5.1

composer
composer require concrete5/concrete5:^9.5.1

Severity breakdown

CVSS 4.0 0.0

CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:L/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/VA:N/SC:L/SI:L/SA:N

Attack vector
Network
Attack complexity
Low
Attack requirements
Present
Privileges required
Low
User interaction
None
Confidentiality (vulnerable system)
Low
Integrity (vulnerable system)
Low
Availability (vulnerable system)
None
Confidentiality (subsequent systems)
Low
Integrity (subsequent systems)
Low
Availability (subsequent systems)
None

CVSS 3.1 6.4

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:L/I:L/A:N

Attack vector
Network
Attack complexity
Low
Privileges required
Low
User interaction
None
Scope
Changed
Confidentiality
Low
Integrity
Low
Availability
None

Weakness

CWE-1287: Improper Validation of Specified Type of Input

The product receives input that is expected to be of a certain type, but it does not validate or incorrectly validates that the input is actually of the expected type.

How to prevent it
  • Implementation: Assume all input is malicious. Use an "accept known good" input validation strategy, i.e., use a list of acceptable inputs that strictly conform to specifications. Reject any input that does not strictly conform to specifications, or transform it into something that does. When performing input validation, consider all potentially relevant properties, including length, type of input, the full range of acceptable values, missing or extra inputs, syntax, consistency across related fields, and conformance to business rules. As an example of business rule logic, "boat" may be syntactically valid because it only contains alphanumeric characters, but it is not valid if the input is only expected to contain colors such as "red" or "blue." Do not rely exclusively on looking for malicious or malformed inputs. This is likely to miss at least one undesirable input, especially if the code's environment changes. This can give attackers enough room to bypass the intended validation. However, denylists can be useful for detecting potential attacks or determining which inputs are so malformed that they should be rejected outright.

References

Timeline

  1. Published
  2. Last updated by the source
  3. Latest EPSS score
AdvisorySeverityWhy it's related
GHSA-g82f-9pw7-773w
Concrete CMS: PHP Object Injection via unserialize() calls
High Also affects concrete5/concrete5
GHSA-52pr-7vmf-2w7x
Concrete CMS is vulnerable to PHP Object Injection via unserialize() calls in the Workflow, Form block, and File/Set components
High Also affects concrete5/concrete5
GHSA-q9fm-mpg8-8jqm
Concrete CMS is vulnerable to Stored XSS via page name in the Atomik theme
Medium Also affects concrete5/concrete5
GHSA-jqvq-gv67-3567
Concrete CMS is vulnerable to IDOR + wrong-authorization-level in the Express association Reorder dialog
Medium Also affects concrete5/concrete5
GHSA-xjg6-5v39-v7fc
Concrete CMS is vulnerable to CSRF via Backend\File::approveVersion
Medium Also affects concrete5/concrete5
GHSA-44q4-354f-c826
Concrete CMS is vulnerable to Cross Site Request Forgery (CSRF) at concrete/controllers/backend/file approveVersion()
Medium Also affects concrete5/concrete5
GHSA-6qjh-p324-694f
Concrete CMS is vulnerable to Cross Site Request Forgery (CSRF) at concrete/controllers/backend/file rescanMultiple()
High Also affects concrete5/concrete5
GHSA-6fxm-r8p3-mx5c
Concrete CMS is vulnerable to Cross Site Request Forgery (CSRF) at concrete/controllers/backend/file rescan()
High Also affects concrete5/concrete5
Is this in your code?

MergeHarbor checks every repository's dependencies against this database, ranks what matters by exploitability and reachability, routes it to the owning team and opens the fix pull request.

Check your repos with MergeHarbor