Skip to content

GHSA-rw74-vc9h-534j CVE-2026-41663

Admidio has CSRF on Admin Preferences that Triggers Unauthorized Backup, .htaccess Write, and Email Send

Low Packagist
Severity
3.5 / 10
Low · CVSS 3.1
Exploit chance (EPSS)
0.12%
Chance of exploitation in the next 30 days. Higher than 1.63% of scored vulnerabilities.
Known exploited
No
Not in CISA's catalog
Weakness
CWE-352 Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF)
Fix
5.0.9
Upgrade admidio/admidio to this version or later

Description

Summary

Several administrative operations in Admidio's preferences module (database backup, test email, htaccess generation) fire via GET requests with no CSRF token validation. Because SameSite=Lax cookies travel with top-level GET navigations, an attacker forces an authenticated admin to trigger these actions from a malicious page.

Details

In modules/preferences.php, the backup, test_email, and htaccess modes accept GET parameters with no CSRF token check:

// modules/preferences.php - backup mode
case 'backup':
    // Creates full database dump and serves as download
    // No CSRF token validation
    $backupFile = $gDb->backup();
    // ... sends file to client
    break;

case 'test_email':
    // Sends test email from the server
    // No CSRF token validation
    break;

case 'htaccess':
    // Writes .htaccess file to disk
    // No CSRF token validation
    break;

The save mode in the same file validates CSRF via getFormObject(), confirming the developers intended CSRF protection but did not apply it to these other modes.

Because these are GET requests, SameSite=Lax browsers include session cookies on top-level cross-origin navigations, making CSRF exploitation trivial.

Proof of Concept

Simplified attacker page (csrf.html hosted on attacker origin):

<html>
<body>
<h1>Loading...</h1>
<!-- Trigger backup creation on victim's browser -->
<script>window.location = 'https://target-admidio.example.com/adm_program/modules/preferences.php?mode=backup';</script>
</body>
</html>

When an administrator visits this page, the browser navigates to the Admidio backup URL with full session cookies. The server generates a database dump and serves it as a download to the victim's browser. Note: the backup downloads to the victim's machine, not to the attacker. The attacker cannot read the response cross-origin.

For htaccess mode, the CSRF overwrites the .htaccess file on the server, disrupting the application. For test_email mode, it triggers email sends from the server, which an attacker can abuse for spam or to probe internal email infrastructure.

Impact

An attacker tricks an Admidio administrator into visiting a malicious page that triggers state-changing operations on the server:

  • Backup creation: forces the server to generate a full database dump. The backup downloads to the victim's browser, not to the attacker. However, repeated backup triggers can cause disk I/O and storage pressure on the server.
  • htaccess modification: overwrites the server's .htaccess file, breaking URL routing or disabling security headers.
  • Test email: fires email sends from the server, usable as a spam relay or to probe internal mail configuration.

The core issue is that state-changing operations run via unprotected GET requests. The victim only needs to visit a single attacker-controlled page while logged in.

Recommended Fix

  1. Change backup, test_email, and htaccess operations to require POST requests.
  2. Add CSRF token validation using the existing getFormObject() mechanism.
  3. As defense in depth, set SameSite=Strict on session cookies or add a confirmation step for destructive operations like database backup.

Found by aisafe.io

Affected versions

Packagist

PackageVulnerableFixed in
admidio/admidio
< 5.0.9
5.0.9

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.

admidio/admidio Packagist → 5.0.9

composer
composer require admidio/admidio:^5.0.9

Severity breakdown

CVSS 3.1 3.5

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

Attack vector
Network
Attack complexity
Low
Privileges required
High
User interaction
Required
Scope
Unchanged
Confidentiality
None
Integrity
Low
Availability
Low

Weakness

CWE-352: Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF)

The web application does not, or cannot, sufficiently verify whether a request was intentionally provided by the user who sent the request, which could have originated from an unauthorized actor.

How to prevent it
  • Architecture and Design: Use a vetted library or framework that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid [REF-1482]. For example, use anti-CSRF packages such as the OWASP CSRFGuard. [REF-330] Another example is the ESAPI Session Management control, which includes a component for CSRF. [REF-45]
  • Implementation: Ensure that the application is free of cross-site scripting issues (CWE-79), because most CSRF defenses can be bypassed using attacker-controlled script.
  • Architecture and Design: Generate a unique nonce for each form, place the nonce into the form, and verify the nonce upon receipt of the form. Be sure that the nonce is not predictable (CWE-330). [REF-332]
  • Architecture and Design: Identify especially dangerous operations. When the user performs a dangerous operation, send a separate confirmation request to ensure that the user intended to perform that operation.
  • Architecture and Design: Use the "double-submitted cookie" method as described by Felten and Zeller: When a user visits a site, the site should generate a pseudorandom value and set it as a cookie on the user's machine. The site should require every form submission to include this value as a form value and also as a cookie value. When a POST request is sent to the site, the request should only be considered valid if the form value and the cookie value are the same. Because of the same-origin policy, an attacker cannot read or modify the value stored in the cookie. To successfully submit a form on behalf of the user, the attacker would have to correctly guess the pseudorandom value. If the pseudorandom value is cryptographically strong, this will be prohibitively difficult. This technique requires Javascript, so it may not work for browsers that have Javascript disabled. [REF-331]
  • Architecture and Design: Do not use the GET method for any request that triggers a state change.
  • Implementation: Check the HTTP Referer header to see if the request originated from an expected page. This could break legitimate functionality, because users or proxies may have disabled sending the Referer for privacy reasons.

References

Timeline

  1. Published
  2. Last updated by the source
  3. Latest EPSS score
AdvisorySeverityWhy it's related
GHSA-hm42-q32m-vj4f
Admidio: CSRF on Plugin Install, Uninstall, and Update via Unprotected GET Requests
Medium Also affects admidio/admidio
GHSA-xw54-c3mx-9pm3
Admidio: Any logged-in user can delete inventory fields via `mode=field_delete` — incomplete fix of #2024
Medium Also affects admidio/admidio
GHSA-mch8-wf3h-6x88
Admidio writes session IDs and auto-login cookie values to application logs
Medium Also affects admidio/admidio
GHSA-4rgq-38mh-9xqg
Admidio PKCS#12 private key export action lacks CSRF protection
Medium Also affects admidio/admidio
GHSA-x628-457g-2pw9
Admidio has IDOR in `documents-files.php` `mode=move_save` that lets any folder-uploader exfiltrate files from private folders
High Also affects admidio/admidio
GHSA-q6w3-hpfv-rg36
Admidio: IDOR in documents-files.php allows cross-folder file rename and description changes by unauthorized uploaders
Medium Also affects admidio/admidio
GHSA-xg76-5qj2-2hhv
Admidio: CSRF in SSO client `enable` action toggles SAML/OIDC clients without token validation
Medium Also affects admidio/admidio
GHSA-mx25-j3rc-6w2w
Admidio's CSRF in registration `send_login` mode resets arbitrary user passwords
Medium Also affects admidio/admidio
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