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 0.44% for the current model date.
BlackTreeCVE IntelligenceFull vulnerability report · 2026
CVE-2026-26077High confidence
Discourse doesn't ensure webhooks require a token
discourse · discourse
Official source article: GitHub GHSA-J67C-53J2-4HFW ↗. Check the applicable product and release in the original source.
6.5MediumCVSS 3.1
Scheduled
Fix not verifiedMedium 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
- 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 discourse discourse and falls inside the recorded affected range.
- Recheck the vendor advisory before scheduling a change because no verified fixed version is currently retained.
- 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.
Fix not verified01
What, why and how
Discourse is an open source discussion platform. Prior to versions 2025.12.2, 2026.1.1, and 2026.2.0, several webhook endpoints (SendGrid, Mailjet, Mandrill, Postmark, SparkPost) in the `WebhooksController` accepted requests without a valid authentication token when no token was configured. This allowed unauthenticated attackers to forge webhook payloads and artificially inflate user bounce scores, potentially causing legitimate user emails to be disabled. The Mailpace endpoint had no token validation at all. Starting in versions 2025.12.2, 2026.1.1, and 2026.2.0, all webhook endpoints reject requests with a 406 response when no authentication token is configured. As a workaround, ensure that webhook authentication tokens are configured for all email provider integrations in site settings (e.g., `sendgrid_verification_key`, `mailjet_webhook_token`, `postmark_webhook_token`, `sparkpost_webhook_token`). There's no current workaround for mailpace before getting this fix.
What
Discourse is an open source discussion platform. Prior to versions 2025.12.2, 2026.1.1, and 2026.2.0, several webhook endpoints (SendGrid, Mailjet, Mandrill, Postmark, SparkPost) in the `WebhooksController` accepted requests without a valid authentication token when no token was configured. This allowed unauthenticated attackers to forge webhook payloads and artificially inflate user bounce scores, potentially causing legitimate user emails to be disabled. The Mailpace endpoint had no token validation at all. Starting in versions 2025.12.2, 2026.1.1, and 2026.2.0, all webhook endpoints reject requests with a 406 response when no authentication token is configured. As a workaround, ensure that webhook authentication tokens are configured for all email provider integrations in site settings (e.g., `sendgrid_verification_key`, `mailjet_webhook_token`, `postmark_webhook_token`, `sparkpost_webhook_token`). There's no current workaround for mailpace before getting this fix.
Why
The affected component does not establish the requesting party's identity reliably before granting access.
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
Discourse is an open source discussion platform. Prior to versions 2025.12.2, 2026.1.1, and 2026.2.0, several webhook endpoints (SendGrid, Mailjet, Mandrill, Postmark, SparkPost) in the `WebhooksController` accepted requests without a valid authentication token when no token was configured. This allowed unauthenticated attackers to forge webhook payloads and artificially inflate user bounce scores, potentially causing legitimate user emails to be disabled. The Mailpace endpoint had no token validation at all. Starting in versions 2025.12.2, 2026.1.1, and 2026.2.0, all webhook endpoints reject requests with a 406 response when no authentication token is configured. As a workaround, ensure that webhook authentication tokens are configured for all email provider integrations in site settings (e.g., `sendgrid_verification_key`, `mailjet_webhook_token`, `postmark_webhook_token`, `sparkpost_webhook_token`). There's no current workaround for mailpace before getting this fix.
Why
The affected component does not establish the requesting party's identity reliably before granting access.
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 → Improper Authentication → 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
- Low: no specialised conditions are recorded
- 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-287 ↗
CWE-287: Improper Authentication. When an actor claims to have a given identity, the product does not prove or insufficiently proves that the claim is correct.
- 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:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:LCommon 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.ACLowAttack complexity: No specialised conditions are required beyond attacker-controlled input.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.ILowIntegrity impact: A successful attack can cause a limited loss.ALowAvailability impact: A successful attack can cause a limited loss.- Post-exploitation / living off the land
- Stolen credentials, tokens and legitimate administration functions may provide continued access without deploying a large custom toolset.
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. - Fix not verified
- Affected
- discourse: < 2025.12.2, >= 2026.1.0-latest, < 2026.1.1, >= 2026.2.0-latest, < 2026.2.0
- Fixed
- No fixed version is explicitly recorded in the structured CVE data.
- Action
- No verified patch reference is present in the current structured sources. Check the vendor advisory before making a change.
- 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 26 Feb 2026 · Last source change 27 Feb 2026, 16:19 UTC · CWE-287 · Improper Authentication
CVE recordCVE.org · 5.2
CVSS sourceCNA
EPSS source FIRST · tracked since 2026-08-14
?
The date BlackTree first stored a score for this CVE from the daily FIRST EPSS feed.European sourceENISA EUVD · EUVD-2026-8854
Product sourceCNA
Remediation sourceCVE/CNA references
CWE sourceCNA
NVD statusNVD enriched
Core structured fields are present and their contributing authorities are shown above.
Material change intelligence
View recent updates ↗What changed after publication
No material field changes have been recorded since change tracking began. Routine source refreshes and cosmetic edits are intentionally excluded.
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.