CVE-2026-37266
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 · uneditedAn issue in Responsive File Manager Responsive FileManager Version 9.14.0 allows a remote attacker to execute arbitrary code via the force_download.php component
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 confidenceResponsive FileManager 9.14.0 contains a remote code execution vulnerability in the force_download.php component. The file download functionality appears to insufficiently validate or sanitize user input, allowing an attacker to upload or access arbitrary files leading to code execution.
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
- Required
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/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 Responsive FileManager versionLocate the main version file, README, or index.php and search for version strings (e.g., grep -r '9.14.0' or check version.php if it exists)Affected if The installed version is exactly 9.14.0 or falls within the 9.x range prior to patching
-
Confirm force_download.php existsSearch the web root and subdirectories for force_download.php (e.g., find . -name 'force_download.php')Affected if The file force_download.php is present in the installation directory
-
Check if force_download.php is publicly accessibleAttempt an HTTP request to the force_download.php endpoint or review web server access logs for requests to this fileAffected if The file responds to unauthenticated HTTP requests
-
Inspect file download validation logicExamine the source code of force_download.php for path validation, checking for functions like basename(), realpath(), or allow/deny lists that sanitize user inputAffected if The code lacks proper path validation or allows path traversal sequences (e.g., ../../) in download parameters
The environment is affected if Responsive FileManager version 9.14.0 is installed and the force_download.php component exists and is accessible without authentication.
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 dataUpgrade Responsive FileManager to the latest version or patch the force_download.php component to properly validate file paths and prevent unauthorized file access. If the component is not required, disable or remove it.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation4.0 h
- Testing3.0 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 $2,800.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-37266 — 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-2026-37266 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