BlackTreeIndependent security intelligence
← Back to the CVE catalogue
Full vulnerability report · 2026
CVE-2026-55593High confidence

Froxlor: CSRF Vulnerability in Froxlor AJAX Endpoint — Missing Cross-Site Request Forgery Protection

froxlor · froxlor

6.5MediumCVSS 3.1
Recommended action
Scheduled

Medium technical severity with no CISA KEV confirmation; remediate through the normal risk-based patch cycle unless local exposure raises the priority.

Patch available
Optional official sources

National CERT insights
?CERT means Computer Emergency Response Team; CSIRT is the closely related term Computer Security Incident Response Team.

Select the national-authority views to include. The exact source language is shown on each matched advisory. Your choice is remembered on this device and encoded in the shareable URL.

Official European source

ENISA European Vulnerability Database

Official EUVD identifiers, advisory evidence and known-exploited context. Missing fields are not treated as evidence of low risk.

1 current
ENISA EUVD identifier

EUVD-2026-61220

No EUVD known-exploited evidence

Froxlor is open source server administration software. Prior to 2.3.8, the standalone lib/ajax.php entry point bypasses the centralized request validation in lib/init.php, and Ajax::handle in lib/Froxlor/Ajax/Ajax.php checks only for a valid session before routing state-changing requests. The editapikey action in Ajax::editApiKey updates allowed_from and valid_until without validating a CSRF token, while templates/Froxlor/assets/js/jquery/apikeys.js sends no token because the endpoint does not require one. An unauthenticated attacker can induce an authenticated administrator's browser to submit a forged request that adds an attacker-controlled address to an API key's allowed_from list or removes its expiration, weakening the key's security restrictions. This issue is fixed in version 2.3.8.

EUVD state
Present in the current official mapping
Known exploitation
Not present in the current ENISA EUVD known-exploited dataset. This is not proof of no exploitation.
ENISA score
6.5 · CVSS 3.1
Advisory evidence
No linked advisory details stored yet
Recommended actionScheduled

Medium technical severity with no CISA KEV confirmation; remediate through the normal risk-based patch cycle unless local exposure raises the priority.

Patch available
01

What, why and how

Froxlor is open source server administration software. Prior to 2.3.8, the standalone lib/ajax.php entry point bypasses the centralized request validation in lib/init.php, and Ajax::handle in lib/Froxlor/Ajax/Ajax.php checks only for a valid session before routing state-changing requests. The editapikey action in Ajax::editApiKey updates allowed_from and valid_until without validating a CSRF token, while templates/Froxlor/assets/js/jquery/apikeys.js sends no token because the endpoint does not require one. An unauthenticated attacker can induce an authenticated administrator's browser to submit a forged request that adds an attacker-controlled address to an API key's allowed_from list or removes its expiration, weakening the key's security restrictions. This issue is fixed in version 2.3.8.

What

Froxlor is open source server administration software. Prior to 2.3.8, the standalone lib/ajax.php entry point bypasses the centralized request validation in lib/init.php, and Ajax::handle in lib/Froxlor/Ajax/Ajax.php checks only for a valid session before routing state-changing requests. The editapikey action in Ajax::editApiKey updates allowed_from and valid_until without validating a CSRF token, while templates/Froxlor/assets/js/jquery/apikeys.js sends no token because the endpoint does not require one. An unauthenticated attacker can induce an authenticated administrator's browser to submit a forged request that adds an attacker-controlled address to an API key's allowed_from list or removes its expiration, weakening the key's security restrictions. This issue is fixed in version 2.3.8.

Why

The application accepts a state-changing browser request without a reliable anti-forgery check.

How

An attacker operating through a network path may attempt exploitation without authentication after a user interaction. If successful, the issue may cause the confidentiality, integrity or availability impact described by the vendor.

What

Froxlor is open source server administration software. Prior to 2.3.8, the standalone lib/ajax.php entry point bypasses the centralized request validation in lib/init.php, and Ajax::handle in lib/Froxlor/Ajax/Ajax.php checks only for a valid session before routing state-changing requests. The editapikey action in Ajax::editApiKey updates allowed_from and valid_until without validating a CSRF token, while templates/Froxlor/assets/js/jquery/apikeys.js sends no token because the endpoint does not require one. An unauthenticated attacker can induce an authenticated administrator's browser to submit a forged request that adds an attacker-controlled address to an API key's allowed_from list or removes its expiration, weakening the key's security restrictions. This issue is fixed in version 2.3.8.

Why

The application accepts a state-changing browser request without a reliable anti-forgery check.

How

An attacker operating through a network path may attempt exploitation without authentication after a 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
?Confirmed exploitation and public exploit material are separate signals. Attacks can occur without public proof-of-concept or exploit code.
No confirmed evidence

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
?Confirmed exploitation and public exploit material are separate signals. Attacks can occur without public proof-of-concept or exploit code.
None recorded

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 → Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) → cause the confidentiality, integrity or availability impact described by the vendor
Attack surface
Network
Privileges required
None: unauthenticated exploitation is possible
User interaction
Required interaction required
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-352 ↗

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 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:R/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:N

Common 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.UIRequiredUser interaction: Another user must perform an action for exploitation to succeed.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
Stolen credentials, tokens and legitimate administration functions may provide continued access without deploying a large custom toolset.
NetworkUnauthenticatedCWE-352
A

Official authority intelligence

Only matched European and national findings are included. Language selectors and unavailable sources are omitted.

ENISA EUVD · EUVD-2026-61220Official EUVD mapping

Froxlor is open source server administration software. Prior to 2.3.8, the standalone lib/ajax.php entry point bypasses the centralized request validation in lib/init.php, and Ajax::handle in lib/Froxlor/Ajax/Ajax.php checks only for a valid session before routing state-changing requests. The editapikey action in Ajax::editApiKey updates allowed_from and valid_until without validating a CSRF token, while templates/Froxlor/assets/js/jquery/apikeys.js sends no token because the endpoint does not require one. An unauthenticated attacker can induce an authenticated administrator's browser to submit a forged request that adds an attacker-controlled address to an API key's allowed_from list or removes its expiration, weakening the key's security restrictions. This issue is fixed in version 2.3.8.

Official EUVD record
BSI · German · WID-SEC-W-2026-2113Froxlor: Mehrere Schwachstellen

Ein Angreifer kann mehrere Schwachstellen in Froxlor ausnutzen, um Cross-Site-Scripting- oder SQL-Injection-Angriffe durchzuführen, Sicherheitsmaßnahmen zu umgehen, Daten zu manipulieren oder vertrauliche Informationen offenzulegen, was möglicherweise weitere Angriffe ermöglicht.

Official advisory
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
< 2.3.8
Fixed
2.3.8.
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 18 Aug 2026 · Last source change 19 Aug 2026, 18:20 UTC · CWE-352 · Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF)

CVE recordCVE.org · 5.2
CVSS sourceCNA
EPSS source
?The date BlackTree first stored a score for this CVE from the daily FIRST EPSS feed.
FIRST · tracked since 2026-08-23
European sourceENISA EUVD · EUVD-2026-61220
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

What changed after publication

View recent updates →
  1. Catalogue recordCVE added to the BlackTree catalogue.
    CNA ↗
Material fields only · duplicate refreshes suppressed · history retained for the configured operational retention period
CVE published
Fixed release or patch reference recorded
ENISA EUVD · EUVD-2026-61220↗CVE authority or vendor reference↗Official CVE record (CNA and ADP data)↗NVD record↗
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.
Free version - for non-commercial use only.CVE-2026-55593 · cve.blacktree.nl