VulnerabilityPublished 20 Mar 2026Updated 25 Mar 2026

CVE-2026-33070: error311 FileRise · Missing Authentication

Affects error311 FileRiseSource CVE Database V5

Compare

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 3.7 Low : upgrade to 3.8.0 when convenient.

Data as of 1 Nov 2026, 08:20 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

3.7Low

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

EPSS: 0.3% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 32% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.
Patch: Available – fixed in 3.8.0

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

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: High
Privileges Required: None
User Interaction: None
Scope: Unchanged
Confidentiality: None
Integrity: Low
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: None: There is no loss of confidentiality within the impacted component.
Integrity: Low: Modification of data is possible, but the attacker does not have control over the consequence of a modification, or the amount of modification is limited. The data modification does not have a direct, serious impact on 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 20 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 FileRise and error311/FileRise to 3.8.0.

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
error311FileRise	Affected <3.8.0	Fixed in 3.8.0
GitHuberror311/FileRise`pkg:github/error311/FileRise`Other threats	Affected <3.8.0	Fixed in 3.8.0

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

AI-suggested

The definitive mitigation is to upgrade FileRise to version 3.8.0 or later, where this vulnerability is fixed by enforcing proper authentication and authorization checks on the deleteShareLink endpoint. Until upgrade is possible, organizations should restrict access to the FileRise management interface and API endpoints via network-level controls such as firewalls or VPNs to trusted users only. Implementing Web Application Firewall (WAF) rules to detect and block unauthorized POST requests to /api/file/deleteShareLink.php can provide temporary protection. Additionally, monitoring logs for unusual deletion activity and share link removals can help detect exploitation attempts. Administrators should educate users to avoid sharing tokens publicly and consider rotating share tokens if suspicious activity is detected. Finally, applying strict access controls and isolating FileRise instances from public internet exposure reduces attack surface.

Description

FileRise is a self-hosted web file manager / WebDAV server. In versions prior to 3.8.0, a missing-authentication vulnerability in the deleteShareLink endpoint allows any unauthenticated user to delete arbitrary file share links by providing only the share token, causing denial of service to shared file access. The POST /api/file/deleteShareLink.php endpoint calls FileController::deleteShareLink() which performs no authentication, authorization, or CSRF validation before deleting a share link. Any anonymous HTTP client can destroy share links. This issue is fixed in version 3.8.0.

Impact

The primary impact of this vulnerability is the unauthorized deletion of file share links, which disrupts legitimate users' ability to access shared files. This can cause operational inconvenience and potential workflow interruptions, especially in environments relying heavily on FileRise for file sharing and collaboration. Since attackers cannot access file contents or system resources, confidentiality and availability impacts are minimal. However, the integrity of shared links is compromised, which could erode user trust and require administrative overhead to recreate share links. Organizations with critical file sharing needs or those using FileRise in production environments may experience moderate operational disruption. The low CVSS score reflects the limited scope and impact, but the risk increases if attackers can enumerate or guess valid share tokens.

CWE-306Missing Authentication for Critical Functionality (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessLikelihood of exploit: HighCWE Top 25 (2025): #21OWASP Top 10 A07:2025: Authentication Failures (opens in a new tab)
The product does not perform any authentication for functionality that requires a provable user identity or consumes a significant amount of resources.
Architecture and Design
Divide the software into anonymous, normal, privileged, and administrative areas. Identify which of these areas require a proven user identity, and use a centralized authentication capability.
Architecture and Design
For any security checks that are performed on the client side, ensure that these checks are duplicated on the server side, in order to avoid CWE-602. Attackers can bypass the client-side checks by modifying values after the checks have been performed, or by changing the client to remove the client-side checks…
Architecture and Design
Where possible, avoid implementing custom, "grow-your-own" authentication routines and consider using authentication capabilities as provided by the surrounding framework, operating system, or environment.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
OWASP Authentication (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V1.2.3 (opens in a new tab)
V1.2.2 (opens in a new tab)
V1.2.4 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Choosing Message Identifier (opens in a new tab)
Force the System to Reset Values (opens in a new tab)
Using Unpublished Interfaces or Functionality (opens in a new tab)
Cross Site Request Forgery (opens in a new tab)
Communication Channel Manipulation (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, 18:53 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-306

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats