VulnerabilityPublished 6 Mar 2026

CVE-2026-29060: Forceu Gokapi · Improper Access Control

Affects Forceu GokapiSource CVE Database V5

Compare

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 5.0 Medium : upgrade to 2.2.3 when convenient.

Data as of 30 Oct 2026, 11:52 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

5.0Medium

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

EPSS: 0.1% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 3% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.
Patch: Available – fixed in 2.2.3

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

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: Low
User Interaction: None
Scope: Changed
Confidentiality: None
Integrity: None
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: Changed: An exploited vulnerability can affect resources beyond the security scope managed by the security authority of the vulnerable component. In this case, the vulnerable component and the impacted component are different and managed by different security authorities.
Confidentiality: None: There is no loss of confidentiality within the impacted component.
Integrity: None: There is no loss of integrity within 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 6 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 Gokapi and forceu/Gokapi to 2.2.3.

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
ForceuGokapi	Affected <2.2.3	Fixed in 2.2.3
GitHubforceu/Gokapi`pkg:github/forceu/Gokapi`Other threats	Affected <2.2.3	Fixed in 2.2.3

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

AI-suggested

To mitigate CVE-2026-29060, organizations should immediately upgrade Gokapi to version 2.2.3 or later, where the access control flaw has been patched. Until upgrading is possible, administrators should restrict registration to trusted users only and review user permissions to ensure that no unnecessary accounts have access to the admin/upload menu. Implement strict monitoring and logging of API key creation and file request modifications to detect suspicious activity early. Employ network segmentation and firewall rules to limit access to the Gokapi server from untrusted networks. Additionally, enforce strong authentication mechanisms for registered users to reduce the risk of credential compromise. Regularly audit user accounts and permissions to prevent privilege creep. If feasible, temporarily disable user registration or restrict API key generation capabilities through configuration settings. Finally, maintain an incident response plan to quickly address any exploitation attempts or anomalous behavior related to file request operations.

Description

Gokapi is a self-hosted file sharing server with automatic expiration and encryption support. Prior to version 2.2.3, a registered user without privileges to create or modify file requests is able to create a short-lived API key that has the permission to do so. The user must be registered with Gokapi. If there are no users with access to the admin/upload menu, there is no impact. This issue has been patched in version 2.2.3.

Impact

The primary impact of CVE-2026-29060 is unauthorized privilege escalation within the Gokapi file sharing environment. An attacker with a registered account but no elevated privileges can create API keys that allow them to create or modify file requests, actions normally restricted to privileged users. This can lead to disruption of service availability, unauthorized manipulation of file sharing workflows, and potential denial of service if abused at scale. While confidentiality and integrity of files are not directly compromised, the ability to alter file requests could indirectly affect data handling processes. Organizations using Gokapi in multi-user environments are at risk, particularly if administrative controls over user permissions are lax or if multiple users have access to sensitive menus. The vulnerability could be leveraged to bypass intended access controls, undermining trust in the file sharing platform. Since exploitation requires a registered user account, the threat is somewhat limited to insider threats or attackers who have obtained legitimate credentials. However, the network-exploitable nature and lack of required user interaction increase the risk of automated or scripted attacks. The medium severity rating reflects these factors, indicating a moderate but non-trivial risk to affected deployments.

CWE-284Improper Access Control (opens in a new tab)
Pillar weaknessCWE Top 25 (2025): #19OWASP Top 10 A01:2025: Broken Access Control (opens in a new tab)
The product does not restrict or incorrectly restricts access to a resource from an unauthorized actor.
MITRE discourages mapping vulnerabilities to this broad entry; the root cause is usually a more specific weakness.
Architecture and Design · Operation
Very carefully manage the setting, management, and handling of privileges. Explicitly manage trust zones in the software.
Architecture and Design · Separation of Privilege
Compartmentalize the system to have "safe" areas where trust boundaries can be unambiguously drawn. Do not allow sensitive data to go outside of the trust boundary and always be careful when interfacing with a compartment outside of the safe area.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Docker Security (opens in a new tab)
Third Party Javascript Management (opens in a new tab)
Virtual Patching (opens in a new tab)
Authorization (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V1.4.4 (opens in a new tab)
V1.4.5 (opens in a new tab)
V1.10.1 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Embedding Scripts within Scripts (opens in a new tab)
Modification of Windows Service Configuration (opens in a new tab)
Malicious Root Certificate (opens in a new tab)
Intent Spoof (opens in a new tab)
WebView Exposure (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

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 6 Mar 2026, 05:31 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-284

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats