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

CVE-2026-58143

HIGH · 8.8 CVSS v3.1 Published 2026-07-09
Mitigation only
No fix yet — a mitigation exists. There is no fixed release. A documented workaround reduces exposure in the meantime.
See remediation →
95/100
Remediation priority · Urgent
Remotely reachable No privileges 6 weeks old

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
Cotonti Siena 0.9.26 and earlier contains a cross-site request forgery vulnerability that allows unauthenticated attackers to modify administrator configuration by tricking a logged-in administrator into submitting a forged POST request to the admin.php config update handler, which never invokes the application's CSRF validation function. Attackers can disable the PFS module's file extension whitelist by setting pfsfilecheck to 0, enabling any user with PFS access to upload and execute arbitrary PHP files on the server.

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

Cotonti Siena 0.9.26 and earlier has a CSRF vulnerability in the admin.php config update handler that bypasses the application's CSRF validation. Attackers can trick authenticated administrators into submitting forged POST requests that modify configuration settings, specifically setting pfsfilecheck to 0 to disable the PFS module's file extension whitelist, allowing arbitrary PHP file uploads and remote code execution.

MitigationApply CSRF token validation to the admin.php config update handler and ensure all state-changing admin operations validate anti-CSRF tokens before processing configuration changes.

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
High
Integrity
High
Availability
High

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/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 checks

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

  1. Identify installed Cotonti Siena version
    Locate the version file or header in the Cotonti installation (typically in a version.php file or within the main index.php header). Compare the version number to 0.9.26 or earlier.
    Affected if The installed version is 0.9.26 or any earlier version of Cotonti Siena.
  2. Locate the admin.php configuration handler
    Find admin.php in the web root or admin directory of the Cotonti installation. Inspect the code handling configuration updates, specifically looking for the section that processes the pfsfilecheck parameter.
    Affected if The admin.php file exists and contains a configuration update handler that does NOT invoke the application's CSRF validation function before processing the pfsfilecheck parameter.
  3. Check current pfsfilecheck configuration value
    Access the Cotonti admin configuration panel or inspect the configuration database/flat file where pfsfilecheck is stored. Verify whether pfsfilecheck is set to 0.
    Affected if The pfsfilecheck configuration option is currently set to 0, which disables the PFS module's file extension whitelist.
  4. Verify PFS module is enabled and accessible
    Check if the PFS (Personal File Storage) module is installed and enabled in the Cotonti system, and determine whether regular users (not just administrators) have PFS access.
    Affected if The PFS module is enabled and accessible to non-admin users, allowing them to upload files when pfsfilecheck is disabled.

A user is affected if running Cotonti Siena version 0.9.26 or earlier AND the admin.php config handler lacks CSRF validation AND pfsfilecheck is currently set to 0, enabling unrestricted PHP file uploads via the PFS module.

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

Apply CSRF token validation to the admin.php config update handler and ensure all state-changing admin operations validate anti-CSRF tokens before processing configuration changes.

Have this fixed Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation2.0 h
  • Implementation4.0 h
  • Testing3.0 h
  • Review / QA2.0 h
11.0 hours of engineering $1,930
Get help mitigating

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 locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-58143 — 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-2026-58143 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