CVE-2026-40497 (GCVE-0-2026-40497)
Vulnerability from cvelistv5
Published
2026-04-21 01:45
Modified
2026-04-21 01:45
CWE
  • CWE-79 - Improper Neutralization of Input During Web Page Generation ('Cross-site Scripting')
Summary
FreeScout is a free self-hosted help desk and shared mailbox. Prior to version 1.8.213, FreeScout's `Helper::stripDangerousTags()` removes `<script>`, `<form>`, `<iframe>`, `<object>` but does NOT strip `<style>` tags. The mailbox signature field is saved via POST /mailbox/settings/{id} and later rendered unescaped via `{!! $conversation->getSignatureProcessed([], true) !!}` in conversation views. CSP allows `style-src * 'self' 'unsafe-inline'`, so injected inline styles execute freely. An attacker with access to mailbox settings (admin or agent with mailbox permission) can inject CSS attribute selectors to exfiltrate the CSRF token of any agent/admin who views a conversation in that mailbox. With the CSRF token, the attacker can perform any state-changing action as the victim (create admin accounts, change email/password, etc.) — privilege escalation from agent to admin. This is the result of an incomplete fix of GHSA-jqjf-f566-485j. That advisory reported XSS via mailbox signature. The fix applied `Helper::stripDangerousTags()` to the signature before saving. However, `stripDangerousTags()` only removes `script`, `form`, `iframe`, and `object` tags — it does NOT strip `<style>` tags, leaving CSS injection possible. Version 1.8.213 contains an updated fix.
Impacted products
Show details on NVD website


{
  "containers": {
    "cna": {
      "affected": [
        {
          "product": "freescout",
          "vendor": "freescout-help-desk",
          "versions": [
            {
              "status": "affected",
              "version": "\u003c 1.8.213"
            }
          ]
        }
      ],
      "descriptions": [
        {
          "lang": "en",
          "value": "FreeScout is a free self-hosted help desk and shared mailbox. Prior to version 1.8.213, FreeScout\u0027s `Helper::stripDangerousTags()` removes `\u003cscript\u003e`, `\u003cform\u003e`, `\u003ciframe\u003e`, `\u003cobject\u003e` but does NOT strip `\u003cstyle\u003e` tags. The mailbox signature field is saved via POST /mailbox/settings/{id} and later rendered unescaped via `{!! $conversation-\u003egetSignatureProcessed([], true) !!}` in conversation views. CSP allows `style-src * \u0027self\u0027 \u0027unsafe-inline\u0027`, so injected inline styles execute freely. An attacker with access to mailbox settings (admin or agent with mailbox permission) can inject CSS attribute selectors to exfiltrate the CSRF token of any agent/admin who views a conversation in that mailbox. With the CSRF token, the attacker can perform any state-changing action as the victim (create admin accounts, change email/password, etc.) \u2014 privilege escalation from agent to admin. This is the result of an incomplete fix of GHSA-jqjf-f566-485j. That advisory reported XSS via mailbox signature. The fix applied `Helper::stripDangerousTags()` to the signature before saving. However, `stripDangerousTags()` only removes `script`, `form`, `iframe`, and `object` tags \u2014 it does NOT strip `\u003cstyle\u003e` tags, leaving CSS injection possible. Version 1.8.213 contains an updated fix."
        }
      ],
      "metrics": [
        {
          "cvssV3_1": {
            "attackComplexity": "LOW",
            "attackVector": "NETWORK",
            "availabilityImpact": "NONE",
            "baseScore": 8.1,
            "baseSeverity": "HIGH",
            "confidentialityImpact": "HIGH",
            "integrityImpact": "HIGH",
            "privilegesRequired": "HIGH",
            "scope": "CHANGED",
            "userInteraction": "REQUIRED",
            "vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:H/UI:R/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:N",
            "version": "3.1"
          }
        }
      ],
      "problemTypes": [
        {
          "descriptions": [
            {
              "cweId": "CWE-79",
              "description": "CWE-79: Improper Neutralization of Input During Web Page Generation (\u0027Cross-site Scripting\u0027)",
              "lang": "en",
              "type": "CWE"
            }
          ]
        }
      ],
      "providerMetadata": {
        "dateUpdated": "2026-04-21T01:45:55.492Z",
        "orgId": "a0819718-46f1-4df5-94e2-005712e83aaa",
        "shortName": "GitHub_M"
      },
      "references": [
        {
          "name": "https://github.com/freescout-help-desk/freescout/security/advisories/GHSA-fh99-wr77-pxq3",
          "tags": [
            "x_refsource_CONFIRM"
          ],
          "url": "https://github.com/freescout-help-desk/freescout/security/advisories/GHSA-fh99-wr77-pxq3"
        },
        {
          "name": "https://github.com/freescout-help-desk/freescout/commit/5aa8d633216f65995e80a7d4a921b784acc94df4",
          "tags": [
            "x_refsource_MISC"
          ],
          "url": "https://github.com/freescout-help-desk/freescout/commit/5aa8d633216f65995e80a7d4a921b784acc94df4"
        },
        {
          "name": "https://github.com/freescout-help-desk/freescout/releases/tag/1.8.213",
          "tags": [
            "x_refsource_MISC"
          ],
          "url": "https://github.com/freescout-help-desk/freescout/releases/tag/1.8.213"
        }
      ],
      "source": {
        "advisory": "GHSA-fh99-wr77-pxq3",
        "discovery": "UNKNOWN"
      },
      "title": "FreeScout Vulnerable to CSS Injection via Stored Style Tag in Mailbox Signature (CSRF Token Exfiltration)"
    }
  },
  "cveMetadata": {
    "assignerOrgId": "a0819718-46f1-4df5-94e2-005712e83aaa",
    "assignerShortName": "GitHub_M",
    "cveId": "CVE-2026-40497",
    "datePublished": "2026-04-21T01:45:55.492Z",
    "dateReserved": "2026-04-13T19:50:42.115Z",
    "dateUpdated": "2026-04-21T01:45:55.492Z",
    "state": "PUBLISHED"
  },
  "dataType": "CVE_RECORD",
  "dataVersion": "5.2"
}


Log in or create an account to share your comment.




Tags
Taxonomy of the tags.


Loading…

Loading…

Loading…

Sightings

Author Source Type Date

Nomenclature

  • Seen: The vulnerability was mentioned, discussed, or seen somewhere by the user.
  • Confirmed: The vulnerability is confirmed from an analyst perspective.
  • Published Proof of Concept: A public proof of concept is available for this vulnerability.
  • Exploited: This vulnerability was exploited and seen by the user reporting the sighting.
  • Patched: This vulnerability was successfully patched by the user reporting the sighting.
  • Not exploited: This vulnerability was not exploited or seen by the user reporting the sighting.
  • Not confirmed: The user expresses doubt about the veracity of the vulnerability.
  • Not patched: This vulnerability was not successfully patched by the user reporting the sighting.


Loading…

Loading…