CVE-2018-14926
Official description Straight from the sourceThe vendor's or NVD's own wording, published unedited. Authoritative, but often terse — it says what broke, rarely what to do.
NVD · uneditedMatera Banco 1.0.0 allows CSRF, as demonstrated by a /contingency/web/messageSend/messageSendHandler.jsp request.
Technical summary Written by usOur analysis, written from the advisory, the CVSS vector and the affected-version data. It adds context the advisory leaves out, and never invents facts that are not in the source.
dbcve analysis · high confidenceMatera Banco 1.0.0 contains a Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in the /contingency/web/messageSend/messageSendHandler.jsp endpoint. This allows attackers to trick authenticated users into unknowingly sending messages through crafted malicious requests.
Verify against the referenced sources before acting — the references below are authoritative for this CVE, this summary is not.
Affected products & versions What the vendor confirmedThe version ranges the vendor confirmed as vulnerable. If your version sits inside a range here, treat yourself as exposed until you have upgraded.
NVD · CPE data= 1.0.0CVSS breakdown How the score is builtThe industry scoring standard. It rates how the flaw is reached, what it takes to exploit, and what an attacker gains — the score is derived from those, not the other way round.
From the vector- Attack vector
- Network
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- Required
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
Am I affected? How to checkSteps we derive from the advisory and the affected-version data, so you can decide whether this CVE reaches your setup. They are a guide, not a scan — your own configuration is the authority.
dbcve checksWork through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.
-
Identify installed Matera Banco versionCheck system inventory, software bill of materials, or look for version identifiers in Matera Banco installation directories or configuration files. Common paths may include installation logs, version files, or the application banner.Affected if The installed version is Matera Banco 1.0.0 exactly
-
Locate the vulnerable JSP endpointCheck if the file /contingency/web/messageSend/messageSendHandler.jsp exists in the web application deployment directory. This is typically found in the webapps or deployment folder of the application server.Affected if The messageSendHandler.jsp file exists and is accessible
-
Inspect the message form for anti-CSRF tokensAccess the messageSend form (or its source code) and examine the HTML form elements for the presence of a CSRF protection token. Look for a hidden input field containing a random token value that changes per session, or check if the form submission includes a synchronizer token.Affected if No anti-CSRF token (synchronizer token) is found in the form or request parameters
-
Verify server-side token validationReview server-side code for messageSendHandler.jsp to determine if the request handler validates CSRF tokens before processing. Check if the code extracts and verifies a token from the request parameters.Affected if The server-side code does not validate CSRF tokens before processing the message send request
A user is affected if they run Matera Banco version 1.0.0 with the /contingency/web/messageSend/messageSendHandler.jsp endpoint accessible and without CSRF token protection on the message form.
Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.
Remediation Closing itWhat it takes to close this. Where a vendor fix exists we point at it; where none exists we say so plainly, and can build one. Effort estimates are scoped from the advisory, not from your codebase.
From vendor dataImplement anti-CSRF tokens (synchronizer token pattern) on all state-changing operations including the messageSendHandler.jsp form, and validate these tokens server-side before processing requests. Additionally, validate Origin and Referer headers as a defense-in-depth measure.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing4.0 h
- Review / QA2.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $5,120.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2018-14926 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.
References Go to the primary sourcePrimary sources — vendor advisories, patches and trackers. Where our summary and a reference disagree, the reference wins.
Primary sourcesPractitioner notes
ContributedPeer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2018-14926 in production — separate from our analysis above.
The advisory tells you what broke. It rarely tells you what actually worked. If you’ve dealt with this one, that detail is what the next engineer is searching for.
- The version that genuinely resolved it — not the one the vendor claimed
- A config change or rule that shut the vector down
- A gotcha in the upgrade path that cost you an afternoon
No notes yet
Be the first to add a field note for this CVE — a mitigation you’ve verified, a version caveat, or a link to a working fix. Sign in above to contribute.
A place for practitioners to share what actually worked: a mitigation you’ve tested, a configuration change, a version- or environment-specific caveat, or a link to a verified patch. The most useful notes rise to the top as peers upvote them, so the signal stays high.
- Verified mitigations, workarounds, and config changes
- Version or environment caveats, and links to real fixes
- No weaponised exploit code, or anything meant to cause harm
- No spam, self-promotion, credentials, or personal data