VulnerabilityPublished 29 Apr 2026Updated 8 May 2026

CVE-2026-41660: admidio/admidio · Admidio has Inverted 2FA Reset Authorization Check that Lets Group Leaders Strip Admin TOTP

Affects admidio/admidioSource GCVE Database

Authoritative record:CVE-2026-41660· High 7.1

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 7.1 High : upgrade to 5.0.9 soon.

Data as of 27 Oct 2026, 00:07 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

7.1High

How severe the flaw is on the 0–10 CVSS scale.

Patch: Available – fixed in 5.0.9

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:L

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: Low
User Interaction: None
Scope: Unchanged
Confidentiality: None
Integrity: High
Availability: Low

Bold values are the worst case: easiest to exploit or largest impact.

Attack Vector: Network: The vulnerable component is bound to the network stack and the set of possible attackers extends beyond the other options listed, up to and including the entire Internet. Such a vulnerability is often termed 'remotely exploitable' and can be thought of as an attack being exploitable at the protocol level one or more network hops away (e.g., across one or more routers).
Attack Complexity: Low: Specialized access conditions or extenuating circumstances do not exist. An attacker can expect repeatable success against the vulnerable component.
Privileges Required: Low: The attacker is authorized with (i.e., requires) privileges that provide basic user capabilities that could normally affect only settings and files owned by a user. Alternatively, an attacker with Low privileges may have the ability to cause an impact only to non-sensitive resources.
User Interaction: None: The vulnerable system can be exploited without any interaction from any user.
Scope: Unchanged: An exploited vulnerability can only affect resources managed by the same security authority. In this case, the vulnerable component and the impacted component are either the same, or both are managed by the same security authority.
Confidentiality: None: There is no loss of confidentiality within the impacted component.
Integrity: High: There is a total loss of integrity, or a complete loss of protection. For example, the attacker is able to modify any/all files protected by the impacted component. Alternatively, only some files can be modified, but malicious modification would present a direct, serious consequence to the impacted component.
Availability: Low: Performance is reduced or there are interruptions in resource availability. Even if repeated exploitation of the vulnerability is possible, the attacker does not have the ability to completely deny service to legitimate users. The resources in the impacted component are either partially available all of the time, or fully available only some of the time, but overall there is no direct, serious consequence to the impacted component.

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v3.1 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 7 May 2026
Detectable: no evidence on record.
No public nuclei template indexed
Weaponised: no evidence on record.
No public exploit code indexed in Metasploit or Exploit-DB
Exploited in the wildExploited: no evidence on record.
Not in CISA KEV and no source reports exploitation
Observed by OffSeq MirageSeen by Mirage: no evidence on record.
No attack traffic recorded by OffSeq Mirage sensors

A missing step is not evidence of safety. Sources: cve.org (opens in a new tab), the Metasploit, Exploit-DB and nuclei-templates index as of 26 Oct 2026.

Disclosed: The CVE record is public on cve.org. Its publication is t = 0.
Detectable: A public nuclei template can find exposed instances, for defenders and attackers alike.
Weaponised: Public exploit code exists in Metasploit or Exploit-DB, or CISA SSVC or the CVSS exploit maturity reports a public proof of concept.
Exploited in the wild: CISA KEV lists it, CISA SSVC rates exploitation active, or a source reports attacks.
Observed by OffSeq Mirage: OffSeq Mirage honeypot sensors recorded attack traffic for this CVE, or found exposed hosts without attack traffic.

Moments are spaced evenly, not to scale; a dashed line marks a gap of six months or more. Deltas count from t = 0. Sources that give only a date (CISA KEV, Exploit-DB, or a time of exactly 00:00Z) read “same day” rather than hours. Metasploit modules carry the flaw’s disclosure date, not their release date, and nuclei templates carry no date, so both appear above but not on the timeline.

What to do

Upgrade admidio/admidio to 5.0.9.

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
Packagistadmidio/admidio	Affected <5.0.9	Fixed in 5.0.9

Check your own hosts for these packages with threat-finder (opens in a new tab), our free open-source scanner.

Description

## Summary A logic error in Admidio's two-factor authentication reset inverts the authorization check. Non-admin users cannot remove their own TOTP configuration, but they can remove other users' TOTP, including administrators. A group leader with profile edit rights on an admin account can strip that admin's 2FA. ## Details In `modules/profile/two_factor_authentication.php` at line 84, the authorization check uses an inverted condition: ```php // modules/profile/two_factor_authentication.php line 84 if (!($gCurrentUser->isAdministrator() || $gCurrentUserId !== $userId)) { throw new AdmException('SYS_NO_RIGHTS'); } ``` By De Morgan's law, this condition evaluates as: - Blocks when: `NOT isAdministrator() AND $gCurrentUserId === $userId` - In practice: blocks non-admins from resetting their OWN 2FA - Passes: non-admins resetting OTHER users' 2FA (the opposite of the intended behavior) The intended logic should block non-admins from resetting other users' 2FA. The `!==` operator on line 84 should be `===`. A group leader who holds `hasRightEditProfile()` permission on an admin user (checked earlier in the flow) can exploit this to strip 2FA from administrator accounts, reducing their security to password-only authentication. ## Proof of Concept 1. As `testuser` (a non-admin group leader with edit rights on admin profiles), send: ```http POST /adm_program/modules/profile/two_factor_authentication.php HTTP/1.1 Content-Type: application/x-www-form-urlencoded Cookie: ADMIDIO_..._SESSION_ID=<testuser_session> mode=reset&user_uuid=<admin_user_uuid> ``` Result: the server removes 2FA from the admin account. 2. As `testuser`, attempt to reset their own 2FA: ```http POST /adm_program/modules/profile/two_factor_authentication.php HTTP/1.1 Content-Type: application/x-www-form-urlencoded Cookie: ADMIDIO_..._SESSION_ID=<testuser_session> mode=reset&user_uuid=<testuser_user_uuid> ``` Result: `SYS_NO_RIGHTS` error. The user cannot reset their own 2FA. This confirms the authorization logic is inverted. ## Impact A group leader (or any user with profile edit rights on an admin) can disable two-factor authentication on administrator accounts. This degrades admin account security to password-only, opening the door to credential stuffing or brute force attacks without a 2FA barrier. ## Recommended Fix Change `!==` to `===` on line 84 of `modules/profile/two_factor_authentication.php`: ```php // Fixed condition: block non-admins from resetting OTHER users' 2FA if (!($gCurrentUser->isAdministrator() || $gCurrentUserId === $userId)) { throw new AdmException('SYS_NO_RIGHTS'); } ``` --- *Found by [aisafe.io](https://aisafe.io)*

CWE-863Incorrect Authorization (opens in a new tab)
Class weaknessLikelihood of exploit: HighCWE Top 25 (2025): #17OWASP Top 10 A01:2025: Broken Access Control (opens in a new tab)
The product performs an authorization check when an actor attempts to access a resource or perform an action, but it does not correctly perform the check.
Architecture and Design
Divide the product into anonymous, normal, privileged, and administrative areas. Reduce the attack surface by carefully mapping roles with data and functionality. Use role-based access control (RBAC) to enforce the roles at the appropriate boundaries.
Architecture and Design
Ensure that access control checks are performed related to the business logic. These checks may be different than the access control checks that are applied to more generic resources such as files, connections, processes, memory, and database records.
Architecture and Design · Libraries or Frameworks
Use a vetted library or framework that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Authorization (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V8.3.8 (opens in a new tab)
V13.4.2 (opens in a new tab)
V7.2.2 (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

WeaknessesCWE-863

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats