SQL InjectionWeakness · CWE-89

CVE-2026-4776

HIGH · 7.1 CVSS v3.1 Published 2026-05-29
Mitigation only
No fix yet — a mitigation exists. There is no fixed release. A documented workaround reduces exposure in the meantime.
See remediation →
77/100
Remediation priority · High
Remotely reachable Zero-click

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
An SQL injection vulnerability exists in Mautic's API contact filtering mechanism. Due to insufficient recursive sanitization of nested query parameters, an authenticated API user can bypass input filtering and inject arbitrary SQL commands.

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

Mautic contains an SQL injection vulnerability in its API contact filtering mechanism. The issue stems from insufficient recursive sanitization of nested query parameters, allowing authenticated API users to bypass input filtering and inject arbitrary SQL commands.

MitigationImplement proper recursive input sanitization for all nested query parameters in the API filtering logic, or use parameterized queries/prepared statements to eliminate SQL injection vectors.

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
High
Integrity
None
Availability
Low

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/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. Confirm Mautic installation
    Identify if Mautic is running in your environment by checking for Mautic-specific files (e.g., app/app.php, vendor/autoload.php) or the Mautic web application response headers.
    Affected if Mautic is not present in the environment.
  2. Check installed Mautic version
    Locate the version file (typically app/version.txt or through the Mautic admin dashboard under System Info) and compare the version number against the affected range published in the CVE advisory.
    Affected if The installed version falls within the affected version range and has not been patched.
  3. Verify API functionality is enabled
    Check the Mautic configuration file (app/config/local.php or through the UI at Settings > API Settings) for API enablement settings, or attempt a simple API request to confirm API access is active.
    Affected if The API is disabled, the vulnerability cannot be exploited through the API interface.
  4. Confirm API authentication is accessible
    Test API access using a valid API key or OAuth credentials against the contacts endpoint (e.g., GET /api/contacts) to verify authenticated API users can interact with contact filtering.
    Affected if API authentication is not configured or all API users are restricted from accessing contact endpoints.
  5. Inspect logs for nested filter parameter patterns
    Review Mautic access logs and application logs (var/logs/) for requests containing nested filter parameters in the API contact endpoint, such as filter[0][field][nested][field] structures that may indicate exploitation attempts.
    Affected if Suspicious nested filter parameter patterns are found in logs without corresponding legitimate API usage.

The environment is affected if Mautic is running a version within the CVE-affected range, the API is enabled and accessible to authenticated users, and the contact filtering API endpoint can accept nested filter parameters.

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.

From vendor data
Mitigation available No clean upgrade yet — mitigate in the meantime
Mitigation

Implement proper recursive input sanitization for all nested query parameters in the API filtering logic, or use parameterized queries/prepared statements to eliminate SQL injection vectors.

Have this fixed Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation3.0 h
  • Implementation6.0 h
  • Testing3.0 h
  • Review / QA2.0 h
14.0 hours of engineering $2,490
Get help mitigating

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 locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-4776 — 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-2026-4776 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