Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF)Weakness · CWE-352

CVE-2026-41074

HIGH · 7.1 CVSS v3.1 Published 2026-05-22
Mitigation only
No fix yet — a mitigation exists. There is no fixed release. A documented workaround reduces exposure in the meantime.
See remediation →
78/100
Remediation priority · High
Remotely reachable No privileges

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 · unedited
RT is an open source, enterprise-grade issue and ticket tracking system. Versions 6.0.0 through 6.0.2 contain a Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerability. An attacker who can induce a logged-in RT user to visit a malicious web page can trigger arbitrary state-changing actions in RT on that user's behalf. This issue has been fixed in version 6.0.3.

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 confidence

RT versions 6.0.0 through 6.0.2 are vulnerable to Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF), allowing authenticated users to be tricked into performing unintended state-changing actions via malicious web pages. The vulnerability stems from missing or insufficient anti-CSRF tokens in state-changing operations within the RT ticket tracking system.

MitigationUpgrade RT to version 6.0.3 which contains the CSRF fix. Until upgrade is complete, consider implementing SameSite cookies and CSRF tokens at the web application firewall level as a temporary measure.

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
None
User interaction
Required
Scope
Unchanged
Confidentiality
None
Integrity
High
Availability
Low

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:N/I:H/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 checks

Work through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.

  1. Identify installed RT version
    Check the RT web interface footer for the version number, or run 'perl -M RT -e "print RT->Version"' from the RT directory, or inspect the VERSION file in the RT installation directory
    Affected if The version shown is 6.0.0, 6.0.1, or 6.0.2
  2. Confirm RT web interface is accessible
    Verify that the RT web application is running and reachable by attempting to access the RT login page via HTTP/HTTPS
    Affected if The RT web interface is accessible online and accepts user authentication
  3. Check for CSRF token enforcement in forms
    Inspect the HTML source of a ticket modification or administrative form in RT (e.g., Create Ticket, Reply to Ticket) and look for_csrf.token or similar hidden token fields in the form markup
    Affected if Forms lack CSRF protection tokens (the vulnerability makes them susceptible)
  4. Verify active user sessions exist
    Check if there are currently logged-in users or if the system accepts authenticated sessions by logging in as a test user and inspecting the session handling
    Affected if The system processes authenticated user sessions (CSRF attacks require a logged-in user to trigger the malicious request)

You are affected if RT version 6.0.0, 6.0.1, or 6.0.2 is running and its web interface processes authenticated user requests without CSRF protection tokens in state-changing forms.

Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.

Check your environment

Paste your version and any relevant configuration and it will be compared against the affected criteria above. Do not include secrets or credentials.

AI-assisted, checked against the advisory. Informational, not a guarantee.

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 · scoped
Mitigation available No clean upgrade yet — mitigate in the meantime
Mitigation

Upgrade RT to version 6.0.3 which contains the CSRF fix. Until upgrade is complete, consider implementing SameSite cookies and CSRF tokens at the web application firewall level as a temporary measure.

Recommended fix High confidence

RT version 6.0.3

  1. Backup your RT (Request Tracker) installation and database before upgrading
  2. Download RT version 6.0.3 from the official Best Practical Solutions repository or website
  3. Stop the RT web server and any RT services
  4. Install version 6.0.3 following the standard RT upgrade documentation
  5. Run any required database migrations for the 6.0.3 upgrade
  6. Restart RT services and verify the installation
Caveat Review RT 6.0.3 release notes for any configuration or behavioral changes before upgrading

Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.

Have this fixed Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation2.0 h
  • Implementation3.0 h
  • Testing3.0 h
  • Review / QA2.0 h
10.0 hours of engineering $1,750
Get help mitigating

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 locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-41074 — 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 sources

Practitioner notes

Contributed

Peer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2026-41074 in production — separate from our analysis above.

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.

What this is

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.

What belongs here
  • 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