VulnerabilityPublished 25 May 2026

CVE-2026-48846: Roundcube Webmail · Incorrect Resource Transfer Between Spheres

Affects Roundcube WebmailSource CVE Database V5

Compare

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 6.5 Medium : upgrade to 1.7.1 or 1.6.16 when convenient.

Data as of 29 Oct 2026, 19:04 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

6.5Medium

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

EPSS: 0.4% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 34% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.
Patch: Available – fixed in 1.7.1, 1.6.16

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

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: None
User Interaction: None
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: 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: 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 25 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 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 Roundcube Webmail to 1.7.1 or 1.6.16.

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
RoundcubeWebmail	Affected >=1.7.0 <1.7.1	Fixed in 1.7.1
RoundcubeWebmail	Affected >=1.6.0 <1.6.16	Fixed in 1.6.16
GitHubroundcube/roundcubemail`pkg:github/roundcube/roundcubemail`Other threats	Affected =1.6.0 =1.7.0	Fixed in–

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

AI-suggested

If you cannot patch yet, consider disabling or restricting the use of the remote image blocking feature or applying additional email filtering to mitigate risk. Avoid relying solely on the remote image blocking feature for confidentiality protection.

Description

CVE-2026-48846 is a medium severity vulnerability in Roundcube Webmail versions 1.6.0 through 1.6.15 and 1.7.0. It allows bypassing the remote image blocking feature via a crafted CSS var() value in an email message. This bypass may lead to information disclosure or access-control bypass.

Impact

Successful exploitation can lead to unauthorized disclosure of information or bypass of access controls in the affected Roundcube Webmail versions. This could allow an attacker to access content that should be blocked by the remote image blocking feature, potentially exposing sensitive information contained in emails. There is no indication of impact on system availability or integrity beyond access control and confidentiality concerns. No known active exploitation has been reported.

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 1 Jun 2026, 20:58 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-669

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats