BlackTreeCVE Intelligence
← Back to the CVE catalogue
Full vulnerability report · 2026
CVE-2026-93650High confidence

Saleor throttling.py get_client_ip excessive authentication

Unknown · Saleor

6.3MediumCVSS 4.0
Recommended action
Within 7 days

Medium technical severity with public exploit material referenced by a structured source; prioritise exposed affected systems while verifying vendor guidance.

Fix not verified
R
Operational reassessment

Published severity in operational context

Open reassessment dashboard →
Published severityMediumOperational priority:High, raised one band.upgradedsince 18 Sep 2026

Evidence used

  • No CISA KEV confirmation is currently recorded.
  • A structured source references public exploit or proof-of-concept material.
  • The selected CVSS metric records a network-reachable, unauthenticated path with no user interaction.
  • EPSS is 0.69% for the current model date.

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

  1. Confirm that the asset runs Unknown Saleor and falls inside the recorded affected range.
  2. Recheck the vendor advisory before scheduling a change because no verified fixed version is currently retained.
  3. Validate exposure, authentication requirements and compensating controls in the actual environment.
  4. Reopen this reassessment when CVSS, KEV, EPSS, exploit evidence or remediation changes.
Mitigation target: Within 30 daysRemediation target: Within 180 days

This automated reassessment organises public evidence. It does not know asset exposure, business impact or control effectiveness and does not replace CVSS or a human risk decision.

Optional official sources

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

Choose official national sources for this report. Each advisory shows its original language. Your selection is remembered on this device and included in shared links.

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-2026-83264

No EUVD known-exploited evidence

A vulnerability was determined in Saleor up to 3.20.118/3.21.54/3.22.47/3.23.14. This vulnerability affects the function get_client_ip of the file saleor/account/throttling.py. Executing a manipulation can lead to improper restriction of excessive authentication attempts. The attack can be executed remotely. The attack requires a high level of complexity. It is stated that the exploitability is difficult. The exploit has been publicly disclosed and may be utilized. The projects own issue #19203 internal ticket admits "IP can be spoofed in most deployments" and that its REAL_IP_ENVIRON-type setting bypasses get_client_ip; fix (right-to-left RFC 7239 hop selection) proposed but still unmerged. The vendor explains within an email, that "[t]his is not a vulnerability, this is working at intended, Saleor expects XFF to be configured properly".

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
6.3 · CVSS 4.0
Advisory evidence
No linked advisory details stored yet
Recommended actionWithin 7 days

Medium technical severity with public exploit material referenced by a structured source; prioritise exposed affected systems while verifying vendor guidance.

Fix not verified
01

What, why and how

A vulnerability was determined in Saleor up to 3.20.118/3.21.54/3.22.47/3.23.14. This vulnerability affects the function get_client_ip of the file saleor/account/throttling.py. Executing a manipulation can lead to improper restriction of excessive authentication attempts. The attack can be executed remotely. The attack requires a high level of complexity. It is stated that the exploitability is difficult. The exploit has been publicly disclosed and may be utilized. The projects own issue #19203 internal ticket admits "IP can be spoofed in most deployments" and that its REAL_IP_ENVIRON-type setting bypasses get_client_ip; fix (right-to-left RFC 7239 hop selection) proposed but still unmerged. The vendor explains within an email, that "[t]his is not a vulnerability, this is working at intended, Saleor expects XFF to be configured properly".

What

A vulnerability was determined in Saleor up to 3.20.118/3.21.54/3.22.47/3.23.14. This vulnerability affects the function get_client_ip of the file saleor/account/throttling.py. Executing a manipulation can lead to improper restriction of excessive authentication attempts. The attack can be executed remotely. The attack requires a high level of complexity. It is stated that the exploitability is difficult. The exploit has been publicly disclosed and may be utilized. The projects own issue #19203 internal ticket admits "IP can be spoofed in most deployments" and that its REAL_IP_ENVIRON-type setting bypasses get_client_ip; fix (right-to-left RFC 7239 hop selection) proposed but still unmerged. The vendor explains within an email, that "[t]his is not a vulnerability, this is working at intended, Saleor expects XFF to be configured properly".

Why

The product does not implement sufficient measures to prevent multiple failed authentication attempts within a short time frame.

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

A vulnerability was determined in Saleor up to 3.20.118/3.21.54/3.22.47/3.23.14. This vulnerability affects the function get_client_ip of the file saleor/account/throttling.py. Executing a manipulation can lead to improper restriction of excessive authentication attempts. The attack can be executed remotely. The attack requires a high level of complexity. It is stated that the exploitability is difficult. The exploit has been publicly disclosed and may be utilized. The projects own issue #19203 internal ticket admits "IP can be spoofed in most deployments" and that its REAL_IP_ENVIRON-type setting bypasses get_client_ip; fix (right-to-left RFC 7239 hop selection) proposed but still unmerged. The vendor explains within an email, that "[t]his is not a vulnerability, this is working at intended, Saleor expects XFF to be configured properly".

Why

The product does not implement sufficient measures to prevent multiple failed authentication attempts within a short time frame.

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
?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.
Reference recorded

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 Restriction of Excessive Authentication Attempts → 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
Not a CVSS 4.0 base metric
Weakness
?CWE means Common Weakness Enumeration: a standard category for the underlying weakness.
CWE-307 ↗

CWE-307: Improper Restriction of Excessive Authentication Attempts. The product does not implement sufficient measures to prevent multiple failed authentication attempts within a short time frame.

CVSS vector
?CVSS means Common Vulnerability Scoring System. The vector records the metric values used to calculate technical severity.
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:H/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:L/VI:N/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:P

Common Vulnerability Scoring System 4.0: 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.ATNoneAttack requirements: No additional deployment or execution condition is required.PRNonePrivileges required: The attacker does not need an account or existing privileges.UINoneUser interaction: No action by another user is required.VCLowVulnerable-system confidentiality: A successful attack can cause a limited loss.VINoneVulnerable-system integrity: No direct loss is represented by this metric.VANoneVulnerable-system availability: No direct loss is represented by this metric.SCNoneSubsequent-system confidentiality: No direct loss is represented by this metric.SINoneSubsequent-system integrity: No direct loss is represented by this metric.SANoneSubsequent-system availability: 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.
NetworkUnauthenticatedCWE-307Public exploit reference
A

Official authority intelligence

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

ENISA EUVD · EUVD-2026-83264Official EUVD mapping

A vulnerability was determined in Saleor up to 3.20.118/3.21.54/3.22.47/3.23.14. This vulnerability affects the function get_client_ip of the file saleor/account/throttling.py. Executing a manipulation can lead to improper restriction of excessive authentication attempts. The attack can be executed remotely. The attack requires a high level of complexity. It is stated that the exploitability is difficult. The exploit has been publicly disclosed and may be utilized. The projects own issue #19203 internal ticket admits "IP can be spoofed in most deployments" and that its REAL_IP_ENVIRON-type setting bypasses get_client_ip; fix (right-to-left RFC 7239 hop selection) proposed but still unmerged. The vendor explains within an email, that "[t]his is not a vulnerability, this is working at intended, Saleor expects XFF to be configured properly".

Official EUVD record ↗
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
Saleor: 3.20.118, 3.21.0, 3.21.1, 3.21.2, 3.21.3, 3.21.4, 3.21.5, 3.21.6, 3.21.7, 3.21.8, 3.21.9, 3.21.10, 3.21.11, 3.21.12, 3.21.13, 3.21.14, 3.21.15, 3.21.16, 3.21.17, 3.21.18, 3.21.19, 3.21.20, 3.21.21, 3.21.22, 3.21.23, 3.21.24, 3.21.25, 3.21.26, 3.21.27, 3.21.28, 3.21.29, 3.21.30, 3.21.31, 3.21.32, 3.21.33, 3.21.34, 3.21.35, 3.21.36, 3.21.37, 3.21.38, 3.21.39, 3.21.40, 3.21.41, 3.21.42, 3.21.43, 3.21.44, 3.21.45, 3.21.46, 3.21.47, 3.21.48, 3.21.49, 3.21.50, 3.21.51, 3.21.52, 3.21.53, 3.21.54, 3.22.0, 3.22.1, 3.22.2, 3.22.3, 3.22.4, 3.22.5, 3.22.6, 3.22.7, 3.22.8, 3.22.9, 3.22.10, 3.22.11, 3.22.12, 3.22.13, 3.22.14, 3.22.15, 3.22.16, 3.22.17, 3.22.18, 3.22.19, 3.22.20, 3.22.21, 3.22.22, 3.22.23, 3.22.24, 3.22.25, 3.22.26, 3.22.27, 3.22.28, 3.22.29, 3.22.30, 3.22.31, 3.22.32, 3.22.33, 3.22.34, 3.22.35, 3.22.36, 3.22.37, 3.22.38, 3.22.39, 3.22.40, 3.22.41, 3.22.42, 3.22.43, 3.22.44, 3.22.45, 3.22.46, 3.22.47, 3.23.0, 3.23.1, 3.23.2, 3.23.3, 3.23.4, 3.23.5, 3.23.6, 3.23.7, 3.23.8, 3.23.9, 3.23.10, 3.23.11, 3.23.12, 3.23.13, 3.23.14
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 18 Sept 2026 · Last source change 18 Sept 2026, 19:47 UTC · CWE-307 · Improper Restriction of Excessive Authentication Attempts

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 2026-09-19
European sourceENISA EUVD · EUVD-2026-83264
Product sourceCNA
Remediation sourceCVE/CNA references
CWE sourceCNA
NVD statusNVD not scheduled

Missing structured fields: affected product. Missing data is not evidence of low risk; review the primary advisory.

Material change intelligence

What changed after publication

View recent updates ↗
  1. ENISA EUVD mappingEUVD-2026-83264 was added to the official ENISA EUVD mapping for this CVE.
    Before
    not recorded
    After
    {"euvdId":"EUVD-2026-83264"}
    ENISA EUVD ↗
  2. Public exploit evidencePublic exploit evidence changed from No public exploit to Public exploit reference.
    Before
    No public exploit
    After
    Public exploit reference
    CVE.org ↗
  3. Catalogue recordCVE added to the BlackTree catalogue.
    CNA ↗
Material fields only · duplicate refreshes suppressed · history retained for the configured operational retention period
CVE published
ENISA EUVD · EUVD-2026-83264↗CISA Vulnrichment SSVC evidence↗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-2026-93650 · cve.blacktree.nl