VulnerabilityPublished 11 Mar 2026

CVE-2026-30236: opf openproject · Incorrect Authorization

Affects opf openprojectSource CVE Database V5

Compare

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 4.3 Medium : upgrade to 17.2.0 when convenient.

Data as of 30 Oct 2026, 06:59 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

4.3Medium

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

EPSS: 0.1% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 8% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.
Patch: Available – fixed in 17.2.0

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

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: Low
User Interaction: None
Scope: Unchanged
Confidentiality: Low
Integrity: None
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: 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: Low: There is some loss of confidentiality. Access to some restricted information is obtained, but the attacker does not have control over what information is obtained, or the amount or kind of loss is limited. The information disclosure does not cause a direct, serious loss to the impacted component.
Integrity: None: There is no loss of integrity within 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 11 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 29 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 openproject and opf/openproject to 17.2.0.

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
opfopenproject	Affected <17.2.0	Fixed in 17.2.0
GitHubopf/openproject`pkg:github/opf/openproject`Other threats	Affected <17.2.0	Fixed in 17.2.0

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

AI-suggested

Organizations should upgrade OpenProject installations to version 17.2.0 or later, where the vulnerability is fixed. Until upgrading is possible, administrators should restrict access to project budget editing features to trusted users only and review user roles to minimize unnecessary privileges. Monitoring and auditing access logs for unusual budget editing or cost calculation requests can help detect potential exploitation attempts. Additionally, organizations can implement network-level controls to limit access to the OpenProject instance to authorized personnel. Applying the principle of least privilege to user accounts and ensuring that only legitimate project members have access to sensitive budget information will reduce exposure. Finally, educating users about the importance of reporting unexpected access to cost data can aid early detection.

Description

OpenProject is an open-source, web-based project management software. Prior to 17.2.0, when editing a project budget and planning the labor cost, it was not checked that the user that was planned in the budget is actually a project member. This exposed the user's default rate (if one was set up) to users that should only see that information for project members. Also, the endpoint that handles the pre-calculation for the frontend to display a preview of the costs, while it was being entered, did not properly validate the membership of the user as well. This also allowed to calculate costs with the default rate of non-members. This vulnerability is fixed in 17.2.0.

Impact

The primary impact is unauthorized disclosure of sensitive financial information, specifically the default labor cost rates of users who are not project members. This could lead to privacy violations and potentially give competitors or malicious insiders insight into project budgeting and labor cost structures. While the vulnerability does not allow modification of data or disruption of service, the exposure of cost rates could undermine trust and confidentiality within organizations. For companies relying on OpenProject for sensitive project management, this could result in reputational damage or internal compliance issues. Since exploitation requires some level of authenticated access, the risk is limited to users with at least basic privileges but not necessarily project membership. The scope is limited to organizations using vulnerable OpenProject versions prior to 17.2.0, which may include enterprises, government agencies, and NGOs that rely on this software for project budgeting and labor planning.

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

github.com/opf/openproject/security/advisories/GHSA-p747-569x-3v3f (opens in a new tab)

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 11 Mar 2026, 16:44 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-863

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats