VulnerabilityPublished 19 May 2026

CVE-2026-34358: Ctrlpanel-gg panel · Improper Access Control

Affects Ctrlpanel-gg panelSource CVE Database V5

Compare

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 8.1 High : upgrade to 1.2.0 soon.

Data as of 30 Oct 2026, 11:52 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

8.1High

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 1.2.0

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

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: Low
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: 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: 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 May 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 panel and ctrlpanel-gg/panel to 1.2.0.

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
Ctrlpanel-ggpanel	Affected <1.2.0	Fixed in 1.2.0
GitHubctrlpanel-gg/panel`pkg:github/ctrlpanel-gg/panel`Other threats	Affected <1.2.0	Fixed in 1.2.0

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

AI-suggested

This vulnerability has been fixed in CtrlPanel version 1.2.0. Users should upgrade to version 1.2.0 or later to remediate this issue. No additional mitigation is indicated by the vendor advisory.

Description

CtrlPanel is open-source billing software for hosting providers. Versions 1.1.1 and prior contains a broken access control vulnerability where multiple admin controllers enforce permission checks on form display methods but omit equivalent checks on the corresponding write methods, allowing any authenticated user to bypass RBAC via direct POST/PATCH requests. Controllers missing checks on write methods store() and update() include ApplicationApiController (admin.api.write), CouponController (admin.coupons.write), PartnerController (admin.partners.write), ShopProductController (admin.store.write), UsefulLinkController (admin.useful_links.write), and VoucherController (admin.voucher.write); ProductController (admin.products.edit), ServerController (write/change_owner/change_identifier), and UserController (write/change_email/change_credits/change_username/change_password/change_role/change_referral/change_ptero/change_serverlimit) are missing checks on update() only, and ActivityLogController exposed empty stub store()/update() methods that silently accepted any request. An authenticated attacker without admin write privileges can issue API credentials, generate unlimited coupons and vouchers, assign arbitrary partner commission and discount rates, alter shop product pricing and limits, reassign server ownership or identifiers, and modify user accounts including roles, credits, passwords, and linked Pterodactyl IDs to achieve full privilege escalation, as well as abuse logBackIn() without the login_as permission to interfere with admin impersonation sessions. This issue has been fixed in version 1.2.0.

Impact

An authenticated attacker without admin write privileges can escalate their privileges and perform unauthorized administrative actions such as issuing API credentials, generating unlimited coupons and vouchers, modifying partner commissions and discounts, changing shop product pricing and limits, reassigning server ownership and identifiers, and altering user accounts including roles, credits, passwords, and linked Pterodactyl IDs. This leads to a full compromise of administrative functions and potential abuse of the billing system.

Summary

CVE-2026-34358 is an improper access control vulnerability (CWE-284) in CtrlPanel (open-source billing software) versions prior to 1.2.0. Multiple admin controllers enforce permission checks on form display methods but omit equivalent checks on write methods like store() and update(). This allows any authenticated user to bypass RBAC by sending direct POST or PATCH requests to these endpoints. Affected controllers include ApplicationApiController, CouponController, PartnerController, ShopProductController, VoucherController, ProductController, ServerController, UserController, and ActivityLogController. Exploitation enables privilege escalation and unauthorized administrative actions. The vulnerability is rated high severity with a CVSS 3.1 score of 8.1 (Network attack vector, low attack complexity, requires privileges, no user interaction, impacts confidentiality and integrity).

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).
CWE-862Missing Authorization (opens in a new tab)
Class weaknessLikelihood of exploit: HighCWE Top 25 (2025): #4OWASP Top 10 A01:2025: Broken Access Control (opens in a new tab)
The product does not perform an authorization check when an actor attempts to access a resource or perform an action.
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)
Attack patterns
Exploitation of Thunderbolt Protection Flaws (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 19 May 2026, 22:18 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-284, CWE-862

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats