CVE-2026-24422
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 · uneditedphpMyFAQ is an open source FAQ web application. In versions 4.0.16 and below, multiple public API endpoints improperly expose sensitive user information due to insufficient access controls. The OpenQuestionController::list() endpoint calls Question::getAll() with showAll=true by default, returning records marked as non-public (isVisible=false) along with user email addresses, with similar exposures present in comment, news, and FAQ APIs. This information disclosure vulnerability could enable attackers to harvest email addresses for phishing campaigns or access content that was explicitly marked as private. This issue has been fixed in version 4.0.17.
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 analysisThe application discloses data — error detail, internal paths, tokens, or other users' records — to someone who shouldn't see it. On its own it can look minor, but it hands attackers the map they need for a larger attack. Remediation is about minimising what's returned and enforcing authorization on every piece of data.
General guidance for the information exposure class — the official description and references above are authoritative for this specific CVE. Want a bespoke review and a reviewed fix? Ask our team →
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< 4.0.17CVSS 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
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N
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.
dbcve · scoped4.0.17
phpMyFAQ 4.0.17
- 1. Backup your current phpMyFAQ installation and database before proceeding.
- 2. Download phpMyFAQ version 4.0.17 from the official source (github.com/phpmyfaq/phpmyfaq/releases or phpmyfaq.de).
- 3. Extract the new version and replace the existing files, preserving your configuration file (inc/data.php or config/database.php).
- 4. Verify the upgrade by logging into the admin panel and checking the version number.
- 5. Test the affected API endpoints (OpenQuestionController::list(), comment, news, and FAQ APIs) to confirm they no longer expose non-public records or email addresses.
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-24422 — 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-2026-24422 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