CVE-2026-10239
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 · uneditedA vulnerability was determined in JeecgBoot up to 3.9.2. The affected element is the function WordUtil.addImage of the file /airag/word/edit. Executing a manipulation can lead to server-side request forgery. The attack can be executed remotely. The exploit has been publicly disclosed and may be utilized. A fix is planned for the upcoming release.
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 · moderate confidenceJeecgBoot up to version 3.9.2 contains a server-side request forgery (SSRF) vulnerability in the WordUtil.addImage function accessed via the /airag/word/edit endpoint. An attacker can manipulate the function to cause the server to make arbitrary HTTP requests to internal or external resources, potentially accessing sensitive internal services, bypassing network restrictions, or conducting further attacks.
Verify against the referenced sources before acting — the references below are authoritative for this CVE, this summary is not.
CVSS 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
- Low
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- Low
- Integrity
- Low
- Availability
- Low
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L
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 JeecgBoot installationLocate the JeecgBoot application on your server and confirm it is the product in useAffected if JeecgBoot is deployed and the version is 3.9.2 or lower
-
Determine installed JeecgBoot versionCheck the application version file or startup logs for the exact version numberAffected if The installed version is 3.9.2 or any earlier version (all versions up to 3.9.2 are affected)
-
Verify endpoint accessibilityCheck if the /airag/word/edit endpoint is exposed and accessible in your deploymentAffected if The /airag/word/edit endpoint is publicly or internally accessible without proper authentication controls
-
Confirm WordUtil module is enabledReview application configuration to determine if the WordUtil functionality and related airag components are activeAffected if The WordUtil module and /airag/word/edit endpoint are enabled and operational in your environment
-
Inspect network outbound rulesReview firewall and network configuration to determine if the application server has unrestricted outbound network accessAffected if The server can make arbitrary HTTP/HTTPS requests to internal or external resources from the application context
You are affected if running JeecgBoot version 3.9.2 or earlier with the /airag/word/edit endpoint accessible and the WordUtil module enabled, allowing unauthenticated attackers to trigger arbitrary server-side requests.
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 dataUntil the official patch is released, consider disabling or restricting access to the /airag/word/edit endpoint, implementing WAF rules to filter suspicious outbound requests, and applying network segmentation to limit the impact of potential SSRF exploitation.
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation6.0 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 $4,224.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-10239 — 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-2026-10239 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