CVE-2026-5762
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 · uneditedAllocation of resources without limits or throttling vulnerability in Wikimedia Foundation MediaWiki - ReportIncident Extension allows HTTP DoS. This issue was remediated only on the `master` branch.
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 confidenceThe ReportIncident extension in MediaWiki lacks proper resource allocation limits or throttling, allowing attackers to exhaust server resources through repeated HTTP requests. This is a classic resource exhaustion DoS vulnerability where the extension accepts requests without implementing rate limiting or request throttling mechanisms.
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
- Authentication
- X
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- X
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:L/SC:N/SI:N/SA:L/E:X/CR:X/IR:X/AR:X/MAV:X/MAC:X/MAT:X/MPR:X/MUI:X/MVC:X/MVI:X/MVA:X/MSC:X/MSI:X/MSA:X/S:X/AU:X/R:X/V:X/RE:X/U:X
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 MediaWiki installation and versionCheck your MediaWiki installation for the version number, typically found in includes/Defines.php or by accessing the Special:Version page on your wiki.Affected if Running any MediaWiki version with the ReportIncident extension installed
-
Locate the ReportIncident extension filesSearch for the ReportIncident extension directory in your MediaWiki 'extensions' folder. Common path is extensions/ReportIncident/.Affected if The ReportIncident extension directory exists and contains the relevant PHP files for handling incident reports
-
Verify the ReportIncident endpoint is accessibleTest access to the ReportIncident endpoint by checking if /index.php?action=reportincident or similar URL pattern responds on your server.Affected if The endpoint is publicly accessible without authentication restrictions
-
Check for rate limiting configurationInspect your web server configuration (Apache/Nginx) and MediaWiki settings for any rate limiting rules targeting the ReportIncident action, or check for extensions like RateLimiter.Affected if No rate limiting or throttling mechanism is configured for the ReportIncident endpoint
-
Review server resource usage logsExamine web server access logs and application logs for patterns of repeated requests to the ReportIncident endpoint that could indicate resource exhaustion.Affected if High volume of requests to the ReportIncident endpoint is observed without triggering any limits
Your environment is affected if MediaWiki is running with the ReportIncident extension installed and the endpoint is accessible without any rate limiting or throttling controls in place.
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 dataSince the fix exists only in the master branch, organizations should either update to the master branch version or implement application-level rate limiting (e.g., via MediaWiki configuration, web server rate limiting, or a WAF) to mitigate this vulnerability until the fix is backported to stable releases.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation4.0 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 $3,088.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-5762 — 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-2026-5762 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