CVE-2026-52784
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 · uneditedOpenProject is open-source, web-based project management software. Prior to 17.3.3 and 17.4.1, there is a CSRF on TARGET through /users/:id via POST parameter "user[admin]". This vulnerability is fixed in 17.3.3 and 17.4.1.
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 confidenceCross-site request forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in OpenProject's user management endpoint (/users/:id) allows attackers to manipulate the 'user[admin]' POST parameter without proper anti-CSRF validation, potentially enabling unauthorized privilege escalation or user modification through malicious requests triggered by authenticated administrators.
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
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/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.
-
Determine OpenProject versionLocate the installed OpenProject version number in the application (typically found in the administration panel, Gemfile, or package.json)Affected if The installed version is earlier than 17.3.3 or between 17.3.x and 17.4.0 (inclusive)
-
Verify CSRF token presence on user endpointInspect the HTML form or API response for the /users/:id endpoint when accessed by an administrator; check if a CSRF token (authenticity_token) is included in the requestAffected if The endpoint returns or requires no CSRF token for state-changing POST operations
-
Test parameter acceptance without tokenSubmit a crafted POST request to /users/:id with the user[admin] parameter while omitting the anti-CSRF token; observe if the request is processed without token validation errorAffected if The request succeeds and modifies user settings without rejecting the missing token
-
Check application-wide CSRF configurationReview the Rails application configuration (config/application.rb or config/environment.rb) for protect_from_forgery settings and verify they are applied to the users controllerAffected if CSRF protection is disabled, missing, or not enforced on the users controller
A user is affected if their OpenProject installation is version 17.3.3 or 17.4.1 or earlier AND the /users/:id endpoint accepts state-changing POST requests without validating a CSRF token.
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 · scopedUpgrade to OpenProject version 17.3.3 or 17.4.1 to remediate this vulnerability.
OpenProject 17.3.3 or 17.4.1
- 1. Back up the OpenProject database and configuration files
- 2. Consult the official OpenProject upgrade documentation for your current version
- 3. Upgrade OpenProject to version 17.3.3 or 17.4.1
- 4. Verify the upgrade was successful by checking the OpenProject version
- 5. Test the /users/:id endpoint to confirm the CSRF protection is working
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation4.0 h
- Testing4.0 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 $3,648.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-52784 — 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-2026-52784 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