Roundcube Webmail before 1.4.4 allows attackers to include local files and execute code via directory traversal in a plugin name to rcube_pl
Noroxi assessment
Priority: Plan (action score 41/100)
- Public proof-of-concept code exists (GitHub); there is no record of exploitation in the wild.
- Probability of exploitation in the next 30 days: 6.7% (FIRST EPSS); higher than 93.8% of all records.
- Anyone who can reach it over the internet can trigger it. No account or password is required. No user action is required. No special conditions are required; it is repeatable.
- Fixed version: roundcube (Debian:12) 1.4.4+dfsg.1-1; roundcubemail (SUSE:Package Hub 15 SP1) 1.3.15-bp152.4.3.1.
Add it to your regular patch cycle. Upgrade to roundcube (Debian:12) 1.4.4+dfsg.1-1; roundcubemail (SUSE:Package Hub 15 SP1) 1.3.15-bp152.4.3.1 or later.
Generated automatically from the record's data: CVSS (NVD and CNA), CISA KEV and SSVC, FIRST EPSS, exploit sources, fixed versions. How we calculate it
Primary sources: NVD · CVE.org · FIRST EPSS
Roundcube Webmail before 1.4.4 allows attackers to include local files and execute code via directory traversal in a plugin name to rcube_plugin_api.php.
- Published
- May 4, 2020
- Updated
- Jun 16, 2026
- EPSS
- 6.7% · 94th percentile
- CWE
- CWE-22
Report tools
Action score
41
Plan
Add it to your regular patch cycle.
- CVSS
- 39 / 40 · 9.8 / 10
- CISA KEV
- 0 / 30 · Not listed
- EPSS
- 2 / 30 · 6.7%
Get told when this record changes
- Not in KEV: no record of exploitation in the wild
- Proof of concept exists, no weaponized module
- A fix has been released
If any of these changes, we'll tell you in the daily email digest.
Running WordPress? Scan your site free with WP Lens
Noroxi analysis
What does it mean in your environment?
The assessment above is generated automatically from the record's data; it doesn't know your environment. Our team verifies on your systems whether this vulnerability is actually exploitable and which mitigation is enough.
We use this product, ask for helpAffected systems
Is your version affected?
Pick the product and type the version you run. It's compared with this record's version ranges in your browser; the version isn't sent anywhere.
| Vendor | Product | CPE |
|---|---|---|
| roundcube | webmail | cpe:2.3:a:roundcube:webmail |
| opensuse | backports sle | cpe:2.3:a:opensuse:backports_sle |
| opensuse | leap | cpe:2.3:o:opensuse:leap |
Using webmail? Add it to your stack and be the first to know about CVEs like this one. (Email server)
Affected versions
NVD version ranges (for catalog products). Add the product to your stack with a version and matching uses these.
- roundcube webmail1.2.0 and later · before 1.2.10
- roundcube webmail1.3.0 and later · before 1.3.11
- roundcube webmail1.4.0 and later · before 1.4.4
Package-level exposure
OSV and GitHub Advisory data: ecosystem, package and range. SBOM matching uses this table.
| Ecosystem | Package | Affected range | Fix |
|---|---|---|---|
| Debian:12 | roundcube | before 1.4.4+dfsg.1-1 | 1.4.4+dfsg.1-1 |
| SUSE:Package Hub 15 SP1 | roundcubemail | before 1.3.15-bp152.4.3.1 | 1.3.15-bp152.4.3.1 |
| SUSE:Package Hub 15 SP1 | roundcubemail | before 1.3.15-bp152.4.3.1 | 1.3.15-bp152.4.3.1 |
Same product
roundcube: all recordsOther highest-scoring records for the same primary product.
- CVE-2025-49113Roundcube Webmail before 1.5.10 and 1.6.x before 1.6.11 allows remote code execution by authenticated users because the _from parameter in aKEV95Now
- CVE-2020-12641rcube_image.php in Roundcube Webmail before 1.4.4 allows attackers to execute arbitrary code via shell metacharacters in a configuration setKEV94Now
- CVE-2024-42009A Cross-Site Scripting vulnerability in Roundcube through 1.5.7 and 1.6.x through 1.6.7 allows a remote attacker to steal and send emails ofKEV92Now
- CVE-2021-44026Roundcube before 1.3.17 and 1.4.x before 1.4.12 is prone to a potential SQL injection via search or search_params.KEV90Now
- CVE-2020-13965An issue was discovered in Roundcube Webmail before 1.3.12 and 1.4.x before 1.4.5.KEV77This week
- CVE-2024-37383Roundcube Webmail before 1.5.7 and 1.6.x before 1.6.7 allows XSS via SVG animate attributes.KEV76This week
Remediation
Which version to upgrade to
Fix versions compiled from the vendor, package registries and Microsoft. Verify the vendor's note before upgrading.
| Product / package | Fixed version | Source |
|---|---|---|
| debian:roundcube | 1.4.4+dfsg.1-1 · Debian:12 | Package registry (OSV) |
| opensuse:roundcubemail | 1.3.15-bp152.4.3.1 · openSUSE:Leap 15.1 | Package registry (OSV) |
| suse:roundcubemail | 1.3.15-bp152.4.3.1 · SUSE:Package Hub 15 SP1 | Package registry (OSV) |
Exploit status
Proof of concept available
A public proof of concept or detection signature exists. Exploit knowledge is out there; don't delay patching.
Evidence
- Proof-of-concept repository on GitHub ×1
Noroxi does not host or link to exploit code. Metasploit module names and Nuclei template ids are shown (names, not code); Exploit-DB entries and PoC repositories are given as counts only.
| Source | Kind | Date |
|---|---|---|
| Proof-of-concept repository on GitHub | stars:0 | 2024-04-13 |
Research context
For pentesters and researchers: attack profile, score disagreement, timeline, patch commits, credits, variant and chain candidates, bug bounty scope. All derived from existing data; no exploit code.
Timeline
From publication to today: proof of concept, Metasploit module, CISA KEV and fix record. Dates are as reported by the sources.
- Published
- First PoC+1440 d
- TodayOct 15, 2026+2355 d
FIRST EPSS daily score; only changes of 0.01 or more are recorded (step chart).
Patch and commit links
Commit, PR and diff links among the references. A starting point for patch-diffing and variant hunting; fixes, not exploits.
Credits
All researchersFinders, reporters and analysts named in the CNA record. Click a name for that researcher’s other records.
No credits in the CNA record.
Variant candidates
Same product, same weakness class, within 18 months. If the patch missed the root cause, the sibling bug is here.
No nightly-computed relations.
Chain candidates
An authentication bypass and a privilege-requiring bug in the same product, published close together: combined they may become an unauthenticated path.
—
Bug bounty scope
The product’s vendor appears in a public program. Matched by name; verify the scope text in the program.
Technical details
Attack conditions
- Anyone who can reach it over the internet can trigger it.
- No account or password is required.
- No user action is required.
- No special conditions are required; it is repeatable.
If successful
- Confidentiality
- high · data can be read
- Integrity
- high · data or configuration can be modified
- Availability
- high · the service can be disrupted
- Attack vector
- Network
- Attack complexity
- Low
- Privileges required
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality impact
- High
- Integrity impact
- High
- Availability impact
- High
Weakness class (CWE)
CWE-22 · Improper Limitation of a Pathname to a Restricted Directory ('Path Traversal')CVSS vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
nvd-primary
Root cause
A user-supplied file name is joined with the allowed directory, but the result is never checked to confirm it is still inside that directory.
The bug in code
The whole CWE-22 classA representative example of this vulnerability class. Not the vendor's source code; it shows the faulty pattern and its fix.
Vulnerable
const file = path.join(ROOT, req.query.name);res.sendFile(file);Fixed
const file = path.resolve(ROOT, req.query.name);if (!file.startsWith(ROOT + path.sep)) { return res.sendStatus(400);}res.sendFile(file);Attack context
MITRE CAPEC attack patterns and ATT&CK techniques for this weakness class (CWE). A starting point for detection rules and threat hunting.
Attack patterns (CAPEC)
- Path TraversalCAPEC-126likelihood: High · Very High
- Using Slashes and URL Encoding Combined to Bypass Validation LogicCAPEC-64likelihood: High · High
- Manipulating Web Input to File System CallsCAPEC-76likelihood: High · Very High
- Using Escaped Slashes in Alternate EncodingCAPEC-78likelihood: High · High
- Using Slashes in Alternate EncodingCAPEC-79likelihood: High · High
ATT&CK techniques
—
Change log
- Fix✗ → ✓
For records you follow, these changes also arrive as notifications. →
References
Show all references (5 more)Show less
Vendor advisories and official records. Exploit/PoC links are deliberately left out.