CVE-2026-29107
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 · uneditedSuiteCRM is an open-source, enterprise-ready Customer Relationship Management (CRM) software application. Prior to versions 7.15.1 and 8.9.3, it is possible to create PDF templates with `<img>` tags. When a PDF is exported using this template, the content (for example, `<img src=http://{burp_collaborator_url}>` is rendered server side, and thus a request is issued from the server, resulting in Server-Side Request Forgery. Versions 7.15.1 and 8.9.3 patch the issue.
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 confidenceThis is a Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) vulnerability in SuiteCRM's PDF template rendering. Attackers can embed `<img>` tags with arbitrary URLs (e.g., `<img src=http://attacker-controlled-server>`) in PDF templates. When the CRM exports a PDF using these templates, the server-side rendering process fetches the image, causing the server to make HTTP requests to attacker-controlled URLs. This allows network reconnaissance, internal service enumeration, and potential access to internal resources.
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< 7.15.1>= 8.0.0, < 8.9.3CVSS 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
- None
- Integrity
- Low
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N
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 SuiteCRM versionLocate the version file or check the About section in the SuiteCRM admin panel. Common locations include ./suitecrm_version.php or the admin 'About' page.Affected if The installed version is less than 7.15.1, or greater than or equal to 8.0.0 but less than 8.9.3
-
Confirm PDF template functionality is accessibleNavigate to the PDF Templates section in SuiteCRM (usually under Modules > PDF Templates) or check if the PDFTemplates module is active in the system.Affected if PDF template creation or editing is available to users in the current environment
-
Audit existing PDF templates for external image referencesExport or inspect existing PDF templates in the system. Look for `<img` tags with `src` attributes pointing to HTTP/HTTPS URLs, particularly internal IP addresses, localhost, or non-standard ports.Affected if Any PDF template contains `<img>` tags with URLs pointing to arbitrary or unexpected destinations
-
Check for recent template modificationsReview the audit log or modification timestamps on PDF template records in the database (table `pdfmanager` or similar) for unexpected changes.Affected if PDF templates were recently created or modified by untrusted users or show unexpected changes
A user is affected if their SuiteCRM version falls within the vulnerable ranges and PDF template functionality is accessible, allowing potential injection of malicious `<img>` URLs.
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.
dbcve · scoped7.15.18.9.3
Upgrade to SuiteCRM versions 7.15.1 or 8.9.3 which contain the patch for this vulnerability. As a temporary mitigation, restrict the ability to create or modify PDF templates to trusted users only.
Upgrade to SuiteCRM 7.15.1 (for 7.x installations) or SuiteCRM 8.9.3 (for 8.x installations)
- 1. Create a complete backup of the SuiteCRM installation directory and database
- 2. Put the SuiteCRM application into maintenance mode or inform users of planned downtime
- 3. Download the appropriate fixed version from the official SuiteCRM repository: for 7.x line download 7.15.1, for 8.x line download 8.9.3
- 4. Extract the new version files to a temporary location
- 5. Replace the existing SuiteCRM files with the new version files, preserving custom configurations and the config.php file
- 6. Run any database upgrade scripts if included in the release (typically via command line or upgrade wizard)
- 7. Clear all cached files (delete cache/ directory contents except for .htaccess)
- 8. Verify the upgrade was successful by logging into the CRM
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation1.0 h
- Implementation2.0 h
- Testing2.0 h
- Review / QA1.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $1,664.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-29107 — 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-2026-29107 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