VulnerabilityPublished 3 Mar 2026

CVE-2026-27981: sysadminsmedia homebox · Improper Restriction of Excessive Authentication Attempts

Affects sysadminsmedia homeboxSource CVE Database V5

Compare

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 7.4 High : upgrade to 0.24.0 soon.

Data as of 30 Oct 2026, 11:52 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

7.4High

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

EPSS: 0.2% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 22% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.
Patch: Available – fixed in 0.24.0

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

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

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: High: A successful attack depends on conditions beyond the attacker's control. That is, a successful attack cannot be accomplished at will, but requires the attacker to invest in some measurable amount of effort in preparation or execution against the vulnerable component before a successful attack can be expected. For example, a successful attack may require an attacker to: gather knowledge about the environment in which the vulnerable target/component exists; prepare the target environment to improve exploit reliability; or inject themselves into the logical network path between the target and the resource requested by the victim in order to read and/or modify network communications (e.g., a man in the middle attack).
Privileges Required: None: The attacker is unauthorized prior to attack, and therefore does not require any access to settings or files to carry out an attack.
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: High: There is total loss of confidentiality, resulting in all resources within the impacted component being divulged to the attacker. Alternatively, access to only some restricted information is obtained, but the disclosed information presents a direct, serious impact.
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: None: There is no impact to availability within the impacted component.

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v3.1 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 3 Mar 2026
Detectable: no evidence on record.
No public nuclei template indexed
Weaponized: 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 30 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.
Weaponized: A Metasploit exploit module or Exploit-DB entry exists (Metasploit scanner modules do not count), 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 homebox and sysadminsmedia/homebox to 0.24.0.

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
sysadminsmediahomebox	Affected <0.24.0	Fixed in 0.24.0
GitHubsysadminsmedia/homebox`pkg:github/sysadminsmedia/homebox`Other threats	Affected <0.24.0	Fixed in 0.24.0

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

AI-suggested

To mitigate this vulnerability, organizations should immediately upgrade HomeBox to version 0.24.0 or later, where the issue is fixed. If upgrading is not immediately possible, administrators should disable or restrict access to the HomeBox service from untrusted networks to limit exposure. Review and correctly configure the TrustProxy option to ensure that only trusted proxy headers are accepted and processed. Implement additional network-level protections such as Web Application Firewalls (WAFs) or rate limiting at the perimeter to detect and block suspicious authentication attempts. Monitor authentication logs for unusual patterns indicative of brute-force attacks. Consider deploying multi-factor authentication (MFA) to reduce the risk of compromised credentials leading to unauthorized access. Finally, audit all middleware and proxy configurations to ensure that client IP addresses used for security controls are reliably sourced and validated.

Description

HomeBox is a home inventory and organization system. Prior to 0.24.0, the authentication rate limiter (authRateLimiter) tracks failed attempts per client IP. It determines the client IP by reading, 1. X-Real-IP header, 2. First entry of X-Forwarded-For header, and 3.r.RemoteAddr (TCP connection address). These headers were read unconditionally. An attacker connecting directly to Homebox could forge any value in X-Real-IP, effectively getting a fresh rate limit identity per request. There is a TrustProxy option in the configuration (Options.TrustProxy, default false), but this option was never read by any middleware or rate limiter code. Additionally, chi's middleware.RealIP was applied unconditionally in main.go, overwriting r.RemoteAddr with the forged header value before it reaches any handler. This vulnerability is fixed in 0.24.0.

Impact

The primary impact of this vulnerability is that attackers can bypass authentication rate limiting by forging client IP headers, enabling unlimited brute-force login attempts against HomeBox instances. This can lead to credential compromise, unauthorized access, and potential data breaches affecting user confidentiality and system integrity. Since HomeBox is a home inventory and organization system, compromised accounts could expose sensitive personal or household data. The vulnerability does not directly affect availability but undermines authentication controls, increasing the risk of account takeover. Organizations running vulnerable versions face elevated risk of automated attacks and credential stuffing campaigns. The lack of proper proxy header validation also indicates potential misconfigurations in deployment environments, which could be exploited further. Although no known exploits are reported in the wild yet, the ease of exploitation and high impact warrant urgent remediation to prevent future attacks.

CWE-307Improper Restriction of Excessive Authentication Attempts (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessOWASP Top 10 A07:2025: Authentication Failures (opens in a new tab)
The product does not implement sufficient measures to prevent multiple failed authentication attempts within a short time frame.
Architecture and Design
Common protection mechanisms include: Disconnecting the user after a small number of failed attempts; Implementing a timeout; Locking out a targeted account; Requiring a computational task on the user's part.
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
Authentication (opens in a new tab)
Transport Layer Protection (opens in a new tab)
TLS Cipher String (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V2.2.1 (opens in a new tab)
V2.8.5 (opens in a new tab)
V2.8.4 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Dictionary-based Password Attack (opens in a new tab)
Password Brute Forcing (opens in a new tab)
Password Spraying (opens in a new tab)
Credential Stuffing (opens in a new tab)
Use of Known Kerberos Credentials (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).

References

github.com/sysadminsmedia/homebox/security/advisories/GHSA-j86g-v96v-jpp3 (opens in a new tab)

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 3 Mar 2026, 23:02 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-307

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats