VulnerabilityPublished 5 Nov 2026

CVE-2026-69137: SuiteCRM · Server-Side Request Forgery

Affects SuiteCRMSource CVE Database V5

Compare

Public exploit available (Exploit-DB) · CVSS 7.7 High : upgrade to 8.10.2 or 7.15.2 as a priority.

Data as of 5 Nov 2026, 20:18 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

7.7High

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

Thin evidence

One scorer or none

CVSS scores by source
CNA (GitHub_M)	CVSS 3.1	7.7

Patch: Available – fixed in 8.10.2, 7.15.2

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

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: Low
User Interaction: None
Scope: Changed
Confidentiality: High
Integrity: None
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: 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: 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: None: There is no loss of integrity within the impacted component.
Availability: None: There is no impact to availability within the impacted component.

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v3.1 specification.

Exploitation evidence

t = 0 is the CVE’s publication on cve.org

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 5 Nov 2026
Detectable: evidence found.
nuclei template: SuiteCRM <= 7.15.1, <= 8.10.1 - Authenticated SSRF
Weaponized: evidence found.
1 Exploit-DB entry, 35 days before disclosure
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

CVE ID reserved
by GitHub, Inc.
3 Aug 202615:20 UTC, 94 days before disclosure
First Exploit-DB entry (opens in a new tab)
SuiteCRM 8.10.1 - Authenticated SSRF
1 Oct 2026, 35 days before disclosure
CVE published
on cve.org
5 Nov 202618:21 UTC, t = 0
In Threat Radar
record ingested
5 Nov 202618:34 UTC, 13 minutes after disclosure

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 5 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.

What to do

Upgrade SuiteCRM to 8.10.2 or 7.15.2.

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
SuiteCRMSuiteCRM	Affected >=8.0.0 <8.10.2	Fixed in 8.10.2
SuiteCRMSuiteCRM	Affected <7.15.2	Fixed in 7.15.2

AI-suggested

This vulnerability is fixed in SuiteCRM versions 7.15.2 and 8.10.2. Users should upgrade to these or later versions to remediate the issue. Since this is not a cloud service, patching the affected software is required. No additional mitigation steps are indicated by the vendor advisory.

Description

CVE-2026-69137 is a Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) vulnerability in SuiteCRM affecting versions prior to 7.15.2 and between 8.0.0 and before 8.10.2. The vulnerability arises because the CalendarAccount testConnection action passes an authenticated user's server_url directly to curl without validating the host, address, or scheme. This allows an attacker to cause the server to send crafted PROPFIND requests from its network context, potentially accessing internal services, disclosing partial responses, enumerating services, and possibly accessing cloud metadata. The issue is fixed in SuiteCRM versions 7.15.2 and 8.10.2.

Reports on CVE-2026-69137

SuiteCRM 8.10.1 · Authenticated SSRFExploit-DB RSS Feed2026-10-01

Impact

An attacker with authenticated access can exploit this SSRF vulnerability to make the SuiteCRM server send crafted PROPFIND requests from its internal network context. This can lead to unauthorized access to internal services, partial disclosure of response data, enumeration of services, and possible access to sensitive cloud metadata. The confidentiality impact is high, but integrity and availability impacts are not indicated.

Public tooling indexed from Metasploit Framework, Exploit-DB, ProjectDiscovery nuclei-templates and PoC-in-GitHub. Its existence raises the odds of exploitation; it does not confirm attacks.

CWE-918Server-Side Request Forgery (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessCWE Top 25 (2025): #22OWASP Top 10 A01:2025: Broken Access Control (opens in a new tab)
The web server receives a URL or similar request from an upstream component and retrieves the contents of this URL, but it does not sufficiently ensure that the request is being sent to the expected destination.
Implementation · Operation
If there is a known list of applications, IP, hostname, and/or domains to which the product is allowed to communicate, then use allowlists to ensure that outgoing requests are restricted to these known entities. The allowlists could be in the application code or possibly enforced by firewalls or network segmentation.
Implementation · Operation
If the product is expected to be able to connect to arbitrary IP addresses or domains, consider using a denylist that includes private network addresses, internal domain names, etc. The denylist could be in the application code or possibly enforced by firewalls or network segmentation.
Implementation · Input Validation
Assume all input is malicious. Use an "accept known good" input validation strategy, i.e., use a list of acceptable inputs that strictly conform to specifications. Reject any input that does not strictly conform to specifications, or transform it into something that does.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Server Side Request Forgery Prevention (opens in a new tab)
Unvalidated Redirects and Forwards (opens in a new tab)
Cross Site Scripting Prevention (opens in a new tab)
DOM based XSS Prevention (opens in a new tab)
Authorization (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V12.6.1 (opens in a new tab)
V5.2.6 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Server Side Request Forgery (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

Timeline

What to do

Affected software

Description

Reports on CVE-2026-69137

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 5 Nov 2026, 20:18 UTC

Public exploits and detection1 Exploit-DB entry, a Nuclei detection template, GitHub proofs of concept

WeaknessesCWE-918

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats