VulnerabilityPublished 26 Sep 2026

CVE-2026-100710: Froxlor through 2.3.10 does not filter sensitive columns from API responses: Domains::get(), Domains::listing(), SubDomains::get(), and the admin

Affects froxlorSource GCVE Database

Compare

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 4.9 Medium · fixed in 2.3.12 : update froxlor when convenient.

Data as of 10 Nov 2026, 23:24 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

4.9Medium

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

EPSS: 0.2% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 15% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.
Patch: Available – fixed in 2.3.12

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

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: High
User Interaction: None
Scope: Unchanged
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: High: The attacker is authorized with (i.e., requires) privileges that provide significant (e.g., administrative) control over the vulnerable component that could affect component-wide settings and files.
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: 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

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 26 Sep 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 11 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.

ghsa-6v5g-8vmm-8pqh

What to do

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
GitHubfroxlor/froxlor`pkg:github/froxlor/froxlor`Other threats	Affected <=2.3.10	Fixed in–

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

AI-suggested

Upgrade Froxlor to version 2.3.12 or later, where this vulnerability is fixed. No other mitigation is indicated by the vendor advisory. Since this is not a cloud service, remediation depends on applying the official patch.

Description

Froxlor versions through 2.3.10 have an issue where sensitive columns, specifically the dkim_privkey field, are not filtered from API responses in certain domain-related API calls. This allows authenticated non-superadmin admins with the delegated customers_see_all flag to access DKIM private keys of other tenants' domains. The vulnerability enables unauthorized reading of private signing keys, which could be used to sign emails that pass DKIM verification and DMARC alignment. The issue was fixed in version 2.3.12.

Impact

An attacker with authenticated admin access and the delegated customers_see_all flag can obtain DKIM private keys of other tenants' domains. This could allow the attacker to sign emails that appear legitimate by passing DKIM verification and DMARC alignment, potentially facilitating email spoofing or phishing attacks. The CVSS score is 4.9 (medium severity), reflecting the confidentiality impact without integrity or availability impact.

Summary

Froxlor through version 2.3.10 does not properly filter sensitive columns from API responses in the Domains::get(), Domains::listing(), SubDomains::get(), and the admin branch of SubDomains::listing() methods. These methods perform a wildcard SELECT on the panel_domains table and return all columns unmodified, including the dkim_privkey field. An authenticated admin user with the delegated customers_see_all flag but without superadmin privileges can retrieve the DKIM private keys of domains belonging to other tenants. This vulnerability is a follow-up to a previous incomplete fix that removed password and data_2fa fields but not dkim_privkey. The vulnerability is resolved in Froxlor version 2.3.12.

CWE-200Exposure of Sensitive Information to an Unauthorized Actor (opens in a new tab)
Class weaknessLikelihood of exploit: HighCWE Top 25 (2025): #20OWASP Top 10 A01:2025: Broken Access Control (opens in a new tab)
The product exposes sensitive information to an actor that is not explicitly authorized to have access to that information.
MITRE discourages mapping vulnerabilities to this broad entry; the root cause is usually a more specific weakness.
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
Error Handling (opens in a new tab)
Logging (opens in a new tab)
Authorization (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V8.3.4 (opens in a new tab)
V14.3.3 (opens in a new tab)
V7.3.3 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Subverting Environment Variable Values (opens in a new tab)
ICMP Echo Request Ping (opens in a new tab)
TCP SYN Scan (opens in a new tab)
Enumerate Mail Exchange (MX) Records (opens in a new tab)
DNS Zone Transfers (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 27 Sep 2026, 04:41 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-200

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats