CVE-2026-39170
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 · uneditedSemCms 5.0 is vulnerable to Cross Site Request Forgery (CSRF) via crafted POST request to /admin/semcms_user.php.
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 confidenceSemCms 5.0 lacks anti-CSRF protections on the admin user management page (semcms_user.php). Attackers can trick authenticated administrators into submitting malicious POST requests to create, modify, or delete user accounts by luring them to a crafted webpage, exploiting the application's trust in the authenticated user's browser.
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.
-
Confirm SemCms installation and versionLocate the SemCms installation directory and check version identifiers in the main index file, about page, or version metadata files. Compare the installed version to the affected version SemCms 5.0.Affected if The installed version is SemCms 5.0 exactly.
-
Verify the vulnerable endpoint existsCheck if the file /admin/semcms_user.php exists in the web root or admin directory of the SemCms installation.Affected if The /admin/semcms_user.php endpoint is present and accessible.
-
Inspect the endpoint for anti-CSRF token presenceOpen /admin/semcms_user.php in a text editor or fetch it via HTTP and examine the HTML forms for the presence of a CSRF token parameter (such as a hidden input field with a random value or a token in the form action).Affected if The forms in /admin/semcms_user.php do not contain any anti-CSRF token fields.
-
Check SameSite cookie configurationExamine the application source code or session configuration for cookie creation calls and verify if SameSite attribute is set to Strict or Lax on session or authentication cookies.Affected if Cookies are missing SameSite=Strict or SameSite=Lax attributes.
A user is affected if running SemCms 5.0 with the /admin/semcms_user.php endpoint accessible and lacking anti-CSRF token protection on state-changing operations.
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 synchronizer token pattern with unique CSRF tokens on all state-changing forms and validate them server-side; additionally enable SameSite cookie attributes and validate Origin/Referer headers as defense-in-depth.
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation6.0 h
- Testing3.0 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 $3,984.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-39170 — 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-2026-39170 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