CVE-2026-57994
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 · uneditedphpMyFAQ before 4.1.5 applies inconsistent active=yes and publication-date filtering across its public FAQ API endpoints, allowing unauthenticated attackers to retrieve inactive (draft or review-only) FAQ content. Specifically, GET /api/v3.1/faq/{categoryId}/{faqId} returns the inactive FAQ title and full answer, while GET /api/v3.1/faqs/tags/{tagId} and GET /api/v4.0/faqs/tags/{tagId} return the inactive FAQ title and answer preview, disclosing non-public content.
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 confidencephpMyFAQ versions before 4.1.5 have inconsistent authorization filtering across public API endpoints. The /api/v3.1/faq/{categoryId}/{faqId} endpoint returns full inactive FAQ content (title and complete answer), while /api/v3.1/faqs/tags/{tagId} and /api/v4.0/faqs/tags/{tagId} return title and answer previews—all without requiring authentication and without enforcing active=yes or publication-date checks that other endpoints correctly apply.
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
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- Low
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N
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 installed phpMyFAQ versionLocate the version file (typically VERSION or src/phpMyFAQ/Version.php) or check the admin dashboard footer for the version numberAffected if The installed version is below 4.1.5 (e.g., 4.1.4, 4.1.0, 3.x, etc.)
-
Verify API endpoint accessibilitySend unauthenticated HTTP GET requests to /api/v3.1/faq/{categoryId}/{faqId}, /api/v3.1/faqs/tags/{tagId}, and /api/v4.0/faqs/tags/{tagId}Affected if The endpoints return HTTP 200 responses instead of 401/403 authentication errors
-
Confirm inactive FAQ content exposureQuery the API endpoints using IDs known to correspond to inactive FAQs (active='no' or future publication dates) and examine the response bodyAffected if The endpoints return complete FAQ titles, answers, or previews for inactive content that should be restricted
You are affected if your phpMyFAQ version is below 4.1.5 AND the vulnerable API endpoints are accessible and return content from inactive or unpublished FAQs without authentication.
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 phpMyFAQ version 4.1.5 or later which applies consistent active and publication-date filtering across all API endpoints to prevent unauthorized disclosure of draft or review-only FAQ content.
phpMyFAQ 4.1.5
- 1. Backup your existing phpMyFAQ installation and database before proceeding with any upgrade.
- 2. Download phpMyFAQ version 4.1.5 or later from the official phpMyFAQ repository (github.com/thomaskaiser/phpMyFAQ) or the official website.
- 3. Replace the existing phpMyFAQ files with the new version, preserving your configuration file (typically inc/phpMyFAQ/inc/data.php or similar configuration location).
- 4. Run the database upgrade script if included (usually accessible via /setup or admin interface).
- 5. Verify the fix by testing the affected API endpoints: GET /api/v3.1/faq/{categoryId}/{faqId}, GET /api/v3.1/faqs/tags/{tagId}, and GET /api/v4.0/faqs/tags/{tagId} to confirm inactive FAQs are no longer returned to unauthenticated users.
- 6. Clear any caches and restart web server services if required.
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation2.0 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 $3,328.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-57994 — 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-2026-57994 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