VulnerabilityPublished 22 May 2026

CVE-2026-41073: bestpractical rt · CSV Injection

Affects bestpractical rtSource CVE Database V5

Compare

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 4.6 Medium : upgrade to 6.0.3 or 5.0.10 when convenient.

Data as of 30 Oct 2026, 11:52 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

4.6Medium

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

EPSS: 0.1% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 5% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.
Patch: Available – fixed in 6.0.3, 5.0.10

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

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: Low
User Interaction: Required
Scope: Unchanged
Confidentiality: Low
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: 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: Required: Successful exploitation of this vulnerability requires a user to take some action before the vulnerability can be exploited.
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: 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 22 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 rt and bestpractical/rt to 6.0.3 or 5.0.10.

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
bestpracticalrt	Affected >=6.0.0 <6.0.3	Fixed in 6.0.3
bestpracticalrt	Affected <5.0.10	Fixed in 5.0.10
GitHubbestpractical/rt`pkg:github/bestpractical/rt`Other threats	Affected <5.0.10 >=6.0.0 <6.0.3	Fixed in 5.0.10 6.0.3

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

AI-suggested

A fix is available in bestpractical rt versions 5.0.10 and 6.0.3. Users should upgrade to these versions to fully remediate the vulnerability. If immediate upgrade is not possible, a temporary workaround is to avoid opening exported CSV files directly in spreadsheet applications when the data may contain untrusted user input.

Description

RT is an open source, enterprise-grade issue and ticket tracking system. Versions prior to 5.0.10 and 6.0.0 through 6.0.2 contain a spreadsheet (CSV/formula) injection vulnerability. User-controlled data in spreadsheet exports is not sanitized before being written to the output file, which can cause spreadsheet applications to interpret crafted values as formulas or macros when the file is opened. This issue has been fixed in versions 5.0.10 and 6.0.3. If developers are unable to upgrade immediately, they can temporarily work around this issue by avoiding opening exported RT spreadsheet files directly in spreadsheet applications when the data may contain untrusted user input.

Impact

If exploited, this vulnerability can lead to unintended execution of spreadsheet formulas or macros when a crafted CSV file is opened, potentially resulting in limited confidentiality and integrity impacts. There is no indication of availability impact. The CVSS vector indicates the attack requires network access with low complexity, privileges, and user interaction.

Summary

The vulnerability in bestpractical rt involves improper neutralization of formula elements in CSV exports. Specifically, user input is embedded into CSV files without sanitization, which can cause spreadsheet software to execute formulas or macros embedded in the data. This spreadsheet (CSV/formula) injection affects versions prior to 5.0.10 and versions 6.0.0 through 6.0.2. The issue is resolved in versions 5.0.10 and 6.0.3. The vulnerability is identified as CWE-1236 and carries a CVSS 3.1 base score of 4.6, indicating medium severity.

CWE-1236Improper Neutralization of Formula Elements in a CSV File (opens in a new tab)
Base weakness
The product saves user-provided information into a Comma-Separated Value (CSV) file, but it does not neutralize or incorrectly neutralizes special elements that could be interpreted as a command when the file is opened by a spreadsheet product.
Implementation
When generating CSV output, ensure that formula-sensitive metacharacters are effectively escaped or removed from all data before storage in the resultant CSV. Risky characters include '=' (equal), '+' (plus), '-' (minus), and '@' (at).
Implementation
If a field starts with a formula character, prepend it with a ' (single apostrophe), which prevents Excel from executing the formula.
Architecture and Design
Certain implementations of spreadsheet software might disallow formulas from executing if the file is untrusted, or if the file is not authored by the current user.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Abuse Case (opens in a new tab)
Deserialization (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V1.5.1 (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 22 May 2026, 21:44 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-1236

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats