VulnerabilityPublished 2 Jul 2026Updated 8 Nov 2026

CVE-2026-58579: infiniflow ragflow · Cross-site Scripting

Affects infiniflow ragflowSource CVE Database V5

Compare

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 5.4 Medium : upgrade to 0.26.3 when convenient.

Data as of 14 Nov 2026, 20:58 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

5.4Medium

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

Thin evidence

One scorer or none

CVSS scores by source
CNA (VulnCheck)	CVSS 3.1	5.4
CNA (VulnCheck)	CVSS 4.0	5.1

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 0.26.3

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

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: Low
User Interaction: Required
Scope: Changed
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: 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: 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 2 Jul 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 14 Nov 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.

cwe-79

What to do

Upgrade infiniflow ragflow to 0.26.3.

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
infiniflowragflow	Affected <0.26.3	Fixed in 0.26.3
GitHubragflow`pkg:github/ragflow`Other threats	Affected <0.26.3	Fixed in 0.26.3

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

AI-suggested

Users should upgrade to RAGFlow version 0.26.3 or later once available, as this version presumably addresses the issue. Until then, restrict agent creation and editing permissions to trusted users only to reduce risk. Monitor vendor advisories for an official patch or remediation guidance.

Description

RAGFlow before 0.26.3 stores an agent pipeline (DSL) node name without sanitization: the agent update endpoint normalizes the submitted DSL via normalize_dsl, which only performs JSON serialization validation and preserves the node name verbatim. The dataflow-result web UI then renders that name into the "Rerun from current step" confirmation modal via dangerouslySetInnerHTML, and the i18next configuration sets escapeValue:false, so the value is inserted into the DOM without HTML encoding. An authenticated workspace user who can create or edit an agent can inject arbitrary JavaScript that executes in the session of another workspace member who opens the dataflow result and clicks rerun, enabling session/token theft and account takeover across the user trust boundary.

Impact

The vulnerability allows authenticated users with agent creation or editing privileges to inject malicious JavaScript code that executes in the browsers of other authenticated users. This can lead to session or token theft and potential account takeover. The attack requires user interaction (clicking the rerun confirmation), and the vulnerability affects confidentiality and integrity but not availability. The CVSS 3.1 base score is 5.4 (medium severity), reflecting network attack vector, low attack complexity, privileges required, user interaction, and partial impact on confidentiality and integrity.

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 17 Jul 2026, 09:07 UTC

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats