Evidence used
- No CISA KEV confirmation is currently recorded.
BlackTreeCVE IntelligenceFull vulnerability report · 2026
CVE-2026-93631High confidence
Zimbra Collaboration Suite OAuth Extension Cross-Site Request Forgery Enables Account Linking
Zimbra · Zimbra Collaboration Suite
7.1HighCVSS 3.1
Within 7 days
Fix not verifiedHigh technical severity; prioritise exposed affected systems while verifying vendor guidance.
R
Open reassessment dashboard →Operational reassessment
Published severity in operational context
Published severityHigh→Operational priority:High, 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 Zimbra Zimbra Collaboration Suite 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.
High technical severity; prioritise exposed affected systems while verifying vendor guidance.
Fix not verified01
What, why and how
A cross-site request forgery vulnerability in the OAuth extension of Zimbra Collaboration Suite (ZCS) Network Edition allows an attacker to link an attacker-controlled external account to a victim's mailbox. The OAuth callback does not bind its state value or authorization code to the initiating Zimbra session and instead selects the destination mailbox from the browser's current authentication cookie. On a deployment with the provider configured, an attacker can induce a signed-in victim to load a callback containing a fresh code for the attacker's provider account. This creates a persistent data source that imports attacker-controlled contacts or events. With bidirectional CalDAV synchronization, appointments subsequently created or edited in the linked calendar are also disclosed to the attacker. ZCS 10.1.16 and 10.1.20 are affected.
What
A cross-site request forgery vulnerability in the OAuth extension of Zimbra Collaboration Suite (ZCS) Network Edition allows an attacker to link an attacker-controlled external account to a victim's mailbox. The OAuth callback does not bind its state value or authorization code to the initiating Zimbra session and instead selects the destination mailbox from the browser's current authentication cookie. On a deployment with the provider configured, an attacker can induce a signed-in victim to load a callback containing a fresh code for the attacker's provider account. This creates a persistent data source that imports attacker-controlled contacts or events. With bidirectional CalDAV synchronization, appointments subsequently created or edited in the linked calendar are also disclosed to the attacker. ZCS 10.1.16 and 10.1.20 are affected.
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
A cross-site request forgery vulnerability in the OAuth extension of Zimbra Collaboration Suite (ZCS) Network Edition allows an attacker to link an attacker-controlled external account to a victim's mailbox. The OAuth callback does not bind its state value or authorization code to the initiating Zimbra session and instead selects the destination mailbox from the browser's current authentication cookie. On a deployment with the provider configured, an attacker can induce a signed-in victim to load a callback containing a fresh code for the attacker's provider account. This creates a persistent data source that imports attacker-controlled contacts or events. With bidirectional CalDAV synchronization, appointments subsequently created or edited in the linked calendar are also disclosed to the attacker. ZCS 10.1.16 and 10.1.20 are affected.
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 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 → 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:H/I:L/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.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.CHighConfidentiality impact: A successful attack can cause a major loss.ILowIntegrity impact: A successful attack can cause a limited 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. - Fix not verified
- Affected
- Zimbra Collaboration Suite: ≤ 10.1.20
- 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 23 Oct 2026 · Last source change 23 Oct 2026, 13:23 UTC · CWE-352 · Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF)
CVE recordCVE.org · 5.2
CVSS sourceCNA
EPSS source Unavailable
?
The date BlackTree first stored a score for this CVE from the daily FIRST EPSS feed.European sourceNo official EUVD mapping
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
- Catalogue recordCVE added to the BlackTree catalogue.CNA ↗
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.