Evidence used
- No CISA KEV confirmation is currently recorded.
- The selected CVSS metric records a network-reachable, unauthenticated path with no user interaction.
- EPSS is 0.16% for the current model date.
BlackTreeCVE IntelligenceFull vulnerability report · 2026
CVE-2026-114474High confidence
Use of Less Trusted Source in hMailServer
Progressive Robot Ltd · hMailServer
5.9MediumCVSS 3.1
Scheduled
Patch availableMedium technical severity with no CISA KEV confirmation; remediate through the normal risk-based patch cycle unless local exposure raises the priority.
R
Open reassessment dashboard →Operational reassessment
Published severity in operational context
Published severityMedium→Operational priority:Medium, unchanged from published severity.unchanged
Compensating controls
- Validate the affected product branch and deploy the verified fixed release.
- Restrict the affected network interface to trusted sources where business-safe.
- Monitor vendor guidance and exploitation sources for a material change.
Verification
- Confirm that the asset runs Progressive Robot Ltd hMailServer and falls inside the recorded affected range.
- Verify the installed build against the product-specific fixed version after deployment.
- Validate exposure, authentication requirements and compensating controls in the actual environment.
- Reopen this reassessment when CVSS, KEV, EPSS, exploit evidence or remediation changes.
Medium technical severity with no CISA KEV confirmation; remediate through the normal risk-based patch cycle unless local exposure raises the priority.
Patch available01
What, why and how
Use of a less trusted source for the envelope sender in the external-account download of Progressive Robot hMailServer 6.0.0 through 6.3.6 allows a remote unauthenticated attacker to have mail they write in the name of a domain the server hosts sent on by the server with an envelope sender at that domain, so that it passes the domain's SPF and DMARC at other receivers. A message the server downloads from an external POP3 or IMAP account has no SMTP envelope of its own, and the server took the address in its From header as its envelope sender, whatever that address was. A forward or redirect of the downloaded message to an outside address then left with that address as its envelope sender, which the Sender Rewriting Scheme leaves alone for a hosted domain, so that the receiver's SPF check passed for the forged domain, aligned even under strict alignment, with no non-default setting, host name record or DMARC policy needed. An attacker needs to know a mailbox elsewhere that an account here collects and forwards to an outside address; an account holder who adds an external account of their own can collect from a server of their own, which matters where SmtpAuthenticatedSenderCheck holds signed-in senders to their own addresses.
What
Use of a less trusted source for the envelope sender in the external-account download of Progressive Robot hMailServer 6.0.0 through 6.3.6 allows a remote unauthenticated attacker to have mail they write in the name of a domain the server hosts sent on by the server with an envelope sender at that domain, so that it passes the domain's SPF and DMARC at other receivers. A message the server downloads from an external POP3 or IMAP account has no SMTP envelope of its own, and the server took the address in its From header as its envelope sender, whatever that address was. A forward or redirect of the downloaded message to an outside address then left with that address as its envelope sender, which the Sender Rewriting Scheme leaves alone for a hosted domain, so that the receiver's SPF check passed for the forged domain, aligned even under strict alignment, with no non-default setting, host name record or DMARC policy needed. An attacker needs to know a mailbox elsewhere that an account here collects and forwards to an outside address; an account holder who adds an external account of their own can collect from a server of their own, which matters where SmtpAuthenticatedSenderCheck holds signed-in senders to their own addresses.
Why
The product has two different sources of the same data or information, but it uses the source that has less support for verification, is less trusted, or is less resistant to attack.
How
An attacker operating through a network path may attempt exploitation without authentication or user interaction. If successful, the issue may cause the confidentiality, integrity or availability impact described by the vendor.
What
Use of a less trusted source for the envelope sender in the external-account download of Progressive Robot hMailServer 6.0.0 through 6.3.6 allows a remote unauthenticated attacker to have mail they write in the name of a domain the server hosts sent on by the server with an envelope sender at that domain, so that it passes the domain's SPF and DMARC at other receivers. A message the server downloads from an external POP3 or IMAP account has no SMTP envelope of its own, and the server took the address in its From header as its envelope sender, whatever that address was. A forward or redirect of the downloaded message to an outside address then left with that address as its envelope sender, which the Sender Rewriting Scheme leaves alone for a hosted domain, so that the receiver's SPF check passed for the forged domain, aligned even under strict alignment, with no non-default setting, host name record or DMARC policy needed. An attacker needs to know a mailbox elsewhere that an account here collects and forwards to an outside address; an account holder who adds an external account of their own can collect from a server of their own, which matters where SmtpAuthenticatedSenderCheck holds signed-in senders to their own addresses.
Why
The product has two different sources of the same data or information, but it uses the source that has less support for verification, is less trusted, or is less resistant to attack.
How
An attacker operating through a network path may attempt exploitation without authentication or user interaction. If successful, the issue may cause the confidentiality, integrity or availability impact described by the vendor.
02
Exploit reality and attack path
CVSS severity, EPSS forecast probability, public exploit material and CISA-confirmed exploitation are separate signals.
Observed exploitation No confirmed evidence
?
Confirmed exploitation and public exploit material are separate signals. Attacks can occur without public proof-of-concept or exploit code.No CISA KEV match was present at the last successful refresh. This means no confirmation from that source, not proof of no exploitation.
Public PoC / exploit material None recorded
?
Confirmed exploitation and public exploit material are separate signals. Attacks can occur without public proof-of-concept or exploit code.No exploit-tagged reference or CISA SSVC proof-of-concept state is currently recorded. Research may still exist outside the structured feeds.
- Likely attack path
- a network path → Use of Less Trusted Source → cause the confidentiality, integrity or availability impact described by the vendor
- Attack surface
- Network
- Privileges required
- None: unauthenticated exploitation is possible
- User interaction
- None
- Attack complexity
- High: exploitation depends on specific conditions
- Security boundary
- Unchanged: impact remains within the vulnerable component's security authority
- Weakness
?
CWE means Common Weakness Enumeration: a standard category for the underlying weakness. - CWE-348 ↗
CWE-348: Use of Less Trusted Source. The product has two different sources of the same data or information, but it uses the source that has less support for verification, is less trusted, or is less resistant to attack.
- CVSS vector
?
CVSS means Common Vulnerability Scoring System. The vector records the metric values used to calculate technical severity. CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:NCommon Vulnerability Scoring System 3.1: the compact vector below is decoded into plain language.
AVNetworkAttack vector: The vulnerable component can be reached over a network.ACHighAttack complexity: Successful exploitation depends on specific conditions outside the attacker's direct control.PRNonePrivileges required: The attacker does not need an account or existing privileges.UINoneUser interaction: No action by another user is required.SUnchangedScope: The security impact remains within the vulnerable component's authority.CNoneConfidentiality impact: No direct loss is represented by this metric.IHighIntegrity impact: A successful attack can cause a major loss.ANoneAvailability impact: No direct loss is represented by this metric.- Post-exploitation / living off the land
- No specific living-off-the-land technique is confirmed in the structured sources. Monitor normal administration tools for activity inconsistent with the affected service's baseline.
03
Patch and workaround
Operational remediation based on structured source evidence.
- Status
?
Patch availability is based on structured fixed-version fields and authoritative update references. If no fix is verified, check the vendor advisory before making a change. - Patch available
- Affected
- hMailServer: 6.0.0 ≤ 6.3.6
- Fixed
- Upgrade to hMailServer 6.3.7, in which a download does not take an address hosted on the server from its From as its envelope sender - it keeps the empty envelope sender, as a download whose From names no address does - and a forward or redirect of it is held to the rule 6.3.7 applies to every copy of mail from outside: it is sent on with an envelope sender, or under a host name, in the organisation of a domain its From names only when the message passed DMARC for that organisation when it arrived, which a download never has. Until then, do not forward or redirect to an outside address the mail of an account that collects an external mailbox where that mail's From can name a domain the server hosts
- the spam checks of an external account are off unless they are set, and a download has no DMARC verdict of its own to hold it.
- Action
- Review the linked authoritative reference and apply the recorded fixed release appropriate to the affected product branch.
- Workaround
- No verified workaround is recorded. If business-safe, reduce exposure to the affected interface and allow only trusted sources until authoritative guidance is available.
04
Evidence and provenance
Published 21 Oct 2026 · Last source change 21 Oct 2026, 15:12 UTC · CWE-348 · Use of Less Trusted Source
CVE recordCVE.org · 5.2
CVSS sourceCNA
EPSS source FIRST · tracked since 2026-10-22
?
The date BlackTree first stored a score for this CVE from the daily FIRST EPSS feed.European sourceENISA EUVD · EUVD-2026-107317
Product sourceCNA
Remediation sourceCVE/CNA references
CWE sourceCNA
NVD statusNVD awaiting enrichment
Core structured fields are present and their contributing authorities are shown above.
Material change intelligence
View recent updates ↗What changed after publication
- ENISA EUVD mappingEUVD-2026-107317 was added to the official ENISA EUVD mapping for this CVE.ENISA EUVD ↗
- Before
- not recorded
- After
- {"euvdId":"EUVD-2026-107317"}
- Catalogue recordCVE added to the BlackTree catalogue.CNA ↗
CVE published
Fixed release or patch reference recorded
Technical terms and abbreviations used in this report
- CVE
- Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures: the public identifier for one disclosed vulnerability.
- CVSS
- Common Vulnerability Scoring System: a technical severity framework; it is not patching priority by itself.
- EPSS
- Exploit Prediction Scoring System: FIRST's estimate of the probability that exploitation activity will be observed in the next 30 days; it is a forecast, not confirmation.
- CWE
- Common Weakness Enumeration: the standard category describing the underlying software or hardware weakness.
- CNA
- CVE Numbering Authority: an organisation authorised to assign and publish CVE records.
- CISA ADP
- Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency Authorized Data Publisher: structured enrichment added to a CVE record.
- NVD
- National Vulnerability Database: NIST's enrichment service for CVE records.
- CERT / CSIRT
- A computer security incident response team that publishes warnings or coordinates incident response.
- PoC
- Proof of concept: public material that demonstrates or helps reproduce exploitation.
- CSAF
- Common Security Advisory Framework: a machine-readable format for security advisories.
- LoTL
- Living off the land: abuse of legitimate tools or system functions during an attack.