Evidence used
- No CISA KEV confirmation is currently recorded.
- EPSS is 0.17% for the current model date.
BlackTreeCVE Intelligencebalbooa.com · Gridbox extension for Joomla
High technical severity; prioritise exposed affected systems while verifying vendor guidance.
High technical severity; prioritise exposed affected systems while verifying vendor guidance.
Fix not verifiedJoomla Extension - balbooa.com - CSRF in language installation feature Gridbox < 2.20.4.0 - PagesController uses a trait that validates the Joomla session token only when the HTTP method is POST. addLanguage does not require POST inside the action and reads url and zip through the generic request input. A GET request can therefore reach the action without the trait checking a token. The action still requires core.tools , but that is the victim’s permission check; it does not prove that the privileged user intended the request.
Joomla Extension - balbooa.com - CSRF in language installation feature Gridbox < 2.20.4.0 - PagesController uses a trait that validates the Joomla session token only when the HTTP method is POST. addLanguage does not require POST inside the action and reads url and zip through the generic request input. A GET request can therefore reach the action without the trait checking a token. The action still requires core.tools , but that is the victim’s permission check; it does not prove that the privileged user intended the request.
The application accepts a state-changing browser request without a reliable anti-forgery check.
An attacker operating through a network path may attempt exploitation when the stated preconditions are met. If successful, the issue may cause the confidentiality, integrity or availability impact described by the vendor.
Joomla Extension - balbooa.com - CSRF in language installation feature Gridbox < 2.20.4.0 - PagesController uses a trait that validates the Joomla session token only when the HTTP method is POST. addLanguage does not require POST inside the action and reads url and zip through the generic request input. A GET request can therefore reach the action without the trait checking a token. The action still requires core.tools , but that is the victim’s permission check; it does not prove that the privileged user intended the request.
The application accepts a state-changing browser request without a reliable anti-forgery check.
An attacker operating through a network path may attempt exploitation when the stated preconditions are met. If successful, the issue may cause the confidentiality, integrity or availability impact described by the vendor.
CVSS severity, EPSS forecast probability, public exploit material and CISA-confirmed exploitation are separate signals.
No CISA KEV match was present at the last successful refresh. This means no confirmation from that source, not proof of no exploitation.
No exploit-tagged reference or CISA SSVC proof-of-concept state is currently recorded. Research may still exist outside the structured feeds.
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.
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:P/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/SC:N/SI:N/SA:NCommon Vulnerability Scoring System 4.0: the compact vector below is decoded into plain language.
Operational remediation based on structured source evidence.
Published 8 Oct 2026 · Last source change 9 Oct 2026, 12:31 UTC · CWE-352 · Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF)
Core structured fields are present and their contributing authorities are shown above.