VulnerabilityPublished 19 Mar 2026

CVE-2026-32754: freescout · Cross-site Scripting

Affects freescoutSource CVE Database V5

Compare

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 9.3 Critical : upgrade to 1.8.209 as a priority.

Data as of 31 Oct 2026, 20:20 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

9.3Critical

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

Contested

Critical score, yet low EPSS after six months

EPSS: 0.5% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 45% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.
Patch: Available – fixed in 1.8.209

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

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: None
User Interaction: Required
Scope: Changed
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: Low: Specialized access conditions or extenuating circumstances do not exist. An attacker can expect repeatable success against the vulnerable component.
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: Required: Successful exploitation of this vulnerability requires a user to take some action before the vulnerability can be exploited.
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: 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 19 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 31 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 freescout and freescout-help-desk/freescout to 1.8.209.

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
freescout-help-deskfreescout	Affected <1.8.209	Fixed in 1.8.209
GitHubfreescout-help-desk/freescout`pkg:github/freescout-help-desk/freescout`Other threats	Affected <1.8.209	Fixed in 1.8.209

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

AI-suggested

Immediate upgrade to FreeScout version 1.8.209 or later, where the vulnerability is patched.
Implement input sanitization and output encoding for all user-supplied content, especially email bodies, to prevent raw HTML/JavaScript injection.
Configure email clients used by agents and admins to disable automatic HTML rendering or JavaScript execution where possible, reducing the risk of client-side exploitation.
Employ Content Security Policy (CSP) headers or email client security features that restrict script execution in emails.
Monitor incoming emails for suspicious content or unusual patterns that may indicate exploitation attempts.
Educate support staff about the risks of opening unexpected or suspicious emails, even from known sources.
Consider deploying web application firewalls (WAFs) with custom rules to detect and block malicious payloads targeting FreeScout email notifications.
Regularly audit and review FreeScout configurations and logs for signs of exploitation or anomalous activity.
Isolate the help desk system network segment to limit lateral movement if compromise occurs.
Backup FreeScout data regularly to enable recovery in case of compromise.

Description

CVE-2026-32754 is a critical stored Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) vulnerability in FreeScout versions prior to 1.8.209. It arises from improper sanitization of incoming email bodies stored in the database and rendered unescaped in outgoing email notifications. An unauthenticated attacker can exploit this by sending a crafted email that, when viewed by any subscribed agent or admin, triggers universal HTML injection and potentially JavaScript execution in vulnerable email clients. This can lead to phishing, tracking, session hijacking, credential theft, and account takeover affecting all recipients simultaneously. The vulnerability is fixed in version 1.8.209. The CVSS score is 9.

Impact

The impact of CVE-2026-32754 is significant for organizations using vulnerable versions of FreeScout as their help desk or shared inbox solution. Because the vulnerability allows unauthenticated attackers to inject malicious HTML and JavaScript into email notifications, it can lead to widespread phishing campaigns targeting internal support agents and administrators. Successful exploitation can result in session hijacking, credential theft, and full account takeover, compromising the confidentiality and integrity of sensitive support communications and potentially the entire help desk system. This can lead to unauthorized access to customer data, internal communications, and escalation of privileges within the organization. The universal nature of the injection means all recipients of the notification emails are at risk simultaneously, increasing the attack surface and potential damage. Additionally, attackers can use this vector to implant tracking mechanisms or launch further social engineering attacks. The vulnerability does not directly impact system availability but can indirectly cause operational disruptions due to compromised accounts and loss of trust in the help desk system.

CWE-79Improper Neutralization of Input During Web Page Generation (Cross-site Scripting) (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessLikelihood of exploit: HighCWE Top 25 (2025): #1OWASP Top 10 A05:2025: Injection (opens in a new tab)
The product does not neutralize or incorrectly neutralizes user-controllable input before it is placed in output that is used as a web page that is served to other users.
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.
Implementation · Architecture and Design
Understand the context in which your data will be used and the encoding that will be expected. This is especially important when transmitting data between different components, or when generating outputs that can contain multiple encodings at the same time, such as web pages or multi-part mail messages.
Architecture and Design · Implementation · Attack Surface Reduction
Understand all the potential areas where untrusted inputs can enter your software: parameters or arguments, cookies, anything read from the network, environment variables, reverse DNS lookups, query results, request headers, URL components, e-mail, files, filenames, databases, and any external systems that provide…
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Cross Site Scripting Prevention (opens in a new tab)
DOM based XSS Prevention (opens in a new tab)
Injection Prevention (opens in a new tab)
Abuse Case (opens in a new tab)
Deserialization (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V5.3.3 (opens in a new tab)
V1.5.1 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
XSS Using MIME Type Mismatch (opens in a new tab)
DOM-Based XSS (opens in a new tab)
Reflected XSS (opens in a new tab)
Stored XSS (opens in a new tab)
Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).
CWE-116Improper Encoding or Escaping of Output (opens in a new tab)
Class weaknessLikelihood of exploit: HighOWASP Top 10 A05:2025: Injection (opens in a new tab)
The product prepares a structured message for communication with another component, but encoding or escaping of the data is either missing or done incorrectly. As a result, the intended structure of the message is not preserved.
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.
Architecture and Design · Parameterization
If available, use structured mechanisms that automatically enforce the separation between data and code. These mechanisms may be able to provide the relevant quoting, encoding, and validation automatically, instead of relying on the developer to provide this capability at every point where output is generated.
Architecture and Design · Implementation
Understand the context in which your data will be used and the encoding that will be expected. This is especially important when transmitting data between different components, or when generating outputs that can contain multiple encodings at the same time, such as web pages or multi-part mail messages.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Content Security Policy (opens in a new tab)
Injection Prevention (opens in a new tab)
SQL Injection Prevention (opens in a new tab)
Injection Prevention in Java (opens in a new tab)
Query Parameterization (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V14.4.6 (opens in a new tab)
V14.4.4 (opens in a new tab)
V14.4.2 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Cross Zone Scripting (opens in a new tab)
User-Controlled Filename (opens in a new tab)
Web Server Logs Tampering (opens in a new tab)
AJAX Footprinting (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 27 Mar 2026, 19:38 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-79, CWE-116

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats